Any alternative solution is magical thinking and preposterously more absurd or mathematically impossible so clearly the preposterous mathematically imposibility of evolution actually happened and the preposterous and impossibility are just your mental fictions. Bubble bees do fly.
Any alternative solution is magical thinking and preposterously more absurd or mathematically impossible so clearly the preposterous mathematically imposibility of evolution actually happened and the preposterous and impossibility are just your mental fictions. Bubble bees do fly.
you debated it for 7 pages and now that people are railing on you to answer specific questions the entire debate is moot to you?!
proposterous!
you are combining abiogensis with evolution again rip - you aren't inspiring confidence at being well informed about the topic of discussion.
Evolution means that we are here because of chance.
Does chance also explains such a complex universe,
I mean look at our galaxy alone,the earth has been
spinning around itself and orbiting around the sun
for millions of years causing day and night and the
four seasons.Can we keep explaining every thing in
the universe (including ourselves) by such extravagantly
unique chances?
Does chance also explains such a complex universe,
I mean look at our galaxy alone,the earth has been
spinning around itself and orbiting around the sun
for millions of years causing day and night and the
four seasons.Can we keep explaining every thing in
the universe (including ourselves) by such extravagantly
unique chances?
do you mean look at our solar system alone? b/c the galaxy is a whole lot more than our sun and the planets....
so now that we have that cleared up what is the point of your post? with a big enough universe chance seems to be enough for almost anything to happen at least once.
What made that universe so big in the first place,and how did it even exist .It is also
strangely organized.
Accepting science and god simultaneously are diametrically opposed. See my previous posts on this if you care to discuss the logic. Or just ignore it like you have before.
Youre source is about as ignorant as you.
There is NO way to tell the size of the visual cortex without examining FUNCTION. Yes, i mean actual physiology. Care to explain how your source conducted physiological studies on a FOSSIL?
How are they diametrically opposed?
One set of beliefs is anchored in the supernatural, spiritual and the untestable.
The other set is anchored in the real world and testable.
Religion doesn't give answers to science and science doesn't give answers to the spiritual realm.
sorry but thats one of the biggest craps I have seen
and then they go onto ww2 and hitler
and somehow the conclusions are that Islam is the sollution to terrorism
wtf?
Czar - LOL. It didn't exactly fit the discussion huh?
Oh, this whole 6000 year that the world's been around thing...that's not us Assyrian Church of the East Christians speaking. That's the western churches (i.e. roman catholic and protestant-based or protestant-descended ones). Solution: Stop reading those greek-translated bibles. That's all. You're reading the translation of a translation of an original at best...usually it's more like a translation of a translation of a translation of an original. PM me if Assyrian Aramaic vs. Greek Primacy interests you. It'll solve your problems. Peace...
Oh, this whole 6000 year that the world's been around thing...that's not us Assyrian Church of the East Christians speaking. That's the western churches (i.e. roman catholic and protestant-based or protestant-descended ones). Solution: Stop reading those greek-translated bibles. That's all. You're reading the translation of a translation of an original at best...usually it's more like a translation of a translation of a translation of an original. PM me if Assyrian Aramaic vs. Greek Primacy interests you. It'll solve your problems. Peace...
shira
Diamond Member
- Jan 12, 2005
- 9,500
- 6
- 81
Rip's response to the evidence of Archeopteryx is a perfect example of why one can't "reason" with true believers:
True believer: "Show me a transitional form."
Scientist" "Here's a transitional form. It has features A, B, C, and D, which are typical of Class X, and features E, F, G, and H, which are typical of Class Y, which pre-dated Class X by 50 million years. This specimen thus represents powerful evidence of Class Y evolving into Class X."
True believer: "This is merely an unusual form of X. It is not a true transitional form."
Rip will never accept any evidence of evolution, regardless of how powerful it is. This is why the term "intellectually dishonest" and "willfully ignorant" are such apt terms for people like him.
True believer: "Show me a transitional form."
Scientist" "Here's a transitional form. It has features A, B, C, and D, which are typical of Class X, and features E, F, G, and H, which are typical of Class Y, which pre-dated Class X by 50 million years. This specimen thus represents powerful evidence of Class Y evolving into Class X."
True believer: "This is merely an unusual form of X. It is not a true transitional form."
Rip will never accept any evidence of evolution, regardless of how powerful it is. This is why the term "intellectually dishonest" and "willfully ignorant" are such apt terms for people like him.
what are you talking about...you've never walked outside and found that gravity rolled snake eyes?
If all of life is derived from a single cell organism, the fossil record should be replete with transitional forms connecting one species to another. It isn't. In fact, not a single transitional form has been identified.
Consequently, proponents of macroevolution have been reduced to fraudulent behavior (Piltdown man, for example) or engaging in wishful thinking.
Archeopteryx is a bird.
Questioning Orthodoxy: Dr. Alan Feduccia Speaks on the Origin of Birds
shira
Diamond Member
- Jan 12, 2005
- 9,500
- 6
- 81
Absolutely.
Consider: There are on average about 350 million sperm in a single ejaculation. Every one of your father's sperm was genetically unique. So if your mother's eggs were all genetically identical, the odd were AT BEST one in 350 million that the genetically unique human that you are would be conceived. But the odds are actually MUCH lower that that. For one thing, conception is not guaranteed (what percentage of the time that a man and woman are trying to make a baby do you think they succeed?). And you mother's eggs AREN'T all identical; they're all unique, just like your dad's sperm.
So the odds that your parents would produce the gentic combination that constitutes you is almost unimaginably small. Yet here you are! Here we ALL are!
The point is, assuming you parents didn't have some reproductive impairment, SOME genetic combination was guaranteed. Looked at from this end, it seems impossible. But looked at from the other end (we know ONE sperm is going to win, and that will create a person), it was a certainty that a genetically-unique human being would be created.
Life-bearing planets and the state of the universe are exactly the same. Given all the galaxies and all the stars and all the solar systems and all the planets, it's a virtual certainty that a vast number of worlds capable of sustaining life would exist. And given that vast number, it's a virtual certainty that at least some of them would find a way to create life, and even intelligent life. WE are the ones who won the lottery (and there are probably millions more worlds with intelligent life, too). If you look at it from "this end", it seems impossible. But given the "numbers", it's impossible that intelligent life would NOT exist.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 22K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
News NVIDIA and Intel to Develop AI Infrastructure and Personal Computing Products- Started by poke01
- Replies: 411
-
Facebook
Twitter