Absolutely Nothing: Atheists on What They Know About What They Pretend to Discuss

Yes but they changed the rules. Have to return every two months, used to be six, so now more expensive

Yes, 250cc

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

with

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Keep well

Cheers

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I know people just like Jan, often very troubled, unhappy, usually in loveless marriages or divorced. In a job where no one bothers them, usually can't get along with co-workers and often addicted to something or other. Many have mental disorders, but without actually meeting Jan, it's hard to tell. Here, on these forums, is a release for him where he can say all the things he can't say to anyone in person for fear of ridicule and alienation. Probably a really hard life and his Bible is his only solace.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Awesome helmet, dude.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Well I must confess I can tick some of those boxes I was divorced twice, so that's two points right there, and addicted to tea. That is so much stronger than you realise..I rowed a sail boat over a mile to get a morning cup of tea...I never thought to wait until the morning breeze came along..that was my second morning with out tea. Maybe being with salt water tweaks the need.
I like Jan I like you I like most folk..we each have our problems that only others see.
It would be such fun to meet the folk behind their net character...now would that make a great tv show...so we crowd fund it everyone gets to meet issued swords and off we go..for the tv that part is just staged, but we chat like polite folk at a polite party.
As you can tell I am bored being here in the city and can't get anything meaningful done.
What was the op again?
Alex

 

Do they have bike drag races where you go over there? I found on YouTube them drag racing small capacity bikes..very interesting,
Alex

 

That's what you find out when you study and learn - you encounter the evidence, or as much as you have time for (it would take a lifetime to simply read it all - you will end up choosing the lines of evidence you find most interesting).
Which is well worth the effort. I have never met anyone who regretted the time they spent gaining an understanding of that theory. You won't either, if you ever decide to make the effort.

I recall him doing a decent parody of the "intelligent design" crowd, but too slow for me - and too much like shooting fish in a barrel. I don't watch videos, as a rule - life is short.

 

I get you, and I have no doubt as to it brilliance, and elegance. But that’s not what we’re discussing. The reality is, despite it’s brilliance, it cannot really be considered a scientific fact, if there other scientists who cannot accept it as fact. There is a discrepancy among scientists, regarding the theory.

Also. If it was a fact, there would be at least some truth to it. That would mean that at some level, everyone would know something that corroborates the fact of it.

There is no intuitive value to this theory. There is nothing that naturally leads one to see the theory as connective to their everyday existence. One can not relate to it. It has to be constantly driven into the mind from an outside source, in order to accept. This is probably why proponents of the theory get angry with dissenters. Because it upsets the stream of information necessary to properly indoctrinate.

Any idea that requires one to have a formal education, in order to know that it naturally occurs, is not real knowledge, even though it may take real knowledge to construct it.
Real knowledge is already known, it just needs to be uncovered.

But let’s say darwinism is true.
We don’t know it.
There is no real knock down evidence that supports it as knowledge.
It is all educated speculation.
The uneducated cannot relate to it.

 

JAMES CHECK THIS OUT!!!

 

I took a peek and as usual Jan is wrong.

I am relatively uneducated and intuitively I am unalterably convinced that the concept of Darwinian evolution and Natural selection is fundamentally sound. It meets the logical requirements of gradual change in all respects.

You don't have to be educated to see truth, you need to be falsely educated (or stupid), not to see it!

 

You cannot value or relate to what you don't understand, of course. That is normal, and expected. But if you are going to continue to devote so time and typing to Darwinian theory, if you are going to continue to care about it and post about it, you owe it to yourself to make an effort to understand what it is. You are missing out on one of the greatest achievements of human thought, simply for lack of attention and effort.

 

You are assuming I don’t understand what it is.
Granted I’m not a scientist, and I don’t know the intricate details of the theory. Obviously you know more than me, but I’m willing to bet there are people who know more than you, and there are people who know more than them. But not everyone is going to see it as a scientific fact. Surely you can understand that.

How many believers (of which there must be millions) know everything about the subject?
I bet there are believers who are less aware of it than folk like me or Alex. Why do they believe it?

 

You can download "On the origin of species" as a .pdf , for free from Wikipedia.

 

I alreadyhave it.
But thanks anyway.

 

But have you read it? Careful about your answer now. I may test you......

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

More exactly - did you follow the logic and understand it?

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Go away, I’m not on trial.
Well not in this thread anyway.

 

I'm observing, not assuming.

This, for example:

Darwinian Evolutionary Theory is a scientific theory, not a scientific fact.

You don't understand the basics of Darwinian Evolutionary Theory.
You don't even recognize supporting evidence for it.

None. It's far too complex and multifaceted. As I posted above: it would take you the rest of your life just to read the literature involved.

Varies by person.

I don't "believe in" Darwinian Theory or any other scientific theory, of course - theories are not the kinds of things one believes in, but rather understands and uses. But I agree that many people do.

 

Wrong.

On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life.

Summary of Darwin's theory

which biologist Ernst Mayr summarised as follows:

Every species is fertile enough that if all offspring survived to reproduce, the population would grow (fact).
Despite periodic fluctuations, populations remain roughly the same size (fact).
Resources such as food are limited and are relatively stable over time (fact).
A struggle for survival ensues (inference).
Individuals in a population vary significantly from one another (fact).
Much of this variation is heritable (fact).
Individuals less suited to the environment are less likely to survive and less likely to reproduce; individuals more suited to the environment are more likely to survive and more likely to reproduce and leave their heritable traits to future generations, which produces the process of natural selection (fact).
This slowly effected process results in populations changing to adapt to their environments, and ultimately, these variations accumulate over time to form new species (inference).

more...; https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:ElectronPdf&page=On the Origin of Species&action=show-download-screen

Oh Jan, you are failing even on the introduction to "On the Origin of Species".....

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

That’s no indication I don’t understand it on some level. Personally I regard it as an idea.
I understand that is called a theory.
And I know hardcore Darwinists think it’s a fact. Alex thinks it is a fact, and sure he knows less than me.

Of course I understand the basics of it.
I just don’t take the idea as seriously as you.
I recognise what is supposed to be the supporting evidence (in my level), ie fossil record. I just don’t agree with it.
I see it as materialistic philosophy at best. I don’t even find it that interesting.
Sorry!

No thanks.

Unless it is an idea dressed up as a theory, and forced down people’s throats as one.

 

I only have to look at my cat to realise only a god could create such beauty and I know I am right.
But if we have no evolution we have no way all the species became er.. species..
Alex