Why evolution is true (another great science lecture)

[Malak]

Incorrect.

Evolution is fact.

Atheists are not an organized religion or a religion.

The fact that they have a big international conference where they get together to put on speeches like this... that isn't clear proof of an organized religion? I'm not the one ignoring evidence in this thread.

 

[Malak]

He is not trying to disprove anything. The facts do that for him. Keep watching buddy. The 6 main planks of his speech summarized at 38:00 prove beyond doubt that all stories of biblical creationism are utter nonsense.

I'm 23 minutes in so far and he hasn't shown any facts yet. He just rehashes the same old crap that has nothing to do with evolution at all.

 

[GodlessAstronomer]

Incorrect.

Evolution is fact.

Atheists are not an organized religion or a religion.

Actually evolution is a theory that explains certain facts about the world. The problem is that the anti-science crowd doesn't understand the word "theory" in a scientific context. "Theory" doesn't imply "uncertain" like it does in common usage.

 

[GodlessAstronomer]

This is the one where PZ beats Simmons' ass black and blue with whale fossils.

Yes, it's wonderful :awe:

 

[Jeff7]

God isn't a theory though. That would be like saying you are a theory. Existant beings cannot be theories. Your lack of experience with a specific entity is not proof of their non-existence, nor any kind of arguement for their lack of existence.

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

Claim: An infinitely powerful entity exists, but doesn't manifest itself in any way, except for circumstantial and anecdotal evidence found within ancient writings.

Seeking: Infinitely extraordinary evidence.

Creationists seem to have evolved an immunity to evidence.

Sign of intelligent design:
Fingers fit right into your ears so as to block out blasphemous information.


And of course there's our epic egos, having us think we're so utterly amazing that our very existence requires an infinitely powerful creator entity. Yeah, we're really damn amazing.
George Carlin, somewhat relevant:
"If it's true that our species is alone in the universe, then I'd have to say the universe aimed rather low and settled for very little." If this Universe is the best work any creator can do, I want my money back.

We think we're amazing because we've gotten the farthest of any species on this particular planet, at least in terms of what we'd define as "intelligence." Woo. Hoo. Let me put on my tiny party hat.

 

[Malak]

Why don't you go ahead and listen to this debate to find out why the author of that book has absolutely no credibility. The guy is a total kook.

That's hilarious, really. Simmons takes 10 seconds to overthrow the entire 5 minutes of Meyers and you think this was a win on the side of evolution? Did you even read the book Simmons wrote? I don't think Meyers did, based on what he said. Meyers ends his speech attacking Simmons for basing his beliefs in the bible, even though Simmons never comes from the standpoint of the bible. Simmons even says he isn't a believer in the bible nor is he Christian!

Meyers talks just like every other evolution fanboy. They talk and talk and say nothing at all. They say there's all this evidence for evolution, but never show it. They attack and insult creationists without realizing that not just religion is against them. Simmons isn't alone, lots of scientists are against evolution. Not that this matters, since majority belief isn't what dictates what reality is.

 

[Malak]

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

Claim: An infinitely powerful entity exists, but doesn't manifest itself in any way, except for circumstantial and anecdotal evidence found within ancient writings.

Seeking: Infinitely extraordinary evidence.

Your claim is inaccurate though. That is your first fault, you think God has only manifested himself to people thousands of years ago. You also assume that he won't manifest to you, personally. Who has their fingers in their ears?

 

[Jeff7]

Your claim is inaccurate though. That is your first fault, you think God has only manifested himself to people thousands of years ago. You also assume that he won't manifest to you, personally. Who has their fingers in their ears?

Ok fine, I shall expand it:

Claim: An infinitely powerful entity exists, but doesn't manifest itself in any way, except for circumstantial and anecdotal evidence, some of which is based in ancient writings.


Whatever you want to do to that, there's still the claim of an infinitely powerful entity. I've yet to see anything that comes close to qualifying as infinitely extraordinary evidence.

 

[Malak]

Whatever you want to do to that, there's still the claim of an infinitely powerful entity. I've yet to see anything that comes close to qualifying as infinitely extraordinary evidence.

But your lack of experience doesn't negate the existence of something. There is no burden of proof for something like that. I can't just say some anomaly doesn't exist in India if I refuse to bother going there, and I can't demand evidence of it either. I also am not so close-minded to say that people that say it exists are delusional.

 

[DangerAardvark]

That's hilarious, really. Simmons takes 10 seconds to overthrow the entire 5 minutes of Meyers and you think this was a win on the side of evolution? Did you even read the book Simmons wrote? I don't think Meyers did, based on what he said. Meyers ends his speech attacking Simmons for basing his beliefs in the bible, even though Simmons never comes from the standpoint of the bible. Simmons even says he isn't a believer in the bible nor is he Christian!

Meyers talks just like every other evolution fanboy. They talk and talk and say nothing at all. They say there's all this evidence for evolution, but never show it. They attack and insult creationists without realizing that not just religion is against them. Simmons isn't alone, lots of scientists are against evolution. Not that this matters, since majority belief isn't what dictates what reality is.

Wow, it's like they live in a parallel universe.

 

[EGGO]

Meyers talks just like every other evolution fanboy. They talk and talk and say nothing at all. They say there's all this evidence for evolution, but never show it.

You do know that domesticated dogs and plants are your solid proof evidence of evolution, right?

 

[Ruptga]

Damn, this thread started out so well, but we still fell into these same old arguments.

 

[Malak]

At 40 minutes he lists the things that would disprove evolution. #4 on that list is entirely what the book Millions of Missing Links is all about.

His list of stuff at 38 minutes that supposedly make evolution true do not prove evolution in anyway. Quirks of development are just that, quirks. A man with 3 arms or a girl with 6 legs in no way prove evolution, nor do dolphins with 4 fins. Evolution is a process, and there is no evidence of said process. This is why it's a theory. The entire speech is assumption built on assumption. There's no science involved here. There is only speculation.

 

[Inferno0032]

Your claim is inaccurate though. That is your first fault, you think God has only manifested himself to people thousands of years ago. You also assume that he won't manifest to you, personally. Who has their fingers in their ears?

Yet you completely deny the nearly irrefutable evidence for evolution? They talk and talk and say nothing at all? Bone records and DNA do alot of this talking you say doesn't happen. Humans have a 98 percent gene similarity to chimps. The idea behind evolution makes complete and perfect sense. How can this not exist?

I personally, side that evolution is, essentially, fact. However, I don't deny the possibility that there may be some higher entity, although I cannot say for sure, because it has not proven itself to me. But just because it hasn't proven itself to me doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

It's like Socrates claimed himself to be the "wisest" man in the whole world, and he claimed these on the grounds that he knew that he knew nothing, and what he did know, didn't matter. And this understanding is what made him wiser than any other.

Don't pretend like you know everything, because none of us know anything.

The only thing I have against creationists is that they seem to be the only ones who will completely and belligerently deny any possibility of evolution. Evolutionists, on the other hand, tend to seem that they don't think there is a higher entity, but won't deny it off only those grounds.

 

[Inferno0032]

At 40 minutes he lists the things that would disprove evolution. #4 on that list is entirely what the book Millions of Missing Links is all about.

His list of stuff at 38 minutes that supposedly make evolution true do not prove evolution in anyway. Quirks of development are just that, quirks. A man with 3 arms or a girl with 6 legs in no way prove evolution, nor do dolphins with 4 fins. Evolution is a process, and there is no evidence of said process. This is why it's a theory. The entire speech is assumption built on assumption. There's no science involved here. There is only speculation.

How does the process that animals with better traits which assist in survival, leading to the greater passing on of those same genes not make sense to you? It may be hard to see in today's world, where even the slowest, dumbest people reproduce more than educated ones do, but in the "natural" world, it makes perfect sense.

Your ignorance lies in your own personal infallibility. You can't be wrong, period. You don't acknowledge yourself that your own idea isn't true, so how does this put you any higher than those you tear down? Especially since you entire allegiance lies on something very much unproven in comparison to evolution.

 

[Malak]

Yet you completely deny the nearly irrefutable evidence for evolution? They talk and talk and say nothing at all? Bone records and DNA do alot of this talking you say doesn't happen. Humans have a 98 percent gene similarity to chimps.

Gene similarities don't prove a process.

Don't pretend like you know everything, because none of us know anything.

I don't know everything and I don't pretend to. I found some of the topics he discussed intriguing and worth discussing, but not with him. He clearly states he wants nothing to do with anyone that doesn't believe what he believes, which is why he's talking at an Atheist Conference. I come from a standpoint I learned from the movie Dogma. Ideas are better than beliefs. This man, and apparently you, believe in evolution. Until you bring it down to an idea, you will never accept any beloved patriot in its armor.

 

[Malak]

Your ignorance lies in your own personal infallibility. You can't be wrong, period. You don't acknowledge yourself that your own idea isn't true, so how does this put you any higher than those you tear down? Especially since you entire allegiance lies on something very much unproven in comparison to evolution.

That is just silly nonsense, desperate attacks from someone that uses emotion rather than logic.

 

[Jeff7]

But your lack of experience doesn't negate the existence of something. There is no burden of proof for something like that. I can't just say some anomaly doesn't exist in India if I refuse to bother going there, and I can't demand evidence of it either. I also am not so close-minded to say that people that say it exists are delusional.

You're the one claiming that a deity exists and is responsible for the existence of everything.
Burden of proof would fall upon you for that.


Side note: The Bible quote would seem to indicate Christianity. How did you arrive at that religion as the best one, and the right one? If I had to guess, it was likely because someone told you about it, right?
I ask because you seem to hint that the evidence of God is as though it is blatantly obvious to anyone. I must wonder then, how did you go about arriving at the conclusion that this God was the right one? Did you go through the proper process of elimination, evaluating the validity of the thousands upon thousands of deities throughout the course of history? I hear Ra's getting kind of despondent these days, lugging the Sun across the sky without anyone even giving him a pat on the back.

That's the sort of thing that helps reinforce the idea that religions are just a mass delusion/hallucination/mental virus. So many people have this uncanny knack for finding the "correct" religion to be one that's popular in a given society. Not too many people these days are into the Greek Pantheon of Gods, or, as I mentioned, Ra and the Egyptian gods. Why not? Who determined that they were no longer valid? Why are they not valid, but the Christian God is?


I guess that went way OT; this sort of stuff often does tend to mix together, and that kind of came to mind.

That is just silly nonsense, desperate attacks from someone that uses emotion rather than logic.

Logic.....heh.

 

[Inferno0032]

Gene similarities don't prove a process.



I don't know everything and I don't pretend to. I found some of the topics he discussed intriguing and worth discussing, but not with him. He clearly states he wants nothing to do with anyone that doesn't believe what he believes, which is why he's talking at an Atheist Conference. I come from a standpoint I learned from the movie Dogma. Ideas are better than beliefs. This man, and apparently you, believe in evolution. Until you bring it down to an idea, you will never accept any beloved patriot in its armor.

If you are simply attacking this individual speaker, then I'm missing the point of your arguments. I did not watch the lecture, and if he is pompous and a bit snide about how he lectures, I'm sure he would irritate me just the same.

And I'm completely open to ideas or adaptations of evolution, I have no strong ties there, I do believe that the ideas and the evidence make sense, and seem to build on each other. There are obviously flaws in it, as are most things we know in today's science. There are just many many things which we cannot know, which goes right along with the idea of creationism. I can't know anymore than you, so I can't say it isn't true any more than you can say it is. I acknowledge the idea there as well, I just don't throw evolution aside at the same time, I see no reason why there couldn't be coexistence.

And the gene similarities themselves don't prove a process, but they are further evidence supporting it based upon the ideas and bone artifact evidence which evolution signifies.

 

[DrPizza]

Hey dumbass, the Catholics are NOT Atheists.

And since Pope Pious XII basically said "okay, there's a shit ton of evidence for evolution. WE'RE not going to be the fucking morons this time who deny it for a couple of extra centuries, like we did with that whole Earth is the center of the universe thing," Catholics have even accepted evolution. You'd be an idiot not to. The evidence is staggering.

Or, to use an analogy to science that perhaps you can understand, your stance against evolution is akin to saying "the human body is not made up of cells. Cells are a myth" at a time when scientists are already studying the intricacies of cells.

On another note - I believe the Bible says that God created Adam. Did he create an infant Adam, or was Adam already a man? I suppose we could accurately say that God created a 25 year old (just made up that number, for the sake of argument) who didn't exist until that very instant.

If God created the universe 6000 years old, and if God created man 6000 years ago, then he created a 13.72 billion year old universe (give or take 10 million years) that would be exactly the same as if it had started from a "big bang." And God created man exactly the same as he would have evolved had life on earth started 3 billion years ago and been evolving ever since.

Likewise, the pink unicorn may have created the universe 45 seconds ago. Every memory you have, all the evidence throughout your house that you remember gathering from 5, 10, or 20 years ago never even existed before 45 seconds ago - they're all false memories. Sound retarded? Anyone educated in science finds your claim against evolution to be equally retarded.

 

[darkswordsman17]

At 40 minutes he lists the things that would disprove evolution. #4 on that list is entirely what the book Millions of Missing Links is all about.

His list of stuff at 38 minutes that supposedly make evolution true do not prove evolution in anyway. Quirks of development are just that, quirks. A man with 3 arms or a girl with 6 legs in no way prove evolution, nor do dolphins with 4 fins. Evolution is a process, and there is no evidence of said process. This is why it's a theory. The entire speech is assumption built on assumption. There's no science involved here. There is only speculation.

Were you even paying attention? Did you not notice how, dolphins start developing appendages early on, only to lose them, however in some rare cases they continue to develop. Those weren't just extra fins (look at the picture), they're stubby little legs. I'm all ears on your explanation of this.

 

[Iron Woode]

here is an example of the nonsense that comes from Creationists and their ilk:

Hydroplate Theory

and they wonder why people point and laugh at them.

 

[Gamingphreek]

Its amazing that all the people who are arguing in favor of evolutionists seem to feel the need to gang up on the creationists. You really need 15 different people all going after one person - sure seems like something that is "fact" wouldn't need that...

Also, everyone in here is arguing like they are an expert on the topic. I have led Small Groups and Bible studies, I have led Youth Retreats, but I'm not theologian. I can't just pull out a verse from the Bible on queue. My place is not to debate these thinkers - I know what I believe, I know why I believe it. I'm more than happy to have a discussion with people who do not believe in Christ, but God has other purposes for me - I'll leave the debating up to better men/women.

That being said, all of you who claim evolution is a fact are delusional. Can it be something you believe in (regardless of what I may believe), well that is your prerogative. However, if it were a fact then scientists wouldn't still be trying in vain to prove it. It is a theory regarding life.

Furthermore, sorry Atheists, you are a religion.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/religion
Religion - a specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices generally agreed upon by a number of persons or sects

-Kevin

 

[Jeff7]

Hey dumbass, the Catholics are NOT Atheists.

Sure they are.

Its amazing that all the people who are arguing in favor of evolutionists seem to feel the need to gang up on the creationists. You really need 15 different people all going after one person - sure seems like something that is "fact" wouldn't need that...

He's got the power of the almighty behind him right? What's the problem?

That being said, all of you who claim evolution is a fact are delusional. Can it be something you believe in (regardless of what I may believe), well that is your prerogative. However, if it were a fact then scientists wouldn't still be trying in vain to prove it. It is a theory regarding life.

Dammit, where's that ;confused; emoticon?
Yes, if something isn't easily proven, that means it's not true.
Damn periodic table, you took such a long time to compile. Too long, in fact. So many people wasted their entire lives working with "elements" like helium or uranium.
I guess fire, earth, water, and air were right all along.

Furthermore, sorry Atheists, you are a religion.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/religion
Religion - a specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices generally agreed upon by a number of persons or sects
-Kevin

Sweet. That qualifies a lot of things as a religion. Tooth brushing could qualify under that broad....brushstroke. (Well that was terrible and unintentional.) A lot of people do it, some almost obsessively, under the belief that it will stave off tooth decay. Why we even have an organization which helps reinforce this belief, namely the ADA.

 

[Gamingphreek]

Its amazing that all the people who are arguing in favor of evolutionists seem to feel the need to gang up on the creationists. You really need 15 different people all going after one person - sure seems like something that is "fact" wouldn't need that...

Also, everyone in here is arguing like they are an expert on the topic. I have led Small Groups and Bible studies, I have led Youth Retreats, but I'm no theologian. I can't just pull out a verse from the Bible on queue. My place is not to debate these thinkers - I know what I believe, I know why I believe it. I'm more than happy to have a discussion with people who do not believe in Christ, but God has other purposes for me - I'll leave the debating up to better men/women.

That being said, all of you who claim evolution is a fact are delusional. Can it be something you believe in (regardless of what I may believe), well that is your prerogative. However, if it were a fact then scientists wouldn't still be trying in vain to prove it. It is a theory regarding life.

Furthermore, sorry Atheists, you are a religion.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/religion
Religion - a specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices generally agreed upon by a number of persons or sects

-Kevin