Can you really say Evolution has no Meaning ?

a reply to: cooperton

If you didn't resort to appealing to authority, and began to think on your own, there would be a chance to see the objective inpossibility of 100,000,000,000 neurons assembling in a functional order by random chance mutation

Answer the question: Citation please - what journal, publication, textbook or scientist agrees with you?
You're a lone ranger - you can't name one. You make it up as you go along hoping to get away with it. By now you should know better.
Exactly what experiment ever demonstrated that 100,000,000,000 neurons cannot be assembled by random mutation? What's your source for this information?
Don't bother - you have none. Full of crap, as per usual.

originally posted by: AlienView
This is the first problem with Evolution - No one has yet proven how it began in the first place

That is not a problem for evolution. It's a problem for understanding the origin of life. Not knowing how life began =/= how life changes over time.

originally posted by: Toothache

That is not a problem for evolution. It's a problem for understanding the origin of life. Not knowing how life began =/= how life changes over time.

Ahh yes, divert another impossible task (life from non-life without intelligent input), and say it's not the responsibility of evolutionary theory.

Unintelligent design (evolution) is just garbage. We are intelligent. Physical laws are intelligent. The cosmos behave according to intelligible patterns. You can't get away from intelligence. Unless you are thinking unintelligently

originally posted by: Phantom423
What's your source for this information?

I have a degree in neuroscience. This is more authority than you have on the matter. I hate to even appeal to authority, but that seems like all you care about.

you can't find an example of an organisms developing a beneficial neurological mutation from randomly mutating the genetic code. It's just a stupid assertion at this point if you actually know how neurological tissue develops. You only believe it because it's your religion, not because it has empirical evidence to prove its possible

a reply to: cooperton

I have a degree in neuroscience

BS (squared)

you can't find an example of an organisms developing a beneficial neurological mutation from randomly mutating the genetic code

I never said that nor did anyone else. If you can find a citation, let's have it. Again, you're making it up as you go along.

originally posted by: Phantom423


"I never said that... (I could find) an example of an organisms developing a beneficial neurological mutation from randomly mutating the genetic code

Lol exactly. Because evolution is a baseless myth that is purely speculative.

originally posted by: cooperton
I have a degree in neuroscience.

HAHAHA! Oh man, you sure do know how to tell 'em. You must have your crowd in stiches every day.

Judging from your technical and theoretic prowess, I guess you obtained your 'degree' by watching YouTube videos, in which case my son has a degree in Minecraft and my daughter has a Masters in boy bands.

Total bull#e.

Atheist Christopher Hitchens: Best Evidence for Intelligent Design?

"Following Denyse O’Leary, I referred earlier today to the curious but, on reflection, not surprising messy nature of the “magic” numbers that rule our universe and made the cosmos possible from the inception of physical existence at the Big Bang. This incredible fine-tuning forms one thread in Stephen Meyer’s upcoming book Return of the God Hypothesis. It’s remarkable, as even atheists admit..........

Hitchens concedes, “I think every one of us [meaning, champions of atheism] picks the ‘fine-tuning’ one as the most intriguing” of the arguments for intelligent design. He says, “You have to spend time thinking about it, working on it. It’s not trivial. We all say that.”..........."

evolutionnews.org...


One day in some non-dystopian future when the species Man attains both full awareness and develops real intelligence
- When once again he begins to EVOLVE to his next level, he will realize that Evolution, though sometimes random, is none the less based upon the principles of Intelligent Design - A design and plan that is itself EVOLVING as you consider it

originally posted by: cooperton
Unintelligent design (evolution) is just garbage. We are intelligent. Physical laws are intelligent. The cosmos behave according to intelligible patterns. You can't get away from intelligence. Unless you are thinking unintelligently

Surely you mean abiogenesis or speciation? Evolution is a proven fact. (more proof you don't know what you are talking about).
Our intelligence comes from evolution, adaptation and selection over time.
Physical laws are not intelligent, they are simple.
The universe acts on basic natural laws, not designed (and therefore complex) interactions. Design, by its nature, always has trade-offs and compromises.

a reply to: cooperton

Avoiding the question, as usual. You're a phony baloney and a fraud. Nothing has changed.

originally posted by: cooperton

originally posted by: TerraLiga
Because you can't begin to imagine the vast amount of time, successes and failures of all the flora and fauna on this planet does not mean that you and your ilk have to find a more comfortable explanation to make you feel valuable and worthy to exist.

No I studied neural circuits and they could not come to be by random chance mutations. Our nervous system if stretched out on the neuronal level would be 90,000 miles long. That means it could wrap around the earth almost 4 times. To organize these neurons into a functioning organic computer capable of logic, love, self-repair, homeostasis, and so on, is absolutely not plausible by random chance.

Even with infinite amount of time, an impossible task cannot happen. And that's JUST the neurons. There's also about 10x more supporting cells in the brain that help facilitate proper neuronal function. These are organized in precise ways to allow you to have a seamless consciousness. It's not an accident.

originally posted by: Phage

That's right. Everything that was born will die.

Science can't prevent that. But it has managed to delay it a bit, on average. And the best part is, science does not require worship. It isn't that petty.

Worship just means to acknowledge worth. So you are actually worshipping science. More years of life drugged up on a ventilator. Wonderful.

You have personally declared such a thing to be impossible.
Your argument is one of incredulity.
Personal incredulity isn't an actual argument, it's just a statement about what you prefer to believe.

Harte

originally posted by: cooperton

originally posted by: Toothache

That is not a problem for evolution. It's a problem for understanding the origin of life. Not knowing how life began =/= how life changes over time.

Ahh yes, divert another impossible task (life from non-life without intelligent input), and say it's not the responsibility of evolutionary theory.

Unintelligent design (evolution) is just garbage. We are intelligent. Physical laws are intelligent. The cosmos behave according to intelligible patterns. You can't get away from intelligence. Unless you are thinking unintelligently

originally posted by: Phantom423
What's your source for this information?

I have a degree in neuroscience. This is more authority than you have on the matter. I hate to even appeal to authority, but that seems like all you care about.

you can't find an example of an organisms developing a beneficial neurological mutation from randomly mutating the genetic code. It's just a stupid assertion at this point if you actually know how neurological tissue develops. You only believe it because it's your religion, not because it has empirical evidence to prove its possible

The 'anti-religion' which argues nothing requires intelligent design, when everything on Earth was/is created by intelligence. Nothing has been created by 'random chance', anywhere at all, over ALL recorded time, over thousands of years at least, or more.

I'd like to know what has MORE evidence than the one proving 'evolution' is complete nonsense!

What has been created by random chance, over any PROVEN period(s) of time, has NEVER shown 'evolution' of ANY species, let alone all the millions of species on Earth!


Holding up all sorts of fossils of EXTINCT species, and suggesting they were ancestor species which magically transformed - is NONSENSE. No proof, no evidence, can spew about an extinct species, and claim it 'evolved' into another species, living today, because that is utter BS.

DNA is similar within all living species of today, it is not some sort of 'evolutionary' link!


The evidence supports creation of all species on Earth, both those which became extinct, and those which live today.


Any indication of 'evolutionary changes' into another type of species, would have shown up after thousands of years, based on their claim that all species constantly 'evolve' into other species, while it only happens within 'extremely long periods of time', so it's so slight, nobody sees it, or measures it, or knows it's 'happening'......


Junk science, is simply junk, period.

'Nothing has been created by random chance.'

Take a minute and re-read your sentence. If it was created, it was planned, designed and deliberately produced. Provide evidence where that was the case in anything organic.

originally posted by: TerraLiga
'Nothing has been created by random chance.'

Take a minute and re-read your sentence. If it was created, it was planned, designed and deliberately produced. Provide evidence where that was the case in anything organic.

Do you mean what evidence is there of our whole, or parts within, our environment, such as the oceans, rivers, and clouds, indicating they were all created/designed this way, deliberately?

You believe that it was so incredibly lucky, miraculous coincidence, at pure random chance, that somehow, at random chance, AIR was created, and by another remarkable coincidence, the air soon expanded out, and over the entire Earth, as well.

So after air was created by random chance, and expanded over the entire Earth, at random chance, somehow, life was first created, on the Earth, and more and more types of life came about, and all by random chance, they all needed that very air, in order to live on Earth, and they did so.

The random creation of air, which randomly covered over Earth, and when life was first created at random, on Earth, it was another amazing coincidence, it used the air to breathe and to live, that's so lucky, because all of this happened by random chance!

No, it is sheer nonsense.

originally posted by: TerraLiga


HAHAHA! Oh man, you sure do know how to tell 'em. You must have your crowd in stiches every day.

Judging from your technical and theoretic prowess, I guess you obtained your 'degree' by watching YouTube videos, in which case my son has a degree in Minecraft and my daughter has a Masters in boy bands.

Total bull#e.

Ahh lovely. The hysterics are starting to kick in with you again. You awkwardly laugh loudly because you can't logically defend your assertions. Prove random chance can create human beings from non-life over billions of years. You can't, its pure speculation. Obviously intelligent creatures are far more likely to have been made by something intelligent, rather than unintelligent.

Imagine the terminator robot coming to be by random chance. Absurd. Your unintelligent design theory is garbage. 100billion neurons can not assemble into working synchrony to generate the faculty of consciousness by random chance.

a reply to: cooperton

100billion neurons can not assemble into working synchrony to generate the faculty of consciousness by random chance.

Prove it.

a reply to: cooperton

Well you displayed a causal fallacy atributing that only intelligence can create intelligence. Its always stupid when you dont understand the cause. For example

“Someone really should move this ‘deer crossing’ sign. This is a dangerous stretch of highway and the deer really should be crossing somewhere else.”

In this statement the reason the sign was there is because the deer cross there. However this person seems to think the deer cross there because of the sign. You are using the same exact logic when you assert it takes intelligence to create intelligence one has nothing to do with the other

originally posted by: dragonridr
a reply to: cooperton

Well you displayed a causal fallacy atributing that only intelligence can create intelligence. Its always stupid when you dont understand the cause. For example

“Someone really should move this ‘deer crossing’ sign. This is a dangerous stretch of highway and the deer really should be crossing somewhere else.”

In this statement the reason the sign was there is because the deer cross there. However this person seems to think the deer cross there because of the sign. You are using the same exact logic when you assert it takes intelligence to create intelligence one has nothing to do with the other

Cool story, show me an example of random chance generating neurons to assemble in a manner to create a self-aware being that has an integrated muscular system and supporting organs to allow this consciousness to exist in the material world.

a reply to: cooperton

You're talking to one.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: cooperton

You're talking to one.

Phage, you're intelligent, not unintelligent. We both were intelligently designed, lest we be called unintelligent.

a reply to: cooperton

Cool story, show me an example of random chance generating neurons to assemble in a manner to create a self-aware being that has an integrated muscular system and supporting organs to allow this consciousness to exist in the material world.

Can you cite any scientific paper that says that neurons were assembled by random chance. It's incumbent on YOU to show that this is the standard belief of the scientific community - since you're making the claim.