Former Evolutionists and former Creationists

Originally posted by iterationzero
reply to post by PhotonEffect

 

Your argument is akin to saying that Santa must exist in the context of a jolly fat man that delivers presents to all the good children of the world on Christmas Eve because I saw him at the mall last December.

Sure, ok. I don't see how it's even remotely the same, but ok. I'm not here to argue.

There's a huge difference between saying that there's historical evidence for the existence of Jesus of Nazareth and claiming that "He" is the son of God made man, result of a virgin birth, performed miracles, was crucified and rose again from the dead, etc. Or, to put it another way, a huge difference between the man who existed and the costume Christians have clothed him in as their divine messiah.

Yeah sure, and that's perfectly fine. Like I said I'm not here to argue and I didn't invoke Jesus the god who turned water into wine. I'm referring to Jesus the man. And the poster who I was asking the questions to said himself that he deeply loved Jesus at one point in his life...

Originally posted by TucoTheRat
Dude can you please at least follow the rules of your own little 14 point image? Give me an example of this fact. Show me ONE, just one, fact that proves evolution happens without intelligent design.

All we need for evolution to happen are the 14 points of the picture. Which one of those steps requires an intelligent designer? Post proof. Thanks.

Originally posted by rhinoceros

Originally posted by TucoTheRat
Dude can you please at least follow the rules of your own little 14 point image? Give me an example of this fact. Show me ONE, just one, fact that proves evolution happens without intelligent design.

All we need for evolution to happen are the 14 points of the picture. Which one of those steps requires an intelligent designer? Post proof. Thanks.

edit on 5-8-2013 by rhinoceros because: (no reason given)

For evolution that happens outside of intelligent design, I have no proof what so ever. That is to say, I have no proof that things that have theoretically evolved out side of human meddling stem in their origin from an intelligent designer.

We would not be having this conversation if I did have proof that you ask for.

But this in turn resembles why evolution is mistakenly called a theory when it is a fact.

Evolution happens Fact, Humans have, by intelligent design, caused evolution Fact.

The idea that evolution can happen outside of intelligent design is irreverent and of no importance to the theory of evolution happening with out intelligent design. It says so right at the bottom of your 14 point image. That why I use the word obtuse. Evolutionists like yourself have a theory that says things evolve with out intelligent design and at the same time state "We don't know the origins of life and how it started and don't much care". How is that science?

How can you have a theory about something you don't care or need the answer to? That my friend is the definition of being obtuse, and is so far from scientific reasoning as things can get. Especially when you have facts and evidence that Evolution happens quite easily by inept human hands.

Just look at how our simple human mistakes change the evolutionary tracks of so many lifeforms around us. Look at how people in such a short time have set in place a chain of events that will change life on this earth as we know it. look at science itself and the men who brought it to you, how they accomplished what the did by simply trying to reach the mind of a creator. Darwin himself believed in intelligent design.

But all this is speculation and opinion the fact is you have a choice intelligent design or not there is evidence and facts for one of those choices and theory for the other.

The Rat.

Originally posted by TucoTheRat
Evolutionists like yourself have a theory that says things evolve with out intelligent design and at the same time state "We don't know the origins of life and how it started and don't much care". How is that science?

What is an evolutionist? Is it a person who understand the theory of evolution? If yes, do you call people who understand Newton and Einstein gravitationists? If not, why? Look, the double-helix structure of DNA was only discovered 60 years ago. The third major domain of life was only discovered 20 years ago. Currently, there's a lot of debate if a 4th domain of life exists. There's also debate if Eukaryotes really make a domain of life, or are just a phylum of Archaea. The first signs of life are about 3.7 billion years old. You think it's so easy to find out what exactly happened ~4 billion years ago? Anyway, we've already uncovered so much. For example, it's almost certain that in the early genetic code, only the first two letters of a codon carried meaning. Likewise, in this genetic code, there were only a few amino acids (while the rest were incorporated into the code later). It's almost certain that RNA world and then RNA+protein world, preceded current DNA/RNA/Protein world. There are many feasible theories for the beginning of life. My personal favorite is autocatalytic RNA molecules, but my mind is open for other options, just as long as they are backed up by logic and are testable (can be falsified)..

Originally posted by TucoTheRat

Originally posted by rhinoceros

Originally posted by TucoTheRat
Dude can you please at least follow the rules of your own little 14 point image? Give me an example of this fact. Show me ONE, just one, fact that proves evolution happens without intelligent design.

All we need for evolution to happen are the 14 points of the picture. Which one of those steps requires an intelligent designer? Post proof. Thanks.

edit on 5-8-2013 by rhinoceros because: (no reason given)

For evolution that happens outside of intelligent design, I have no proof what so ever. That is to say, I have no proof that things that have theoretically evolved out side of human meddling stem in their origin from an intelligent designer.

We would not be having this conversation if I did have proof that you ask for.

But this in turn resembles why evolution is mistakenly called a theory when it is a fact.

Evolution happens Fact, Humans have, by intelligent design, caused evolution Fact.

The idea that evolution can happen outside of intelligent design is irreverent and of no importance to the theory of evolution happening with out intelligent design. It says so right at the bottom of your 14 point image. That why I use the word obtuse. Evolutionists like yourself have a theory that says things evolve with out intelligent design and at the same time state "We don't know the origins of life and how it started and don't much care". How is that science?

How can you have a theory about something you don't care or need the answer to? That my friend is the definition of being obtuse, and is so far from scientific reasoning as things can get. Especially when you have facts and evidence that Evolution happens quite easily by inept human hands.

Just look at how our simple human mistakes change the evolutionary tracks of so many lifeforms around us. Look at how people in such a short time have set in place a chain of events that will change life on this earth as we know it. look at science itself and the men who brought it to you, how they accomplished what the did by simply trying to reach the mind of a creator. Darwin himself believed in intelligent design.

But all this is speculation and opinion the fact is you have a choice intelligent design or not there is evidence and facts for one of those choices and theory for the other.

The Rat.

Let me elucidate that long winded post for you.

"I don't know...therefore God"

Originally posted by PhotonEffect
Your beliefs are your beliefs, and your reasons for those beliefs are fine and good. But the 2nd part of your statement is a bit confusing to me. When you say "you" in that statement, are you speaking about yourself or for everyone else?

I am speaking about myself. But generally speaking if a person does not think something exists they cannot logically have feelings for it. That should apply to everyone. Believers think he exists so it's not the same.

It's a generally well accepted truth that Jesus of Nazareth did in fact exist. Even atheists concede that much. So when you say that you stopped loving Him because you can't believe in someone who you don't think exists, what does that mean exactly? Is that a general rule you live by, or just as it applies in this context?

I was talking about Jesus Christ son of God. A man named Jesus living during that time does not prove the existence of that man as described by the gospels.

I mean, have you ever lost someone, a family member perhaps, who you loved; but then stopped loving them because they no longer existed?

That's tough to say. If one believes in a soul, who's to say they stop existing at death? That's not the same as loving something you believe is a fictitious concept. With a person, you cherish their memory and the person lives on within you. They are very much real.

reply to post by TucoTheRat


Of course humans contribute to evolution. All species do. You forget that all evolution is essentially is adapting to environments. If humans create an environment that harms other species or puts their species in danger they either adapt, relocate or go extinct. That is evolution in action, regardless if intelligent beings have effects on it. It happens in non human species as well. A new predator migrates to an area and wreaks havoc on the local populations. In turn they either relocate or die out. The part that turns your idea on its back is the fact of genetic mutations. There is no ID necessary for genes to change when pass from parent to offspring or for solar radiation to cause genetic mutations. Evolution does not require intelligence, bottom line end of story. Extinction level events happen. Sudden environmental changes happen. Some creatures get lucky, some don't.

dup removed

Just wanted to make a small correction to a few posts here.

Evolution isn't 'mistakenly' called a theory at all. The mistake is that people do not understand what is meant when we talk of theories (versus say, an hypothesis) in scientific contexts.

reply to post by Barcs


beautiful post man.

You hijacked my thoughts...except...I was never indoctrinated at young age....they tried...but it didn't stick with me. Even at a young age...I couldn't come to terms with the fact that people believed in different gods...and they all thought theirs is the right one. Even as a boy...it screamed to me...none of it is right. It's just a power struggle for the numbers.