Evolution

[KontanKarite]

Wow, this guy is fairly fervent, is he not?

Just an odd observation. It reminds me of someone and something.

[Onetwothree]

Originally Posted by KontanKarite

LoL!!! Ironic.

LOL weak-atheist = strong-agnostic! LOL Ironic!!!

[Onetwothree]

Originally Posted by Godslayer Jillian

He called himself an agnostic, and said his god is Spinoza's god. Let's leave him as an agnostic then.

Spinoza's God = sexed up atheism. Let's be honest here for a moment.

[KontanKarite]

Wow, your passion is starting to amuze me.

[Godslayer Jillian]

Originally Posted by Onetwothree

Spinoza's God = sexed up atheism. Let's be honest here for a moment.

I understand, but still he didn't consider himself an atheist, and he was too much of a giant for us to put words in his mouth.

[Onetwothree]

Originally Posted by Godslayer Jillian

I understand, but still he didn't consider himself an atheist, and he was too much of a giant for us to put words in his mouth.

Does it matter what you consider yourself even if the definition is wrong? I know many people who claim themselves agnostic when they REALLY mean they are deistic. In today's terms, Einstein is an atheist, and nothing more.

[KontanKarite]

Uh oh, Einstein's a poseur.

[KlaudiaGaya]

Originally Posted by Onetwothree

Quote:
Originally Posted by KlaudiaGaya
I don't mean to question your opinion...

This already sets you off on the wrong foot.

Why? Maybe I expressed myself poorly, but what I meant is that I wasn't going to criticize your point, but state a different point of view. There's nothing wrong with that, but if you think so, that says something about the way you deal with opinions that are different from yours.

Originally Posted by Onetwothree

Quote:
...but I believe in God and I think that's not something that is incompatible with the evolution theory. But then I'm a spiritualist, so to me, both make sense together.

Any 'creator' God is incompatible with evolution, as is any 'guiding' God. It seems absurd that a God would create such bad designs that could be so
EASILY improved upon, and if evolution was guided--then it was guided in inferior directions. Of course evolution was never 'guided' in that sense, but was driven by natural selection, and environmental stressors.

The reason why I believe there's a God is because there's no effect without a cause.

Originally Posted by Onetwothree

Quote:
God in the spiritualistic view is the Creator and the main element of the universe from which the other two elements sprung: the spiritual and the
material. In this concept, there's not only one universe existing but many...


A) If God is a creator [see before] then he's a bad creator. The eye is wired backwards, upside down, we have left-over organs, body parts, muscles,
etc., from when we were troglodytes. If there is a 'great creator' then I suspect he'd be wiser than me. Unless you assume that the creator is a dip
shit, and can't make a Panda's Thumb useful.

Animals' organisms (including humans') are fit for the kind of life each species has. You may find it inadequate, but is that really so? As for the "left-over organs", it takes millions of years for organisms to change their structures, and we're not that far from troglodytes, despite technology..

Originally Posted by Onetwothree

B) Infinite-world-theory is speculated upon, and is not scientific fact, and is no where near it yet. It was first introduced in literature actually, by Lois Borges. Check out, the, "Garden of Forking Paths." I think that is it at least.

Excuse me, but I said "scientists have been studying lately", not that it's a "scientific fact". As for "scientific facts", once it was a scientific fact the belief that Earth was plane and the Sun turned around the planet, which was the center of the universe. So much has changed since then, hasn't it? Well, a "multi-verse" makes sense to me, and if I come across information that makes it completely absurd, I'll change my mind.

Originally Posted by Onetwothree

Quote:
...which is something some scientists have been studying lately in Quantum Physics (look for the BBC Parallel Dimensions Documentary for more information).

I already have a grasp of quantum mechanics. BBC does it justice, but there is no way to understand the theory even in the slightest without understanding the greatest languages: mathematics and physics.

I agree. It's indeed a complex matter, but we're talking theories on evolution here, and none of us is an expert, or are you? At any rate, it's an opinion and it's worth as much as yours and as much as that of anybody else. Anyone is free to speculate.

Originally Posted by Onetwothree

Quote:
The material dimension in which we live could be destroyed and it wouldn't affect the other spiritual dimensions because they are the main ones...

Proof of this? I don't see any. You just evoked science which does not deal in the supernatural [see spiritual (anything)].

I believe in the pre-existence of the soul and in the spiritual life as the main one, that's why I said that.

Originally Posted by Onetwothree

Quote:
My personal opinion on the Big Bang...

I don't care about any personal opinions. I want facts. That's what you don't understand. The best kind of lie is the kind mixed with a bit of truth, and the best kind of bullshit is the kind of bullshit that is mixed with science--thus making it pseudoscience. It's all more convincing to the layman, or the fool, but you do nothing at all to whet my intellectual appetite.

None of us can provide "facts" of such vague subjects, not even those who dedicate their lives to study them. There are evidences and theories, speculations, theories that seem valid for a while until somebody finds something that changes everything (or not). My intention was never to "whet your intellectual appetite" nor anybody else's but just comment on the topic. Go look into information both for and against what you believe,
with an open mind, and you may find "the truth" you want.

Originally Posted by Onetwothree

Klaudia, you made very huge and unbased assumptions with your argument.
First, you assumed that if there are parallel universes (which I also believe), one of them is the spiritual world we have grown up to believe in. There's no reason to believe this.

I said the astral plane is the main one, because in the spiritualistic view, spiritual life is the main one not the material life, which exists as a means of progress to the individuals. I've read about it and I've found reasons to believe that.

[Godslayer Jillian]

Originally Posted by KlaudiaGaya

The reason why I believe there's a God is because there's no effect without a cause.

What about God? There's an effect without a cause; in fact, the greatest possible effect, would you not agree?
By the way, your last quote was mine, not Onetwothree's, and your response to it is very circular:
"I believe the astral plane is the main plane, because in the belief that the astral plane is the main plane, the astral plane is the main plane."
WTF?

[roserougesang]

So, in short that quote means that because something is believed to be so it is so. Someone appears rather confuzzled.

[Circle V]

Einstein didn't consider himself an atheist because the atheists he knew were close-minded and had allow their sense of awe to wither away.

[Onetwothree]

Originally Posted by Circle V

Einstein didn't consider himself an atheist because the atheists he knew were close-minded and had allow their sense of awe to wither away.

Yes, but NOWADAYS atheists are exactly what Einstein, Carl Sagan, Steven Hawking, etc. are. We still dream, and have 'spiritual' moments with the universe. I know I look up at it in awe sometime. To think, I am comparable to a small molecule in a greater organism in a sense. It is quite amazing, and I am atheist. Old-school atheists just denied God all together. Nowadays, we believe it is improbable, but not impossible.

[Circle V]

Yeah, that's pretty much it.

[biohazard]

Originally Posted by Onetwothree

Yes, but NOWADAYS atheists are exactly what Einstein, Carl Sagan, Steven Hawking, etc. are. We still dream, and have 'spiritual' moments with the universe. I know I look up at it in awe sometime. To think, I am comparable to a small molecule in a greater organism in a sense. It is quite amazing, and I am atheist. Old-school atheists just denied God all together. Nowadays, we believe it is improbable, but not impossible.

So in short, you are not 100% aitheist then? I always believed that atheists left out the possibility of a God existing. So in short, how many of you beleive on a small probability of God existing rather than impossible?

[Onetwothree]

Originally Posted by biohazard

So in short, you are not 100% aitheist then? I always believed that atheists left out the possibility of a God existing. So in short, how many of you beleive on a small probability of God existing rather than impossible?

99% of us believe that the probability of God is infinitely small, so considering it is not important, but a divine power's existence is not impossible--just improbable.

It's too hard for people to understand it seems. I am not agnostic. God is nowhere near a 50/50 shot--I am best identified as an atheist.

[Slap Your Love]

Actually, most beliefs of creationism that people are posting
here are young earth creationism theory.

However, Progressive creationism has a lot of things backing it up.
They do believe in evolution on the micro level [such as adaption]
but not macro due to the fossil records not showing graduation and many other things such as molecular biology disproving a DNA link from human erectus and homo sapiens.

Also, physics and cosmology back progressive creationism up
with the big bang because of the unidentified time before the
planck era, extreme fine tuning such as: just the right laws of physics,
excess quarks, just the right size universe in order for nuclear fusion
to occur within 3 minutes so the universe would be more than just
hydrogen. If the universe were just one part in 10 to the 59th larger, the universe would have collapsed before life was possible and universal
probability bounds.

However the other stance to counter this is the belief in a multi-verse
which also has no hard evidence.

This was meant to differentiate from what people here think
creationism is [youg earth creationism] from the scientific creationism
[progressive creationism]. Not really much evolution talk here.

From here you can match this, ID, to Christian theology with interpretation
from Genesis in the Bible.

[Raptor]

Originally Posted by Slap Your Love

Also, physics and cosmology back progressive creationism up
with the big bang because of the unidentified time before the
planck era, extreme fine tuning such as: just the right laws of physics,
excess quarks, just the right size universe in order for nuclear fusion
to occur within 3 minutes so the universe would be more than just
hydrogen. If the universe were just one part in 10 to the 59th larger, the universe would have collapsed before life was possible and universal
probability bounds.

They don't back creationism up.

By unidentified time, do you mean the period of inflation? If so then lack of understanding does not equal evidence for creationism.

Or for the 1 in 10^9, I assume you mean the reasoning for why the universe appears to have close to the critical density (flat)? Inflation causes the density to move closer to a value of 1 (critical) with time.

[Tam Li Hua]

Honestly, I don't believe we have enough evidence to scientifically prove either beyond a shadow of a doubt. For one, the argument for Creationism is directly related to the question "Does God/The Spiritual Realm exist, and if they do, can they affect the physical?".

Secondly, I don't think we can say beyond a shadow of a doubt what happened to cause everything to come into being, because it's an impossible thing for us to know. We can make reasonable guesses, theories, and suppositions, but until we can go back in time and actually witness the birth of the Universe, this question will always be up in the air.

As for evolution, I say it's definitely possible, but since even Darwin himself doubted the theory in the end, it's hard to say how accurate it really is.

[Slap Your Love]

Originally Posted by Raptor

They don't back creationism up.

By unidentified time, do you mean the period of inflation? If so then lack of understanding does not equal evidence for creationism.

Or for the 1 in 10^9, I assume you mean the reasoning for why the universe appears to have close to the critical density (flat)? Inflation causes the density to move closer to a value of 1 (critical) with time.

They do.

No I do not. I mean the time beyond the time of the big bang. The big bang starts at plancks era. 10^-43. The time before that is what I'm referring to.

And no I'm not referring to the flatness of the universe. That's been proven though inflation which you stated. I'm referring to the size of the universe when nuclear fusion took place.

[Underwater Ophelia]

Slap, are you saying that physics backs up Creationism because for the Big Bang to happen physics had to be "just right?"

[Raptor]

Originally Posted by Slap Your Love

No I do not. I mean the time beyond the time of the big bang. The big bang starts at plancks era. 10^-43. The time before that is what I'm referring to.

And no I'm not referring to the flatness of the universe. That's been proven though inflation which you stated. I'm referring to the size of the universe when nuclear fusion took place.

My fault.

Before t = 10^-43s is unknown. How is a lack of knowledge evidence for creationism?

I don't understand your nuclear synthesis point. The relative abundances of atoms after free protons and neutrons combined? I don't see how that gets to creationism either.

[Joker_in_the_Pack]

I have a question, and I'm hopping for answers from both the evolutionists and the idiots who still believe in god.


WHY THE FLYING FUCK DOES IT MATTER WHAT CREATED THE EARTH?

Give me one example of something it will help us create to survive and adapt in life. One thing it will help us do, one aspect of life it will improve. The only good thing about it will be that it ends people from fighting over it. It's just a bunch of intellectual masturbation to think about it for more than a minute.

[Godslayer Jillian]

Wow. That I had to have created this thread is downright sad.
That it had to be resurrected, though, is even sadder.

[Slap Your Love]

Originally Posted by Underwater Ophelia

Slap, are you saying that physics backs up Creationism because for the Big Bang to happen physics had to be "just right?"

This is called fine tuning.

Originally Posted by Raptor

My fault.

Before t = 10^-43s is unknown. How is a lack of knowledge evidence for creationism?

I don't understand your nuclear synthesis point. The relative abundances of atoms after free protons and neutrons combined? I don't see how that gets to creationism either.

It's room for creationism rather than evidence for.

again fine tuning leaving room for creationism to be a valid theory. Not evidence for but evidence for the ability for the theory to be plausible.
Sorry if the I came on too strong at first.

[Drake Dun]

As for evolution, I say it's definitely possible, but since even Darwin himself doubted the theory in the end, it's hard to say how accurate it really is.

Good point. That's the main reason I don't believe Jesus was the son of a god. Right there at the end of the Book of Mathew, where he admits to his flock that he's actually a spy from the planet Zimboo intent on conquering the earth so that his people can eat human skin deep fried and everything. It just seems to contradict his other claims.

Originally Posted by Slap Your Love

...the fossil records not showing graduation and many other things such as molecular biology disproving a DNA link from human erectus and homo sapiens.

Again, look these things up for yourselves, people. You could at least get the names right when you're spreading misinformation. Please, we deserve classy lies! Ones that are hard to detect and stuff.

The fine tuning argument is the kind of thing even an honest and intelligent person could take seriously, but I've tackled it before, so I think I'll just link to myself:

https://www.gothic.net/boards/showth...206#post503206