Creationist questions evolution

[Jan Ardena]

You need to look that up perhaps using books on the subject yhat are scientific rather than religious.

Did you believe humans were made by Darwinian evolution?
If f yes, how did d it make man, and give him the ability build vast empires, and civilisations.
I’ve looked and it is not specific:

You have convinced yourself there is a creator.

If believe in n God. As it seems s natural time believe that n God, I don’t need to be convinced. You on the other are convinced that there is no evidence s no God, which you s why you don’t believe in God.

I really cant answer that but will avoid making up an unsupported answer.

You can’t answer it because you’re here is no answer. It poses a problem for you because you are committed to your delusion.m

Jan.

 

[Xelasnave.1947]

Did you believe humans were made by Darwinian evolution?

Evolution merely deals with changes over time of a species...
Evolution does not deal with the origin of life.
The theory tell us that at some point all life on the Earth was our common ancestor...so over time things slowly change and a new species evolves.
At some point humans shared a common ancestor with the apes not that we come from apes but both apes and humans came from that animal.
And that animal came from a long period where its common ancestor with other mamnals was something different again.
Many folk who attack evolution dont understand its rather limited input on life...it deals with only change over time that sees new species evolve.

how did d it make man, and give him the ability build vast empires, and civilisations.

Evolution does not even attempt to ask those questions.
Many theists think evolution is wrong but they actually dont know what it says and does not say..Jan you should find out what it says rather than attack strawmen built by those who dont know what evolution days and what it deals with.

As to how did humans build empires etc big question and I hope you are not silly enough to yry and answer it by saying it was all due to god☺
And look if you find you cant find an answer, or if science makes a mistake that does not prove god...
If evolution is wrong that does not prove god..if the big bang is wrong that does not prove god...god is not a good answer to questions that you cant find an answer.

You can’t answer it because you’re here is no answer. It poses a problem for you because you are committed to your delusion.m

Sorry I cant work out what you are saying.

But if you want me to answer something I will try...if you seek only speculation I can offer opinion on anything without a clue...just like all other humans☺


Alex

 

[iceaura]

As man hasn’t always been a part of the universe, how did man get here, if the universe didn’t create man?

By Darwinian evolution.
It happens. There's no creator involved.
And that marks the psychology of the overt Abrahamic theist posting on a science forum. They need a creator, a responsible party not themselves, for everything. They need to attach blame, and it can't be to the believers or the belief.

"So, to come to the point, you don't believe the bible should be taken dogmatically?"
That's a very broad question that has many layers and cannot be answered in a yes/no manner.

It's a question that can be answered yes or no, immediately, by anyone familiar with the Bible and willing to be accountable for their answer.
But deflecting accountability, to their God or to evildoers, is important behavior in the psychology of overt Abrahamic theists in their posting on science forums. The common excuse is that being accountable is arrogance, pride - either playing God or playing Devil. The common result is that they can post as they do here - in fundamental dishonesty - without qualm.

 

[Write4U]

If f yes, how did d it make man, and give him the ability build vast empires, and civilisations.

Why not learn what "evolution" and "natural selection" means. You clearly do not understand that evolution does not purposely make or give any abilities. And natural selection does not select which species survive, it selects out the species that do not survive.

Evolution is all by probabilistic mutation and survivability to procreate.

 

[Xelasnave.1947]

Why not learn what "evolution" and "natural selection" means.

You clearly do not understand that evolution does not purposely make or give any abilities. It's all probabilistic.

It seems many theists really dont know what evolution says.

They seem to think one species can give birth to another and where they get that from I have no idea.

They also fail to appreciate that change takes place over a long time. An ape could no give birth to a human ..but they think that is the thrust of the theory...of course if they tead what it says they would not be so silly...maybe but mostly their view of evolution is irrational and stupid.

I think if the ones who think they have a problem with evolution that they would be less concerned if they took the time to read up and actually learn what the theory covers.

Also what they fail to understand is if evolution was proved wrong their burden of proof remains...even if evolution is wrong it does not mean the answer is god..they dont get that at all..however they almost seem to say ..evolution cant work therefore god exists...no no no.

If all science was proved in error or absolutely incorrect that does nothing to prove god it only proves science wrong and does nothing to suggest god exists.
But of course science is always 100% correct it has to be to be published and peer reviewed..religion heck flaw after flaw after flaw..
Too many flaws to list yet not one incorrect aspect to science...not a single one...if we find one it gets correcyed immediately...imagine teligion doing ot that way..
Never ever...and when you point put a flaw..slavery in the bible as an example...do they say ..yes that is wrong..no they bend over backwards to say slavery is actually ok.

To prove god exists is an issue they can not manage with positive input ..that is offerring stand alone proof..but hold onto the line..I can not think of a better idea therefore god.

Yeh great way to find truth.

And so to move somewhat to the thread topic I would say one thing that seems different between the two is that atheists understand the burden of proof and the requirents of evidence whereas thesists seem content with out proof being happy to justify themselves by a call that "its my faith" which is really shorthand for "I have no evidence but I believe in god because I want to and therefore I must be right"

Theists see no problem with accepting heresay evidence if it relates favourably to their belief...atheists seem more demanding of real evidence and reject heresay just as do the courts.

Atheist tend to look at what is before them and try and work out possible alternate explanations and not too worried if they must say "I dont know" whereas theists look at all things and determine that somehow someway God is involved and they must have an answer as to why they are here and can not accept their insignificance and one life mortality.

Atheist seem more tolerant of others whereas theists seem to expect everyone must do it their way because their way is gods way.

Atheists seem to manage personal responsibility whereas theists determine it is God who makes the calls and responsible for everything.

Atheists dont fear death in the same way as theists and not driven to bank on an after life to accept a cruddy present life.

Atheists dont fear a superstitious prospect of hell whereas so many theists believe it is real and hold genuine fear that they will go to hell for eternal punishement if they admit the truth that there can be no god in an eternal universe.

Theists seem to accept the killing and cruelty because they think there are better times waiting for all in the next life.

An atheist sees the suffering and understands those poor victims have got the worst of things and it wont improve...and asks why cant your god fix it..he doesnt therefore he does not exist..theist replies freewill without which we wont be human...pathetic really.

Theists too me seem untrustworthy as they dont worry about double crossing another human and only keep their word with god...thru fear of hell no doubt.

Atheists are mostly direct in discussion whereas theists, certainly here delight in evasive tacticts and often can be accused of being dishonest by others who expect discussion to be less convoluted.

Theists seem to fall for the con artists..one only has to look at the huge wealth accumulated by various telly evangalists...it is mind numbing these con men make such easy livings.

I daw one calling for vash to buy his third private jet so he can sptead the word of the lord...how many folk get conned to pay for a private jet...

Theists fall for faith healing, answered prayers, miracles talking in tounges and mostly believe women are less than men and deserve subserviant rolls.

Alex

 

[Jan Ardena]

We can only speculate how ever expansion is an atribute of this universe..it had what we perceive as a start and that means it presumably will have an end caused somewhat by the expansion if you follow the idea associated with speculation as to the end of the universe...so this universe starts and ends and restarts with a new bid bang...all we need is a cycle...certainly more reasonable than requiring a eternal creator...

Of course it is not more reasonable.
You are simply denying, and rejecting the God that you know exists, by grasping at any straw.

Evolution deals only with elvolution it does not comment on how life formed..
But we know all that and it would not surprise me to find humans creating life in the near future.

Now here's a good example of blind faith, ladies and gentleman.

By who.

By anybody who can comprehend what you're writing (including your atheist chums too).

Its ok to argue along there is there is not approach but now that I come forward with what must present as a dangerous idea I have been noticed... does that mean I am now a target being a thinker and maybe should be dealt with before I give the brainwasher mob an idea that could bring down the empire of lies and myth.

The only danger you present, is the one where you lie to yourself. You do not believe in no universe, you do not believe in no darwinism.
Both are simply pacifiers. They are placed in your psyche to justify your delusion. Snap out of it man! Before you really start to believe it.

Thats the way the religions approach things isnt it...think what you like so long as you agree there is a god...

Don't worry about how the religions approach things. You aren't there yet.

I am just a mug Jan dominating is not my thing.

You are in two minds. Outwardly you act as though you're reasonable, and rational. Inwardly you fiercely defend you delusion.
You are at odds with yourself, and you have demonstrated that in the past.

Superstition is so woven into our society and culture is it any wonder that even an atheist is still capable of being infected by the problem.

Your problem is, denial.

So we have a creator who built everything and therefore has the ability to make things in anyway he pleases...just for a novel approach why not build the universe kinder and hard wire humans not to kill...if you actually think about what I am saying you could ask...well why not.

Because the nature is what it is.
You are part nature (body, mind), and part spiritual (spirit-soul/ego).
The former acts in accordance with nature.
The latter is transcendental to nature, and is eternal, just like it's source.

Your desire to not want to be killed, or even die, is in accordance with, and due, to your spiritual nature.
If you were truly just a product of nature, you would embrace finality, because that is natures way. Everything has to come to an end.
From your delusional perspective, there is no right, no wrong. Nothing matters, as you're just the result of some random process.

Of course we would still be human...we are hard wired not chew off our arms or legs...still human..taking the choice away not to eat ourselves does not hint at being less human nor does being hard wired not to kill.

You misunderstand.
Which would you rather eat, organic food, or genetically modified food. If you were given the choice?
Me. I pick organic every time. Why because it is wholesome, appealing, and helps to keep a nice immune system, so we can keep crap at bay.
What good is food, if you scoop out all the nutrients?
What good is a human being, if you scoop out it's humanity?

I have to go again and follow up later however Jan may I say I really do appreciate the manner you are dealing with me...you have not been evasive or tricky and so it is a pleasure to have our discussion and I thank you.

I'm never evasive.
You just need to give more thought to the questions and points you raise.
Sometimes the best way to understand something (assuming you do), is answer questions for yourself, rather that being told by outside source.
Of course it doesn't work if you're in denial. But as you are probably the most honest atheist I have spoken to, I think you deserve the opportunity to be honest with yourself, and the best way for you to do that, is to accept the most honest answers you come up with when I pose a question to you.

jan.

 

[Write4U]

There doesn’t seem to any reason, or evidence that he actually believes in either. I think he accepts them, because they can justify his world view. I accept evolution ( not Darwinian) because it occurs. But I don’t believe in it.
So in what way do you believe in the universe, and Darwinism?
Jan.

For artificial Darwinian evolution you only need look at household bacteria and at fancy chicken farmers.
Both mutate at forced rates. Both will change into new patterns by Human artificial imitation of Natural selection based on financial considerations.

The difference between the two is that in the evolution of household bacteria, the weakest bacteria are selected out by our use of anti-bacterials and anti-septics causing the survival only of the strongest , most resistant individuals in our homes. (not good).

However, with the breeding of fancy chickens, the chickens with most desirable traits are intentionally selected in by the use of selective breeding, such as for fancy plumage.

p.s. Darwin was an avid pigeon breeder. That's how he tested his theory, before he revealed his work.

I am confident that Alex's perspective is very much in line with the evolved (refined) hypothesis of Darwinian Evolution and the concept of Natural Selection.

Alex, what say you??

 

[Xelasnave.1947]

I am confident that Alex's perspective is very much in line with the evolved (refined) hypothesis of Darwinian Evolution and the concept of Natural Selection.

Alex, what say you??

I think I understand what it says and certainly what it does not say.

Believers generally have it wrong so wrong there is little point trying to educate them.

Heck if they just read a paragraph in Wiki they would realise how wrong they are about what it says...but why would you bother with Wiki if you have the good book..no point in hearing out those fancy scientists with their facts and data and observations when its all been explained by God to folk in the bronze age and passed on word of mouth to be finally recorded edited and translated and some authors identified and credentials not sought and certainly not required.



...what could those scientists know over those folk from the bronze age.

As to the universe my belief that it is eternal is loosley based on the laws of thermal dynamics...and although we can observe a specific evolvement of our current universe that evolvement does not suggest that it could not be eternal...to argue that it is not eternal evidence would be needed to show how the evolvement could start at nothing which if you want to prove god fit him in right there.
The big bang does not suggest that the initial universe was nothing it only deals with the evolvement of something already existing and then expanding...the eternal universe is not eliminated by the big bang in my view.

If God claims to have created the universe what did he say and who did he tell...the start of the good book seems like some annonomous author just claims it happened as opposed to God saying how he did it...anyways what did God say to the author exactly...or did the author get it from someone else.



Alex

 

[Write4U]

That’s because you don’t have a clear comprehension of what faith is.

Sorry, Jan, you can't use that as an argument.
Very few people have a clear comprehension of what faith is. It is being used as junk-food all over the world.

Jan, how many people do you think have a clear comprehension of what faith is?
You, and who else? Musika clearly doesn't.

As long as we have Creation Museums we need to worry about religious dietary values.

Creation Museum Draws Scientific Fire, https://www.aps.org/publications/apsnews/200707/creationmuseum.cfm
The May 28 opening of a $27 million Creation Museum in Petersburg, Kentucky, drew about 4000 visitors, dozens of protestors, and attention from national and international media.

The museum promotes a literal interpretation of the Bible’s creation story, contradicting accepted scientific explanations of the origin of the universe, stars, Earth, and life.

Scientists from the region have signed petitions expressing their concern that the museum spreads lies about science and could confuse children.

https://www.aps.org/publications/apsnews/200707/creationmuseum.cfm

People leaving that museum actually believe that The Flintstones is a historical documentary.

The Creation Museum expects to attract about 250,000 visitors in its first year.

The Petersburg, KY Creation Museum is the largest, but not the only museum promoting the biblical creation story. Dozens of smaller creationist museums exist in the United States, and a $300,000 creation museum opened in the small town of Big Valley, in Alberta, Canada in early June.

This is an example of comprehension by theists? God help us!.......

 

[Write4U]

Jan Ardena said:
Where did all the extra information, that is needed to construct new parts, and systems come from?

Nooooo, Jan , you can't be serious. "Irreducible complexity"? Give me a break.
This hopelessly misinformed assumption was settled in court years ago.

Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District,

where it was proven that Flagella are not irreducibly complex. They are evolved from microtubules which fill a range of evolved motile and information transfer functions.

Jan, in order to understand religion, one must first understand science. Only then can you draw "enlightened" boundaries between spiritualism and rationalism.

 

[billvon]

Where did all the extra information, that is needed to construct new parts, and systems come from?

You don't understand evolution at all, do you.

 

[Jan Ardena]

It's against their morality.

Why is it?

Darwinian evolution.

How did this complex specified information evolve?

We just use your idea of God - the Abrahamic one - in such matters. It's always handy, we are long familiar with it, and it's almost always the one presented by the theist involved.
- - -

Nice try.
You know there is a God, but you deny and reject. You can’t help it.

That's not true. Clearly you have no comprehension of the worldview you slander.

I know atheism isn’t your worldview, silly.
You know there is a God.
You have to borrow from the theist worldview (bummer, huh! )
Kind of like, “”I hate you mom...
...can I bring my dirty laundry round tonight”.

Jan.

 

[Jan Ardena]

Seriously Jan...at least study the science so you can avoid presenting in such a poor light.

I should not have to explain something so available if you cared to look.

So you don’t know how all the complex specified information appears in order to make new systems and body parts.
I bet you weren’t even aware that new parts and sytems needed new information to be built. Yet you still accept this mad idea.

You sir, have blind faith.

jan.

 

[iceaura]

I bet you weren’t even aware that new parts and sytems needed new information to be built. Yet you still accept this mad idea.

You sir, have blind faith.

Silly.

Darwinian evolutionary theory is carefully reasoned from evidence. The building of new information according to that theory is straightforward. A child can demonstrate it right in front of you, if you have any interest in the matter - or you could observe the thermodynamic principles in action by watching a potato plant grow from an eye in a hydroponic jar, as hundreds of thousands of schoolchildren have before you.

He has information you reject, by assumption. He reasons from it, an approach you attack as threatening to your faith. And so you slander him - one comprehensive ad hominem argument against reasoning from evidence, brought to this forum as a work of mission.

That's how you justify your dishonesty, bad faith, and devotion to personal insult and slander - as a work of mission. Your faith has made you a bearer of false witness, an agent of the Great Deceiver, a corrupter of souls.

None so blind as those who will not see, remember?

 

[Xelasnave.1947]

And so you slander him - one comprehensive ad hominem argument against reasoning from evidence, brought to this forum as a work of mission.

Jans approach does more harm to him than anyone else.
I am not an intellectual giant but Jan insists on demonstrating he is less informed than me.
I did have a chuckle imaginig Jans view of god in his design and spare parts room designing and building new species...Jan can only be an atheist running his own false flag to make theists appear dishonest and uneducated...
I was going to tell him about dna but no ..its probably beyond his world view ...so it is him who chooses the path of ignorance rather than the path to enlightenment...let him have his scriptures and let him retain his bronze age superstitious links...ignorance is bliss for him...let him dream let him imagine his made up god ... he has his Santa and is happy.
Alex

 

[Jan Ardena]

Darwinian evolutionary theory is carefully reasoned from evidence. The building of new information according to that theory is straightforward. A child can demonstrate it right in front of you, if you have any interest in the matter - or you could observe the thermodynamic principles in action by watching a potato plant grow from an eye in a hydroponic jar, as hundreds of thousands of schoolchildren have before you.

If a child can demonstrate it, as easily as you say, you should have no trouble explaining it.

Well...?

Jan.

 

[Jan Ardena]

Jans approach does more harm to him than anyone else.
I am not an intellectual giant but Jan insists on demonstrating he is less informed than me.
I did have a chuckle imaginig Jans view of god in his design and spare parts room designing and building new species...Jan can only be an atheist running his own false flag to make theists appear dishonest and uneducated...
I was going to tell him about dna but no ..its probably beyond his world view ...so it is him who chooses the path of ignorance rather than the path to enlightenment...let him have his scriptures and let him retain his bronze age superstitious links...ignorance is bliss for him...let him dream let him imagine his made up god ... he has his Santa and is happy.
Alex

Alex, you are a lost cause.

Jan

 

[iceaura]

If a child can demonstrate it, as easily as you say, you should have no trouble explaining it.

Nor did I, or others, the first few times you tried that deflection.

Your faith has made you a corruptor, an agent of the Great Deceiver.
And that is how you represent your God, on these forums.

Jans approach does more harm to him than anyone else.

It does no harm to him. He's not risking anything he hasn't already lost.

 

[Write4U]

You say this because despite your denial and rejection, you know there is a God.

No, you're in denial. Deep down you know there is no God...

 

[Jan Ardena]

No, you're in denial.....

Nope. I accept God.

Jan.