There Is Scientific Proof of a Creator. Evolution Can Be Disproved

crackerboy

crackerboy

Active Member
Tym said:
You said there was scientific proof for a creator, when asked to present the evidence you try to change the subject again, please admit you have no evidence before you move on to a new topic, or present your evidence.
This is not a constructive discussion if you just keep jumping around and not providing evidence for your claims..
Click to expand...

All of the topics that are mentioned in the video's and myself are themselves part of the evidence. How about this. For the sake of discussion lets say that the video's are my proof. So given those claims. What do you disagree with. Or did you never actually watch the video's. In which case you have already made claims about the validity of them without even knowing what they say. You demonstrated that you have never watched these video's when you asked me to explain fine tuning. So then why did you originally claim them to be propaganda if you don't even know what they where talking about?
 
mindphuk

mindphuk

Well-Known Member
crackerboy said:
No actually if you read the rest of the thread and not just the first and last page. I clearly stated that I was only debating chemical evolution. Which is the concept that all life formed in the ocean by natural means. I countered that concept by explaining evolution does not demonstrate the mechanism that accounts for such a process.
Click to expand...
This is precisely why clear definitions of terms is so important in both formal and informal debates. You sort of laughed at me in the other thread for continually bringing up rules, but as I tried to point out, the rules follow naturally from needing to keep focus and have things make sense. Chemical evolution doesn't necessarily mean what you think it does to a scientist who might think you are talking about nucleosynthesis, or the progressive creation of the elements in stars. Abiogenesis is the term used to describe something resembling life beginning from basic organic molecules.
 
Tym

Tym

Well-Known Member
crackerboy said:
No actually if you read the rest of the thread and not just the first and last page. I clearly stated that I was only debating chemical evolution. Which is the concept that all life formed in the ocean by natural means. I countered that concept by explaining evolution does not demonstrate the mechanism that accounts for such a process.
Click to expand...
YES, actually we addressed the fact that evolution isn't abiogenesis. In your own words "I have come to the conclusion that evolution falls short of disproving a creator since it fails to account for the origins of life." Admit you were wrong and lets move on. Abiogenesis is not evolution. Evolution Doesn't address the beginnings of life, only the complex diversity of life. You are arguing against a straw man, it is a logical fallacy. Instead of arguing against evolution for something that is doesn't even claim, try addressing what it actually says. This is tantamount to arguing that the theory of gravity is wrong because it doesn't tell you how the big bang happend..

Again, please offer up the evidence of your claims or admit you were wrong and lets move on. I'm not being unreasonable, and I'm not being a jerk. I'm just asking for what you need to provide to support your claims. I would suggest looking up the theory of evolution from a reputable source and reading what it actually says. Getting your information from biased propaganda videos is not good.
 
crackerboy

crackerboy

Active Member
Tym said:
YES, actually we addressed the fact that evolution isn't abiogenesis. In your own words "I have come to the conclusion that evolution falls short of disproving a creator since it fails to account for the origins of life." Admit you were wrong and lets move on. Abiogenesis is not evolution. Evolution Doesn't address the beginnings of life, only the complex diversity of life. You are arguing against a straw man, it is a logical fallacy. Instead of arguing against evolution for something that is doesn't even claim, try addressing what it actually says. This is tantamount to arguing that the theory of gravity is wrong because it doesn't tell you how the big bang happend..

Again, please offer up the evidence of your claims or admit you were wrong and lets move on. I'm not being unreasonable, and I'm not being a jerk. I'm just asking for what you need to provide to support your claims. I would suggest looking up the theory of evolution from a reputable source and reading what it actually says. Getting your information from biased propaganda videos is not good.
Click to expand...

Look bro, It's not going to happen. Move on. I have read plenty. Abiogenesis still has to do with simple minerals and elements evolving into more complex organisms. So yes it is a form of evolution. There are many biologists that will argue this point with you. I on the other hand will not.
 
Tym

Tym

Well-Known Member
crackerboy said:
Look bro, It's not going to happen. Move on. I have read plenty. Abiogenesis still has to do with simple minerals and elements evolving into more complex organisms. So yes it is a form of evolution. There are many biologists that will argue this point with you. I on the other hand will not.
Click to expand...
Uhh, no.. When you mix vodka with orange juice, it doesn't "evolve" into a screw driver (the drink not the tool). No it's not a form of evolution. That is an equivocation fallacy, and it also is a logical fallacy.
You are making a claim, support it or concede. If you make a claim, it is your responsibility to give valid evidence or admit you were wrong.

Abiogenesis happened, the fact that we are here is all the proof you need. Maybe a god did it, but even if he did the process would still be known as abiogenesis. The mixing and interaction of chemicals is not evolution. When you mix baking soda and vinegar, it does not evolve in to a mass of bubbles. It is the interaction of chemicals that creates the reaction. Biology addresses life, not chemical interaction devoid of life. Try again..

You cannot make an extraordinary claim and then refuse to back it up with evidence and let it stand. It doesn't work like that. I don't care if you never admit you're wrong, failure to provide evidence of your claim is the exact same as putting your hands to your face and exclaiming "You're right, how could I have been so blind?". Or at best "I have no evidence to support my claims, there for they are not valid". This is the way logic works.
You can't just make an extraordinary claim then expect not to have to back it up. That is absurd.
 
dontcopnone

dontcopnone

Well-Known Member
The logical thing to do is to agree that your individual worldviews are largely incompatible. In a sense, you are both right. Your personal beliefs cause you to see the world as you believe it to be. Neither viewpoint can be, without a single doubt, absolutely proven.

If we could capture an exact 3D rendering of how you each actually perceive reality and compare them, I believe that you would see is that the outlines generally match up...but everything else is different, unique to each person. A person shapes their own reality as they grow up,

When people have strokes and lose the part of the brain that tells them what gives speech context, they lose more than just the ability to communicate. Prior to the stroke, a very small part of their brain held tight to the idea of what speech is, and once it was gone, so was the idea. Reality is immediately changed; not only do you no longer understand the sounds being made by people around you, often, once you start to relearn speech, you don't understand how those words fit together or the meaning of words. You have to relearn the human reality from other humans. Therapy re-teaches you how we communally agree to see reality. This is how we form a consensus from which to communicate. When we define something and teach that definition to another person, we share our perspective and implant it into another person, literally putting an idea in their head. The fun part is that you can manipulate that idea, examine it, put it through the filter that is how you personally see reality and decide whether to interpret your reality in the same way as that other person does.

To get an idea how much words and ideas change our reality, check this out.
 
Heisenberg

Heisenberg

Well-Known Member
crackerboy said:
Look bro, It's not going to happen. Move on. I have read plenty. Abiogenesis still has to do with simple minerals and elements evolving into more complex organisms. So yes it is a form of evolution.
Click to expand...
Moving the goalpost. First you try to disprove evolution, when that doesn't work you say, oh well I am disproving this specific theory of evolution which isn't held by mainstream science. Your best defense against this point seems to be denying it. You can't promise to disprove evolution and then address something else, which ISNT evolution.

You pretty much have demonstrated all the common logical fallacies associated with this debate. Your posts would make a great lesson for a critical thinking class.

If you wanted debate on the subject, then why didn't you make the title something like "lets debate evolution." You chose a more sensational topic to get people excited, to raise emotions, and to mislead. You chose to be deceitful. This is also a common tactic of the discovery institute. By contrast, science never attempts to conceal or confuse the truth.
 
dontcopnone

dontcopnone

Well-Known Member
I think we should let a select elite picked from the entire world decide the matter. In principle, each member elite will represent the average opinion of a given geographical area of inhabited land. Also, let's add to the mix a single man who is seen to represent everyman/everywoman collectively - a personification of all in one, a Decider. Unless there is overwhelming opposition to him, he decides if something can happen. Now allow rich and important people to influence this elite and continue to do so for hundreds of years. Act surprised when this committee becomes the apparent puppet of its most influential suitors.

The moral of the story is that, in the battle between god and science the answer is, of course, Democracy. Let all your friends know how great it is and ask them to try it out. By force, if necessary.
 
guy incognito

guy incognito

Well-Known Member
I think that people are misunderstanding my point about evolution. As stated several times, I don't refute all evolution. I only refute the claim that evolution disproves a creator.

Notice title of thread.


I would also ask that if you do not have an argument or counter argument that you refrain from posting your insults. It is really easy to just jump into a post and call someone a retard and say that there logic is wrong, but if you can't give some kind of explanation that makes that logic wrong than don't bother posting. It is just noise. There are plenty of other threads that welcome such B.S. I created on of them myself, its called "Why is it that when ever you mention God people get all but hurt". This thread was created just for you people that only want to insult and rant. So feel free to post whatever you want in that thread.

Dude did you even read my post? Your logic is wrong because you say:

So to sum this whole thing up. The base for all life is unknown to man. We can not account for the origins of life. The whole premise of science is based on observation of data to reach conclusions. With such a major gap in data evolutionists must still rely on faith that life evolved spontaneously. Christians have faith that it was created. Without being able to provide data your argument falls apart in the eyes of science. This is the same concept as the big bang theory. It's not a theory until you can test it and validate it. So until we create a universe through the same means as the big bang, it is just a hypothesis.

There is not a gap in data though. The "gap" you are speaking of happens before the theory of evolution comes into play. It's analogous to saying there is a "gap" in understanding how the universe was created, therefore the theory of gravity falls apart. Do you see how gravity works independently of how the universe was created? The same way evolution happens independently of the start of life? They have nothing to do with each other other than the fact that one must precede the other.

Nobody has "faith" that life spontaneously created. I am here; I need no further evidence to support that life SOMEHOW started.

I also want to point out we do not need to recreate the big bang in order to verify it. We can infer things from other data. We don't need to recreate dinosaurs to know they existed; their fossilized remnants are proof enough for their existence as well as evolution. Just as the background radiation along with other evidence SUPPORTS the big bang theory. I think anyone that doesn't believe in evolution or the big bang is a ratard.

Oh but the odds of super primitive life forming SOMEWHERE on earth, at SOMETIME over a huge span of time is 6.9 x 10^(2*infinity) !!!!!!!!

Well the odds that some magic entity, EVEN MORE complex than the life and universe it creates, was the origin of life is EVEN MORE astronomical than the odds of it "spontaneously" happening on earth.

I mean seriously? That is the foundation of your argument? It's so unlikely that it must have been created by something even more complex and unlikely?
 
Sure Shot

Sure Shot

Well-Known Member
Riddle me this;
If you don't believe life can be spontaneously occur.
How can you, at the same time, believe God can spontaneously occur?
 
dontcopnone

dontcopnone

Well-Known Member
We're always discovering new things. In a hundred years we may discover a reaction chain that takes basic elemental matter to life. Self organizing matter? A hundred years later, we may discover there is a driving force behind all that we experience. Probably not though, given that belief has a very effective self-defense mechanism. The price of salvation is unwavering belief - if you dare to doubt (example: doubting Thomas in Christianity) or deny the existence of your God, your invitation to "heaven" is revoked and you're going to be buggered in the ass by demons for all eternity. No pressure here to believe. Really. Go ahead and be a soulless atheist. But...if you...want to hedge your bets, just in case...I mean, there's no harm in that, right?

On each side of this discussion are people who have made up their mind on what to believe. They have decided to interpret their reality with or without a divine conductor. This is nothing new; people have been killing each other by the millions over difference of opinion in faith for millennia. It's both comforting and challenging to maintain believe in a creator entity. The animal inside us is not wired to trust, to have faith. It is, however, wired to lash out when people call your version of reality a delusion.

Give it up, find ways to live in each others' world without murdering each other because some people chose to believe in an invisible man in the sky that really loves them. Live your life the way you want to and try to be decent to your fellow humans. Whether you chose to do this in devotion to The Creator or just common decency does not matter. The only commandments you need in life are 1) don't be a dick and 2)try to think of others once in a while.
 
I

Illumination

New Member
dontcopnone said:
We're always discovering new things. In a hundred years we may discover a reaction chain that takes basic elemental matter to life. Self organizing matter? A hundred years later, we may discover there is a driving force behind all that we experience. Probably not though, given that belief has a very effective self-defense mechanism. The price of salvation is unwavering belief - if you dare to doubt (example: doubting Thomas in Christianity) or deny the existence of your God, your invitation to "heaven" is revoked and you're going to be buggered in the ass by demons for all eternity. No pressure here to believe. Really. Go ahead and be a soulless atheist. But...if you...want to hedge your bets, just in case...I mean, there's no harm in that, right?

On each side of this discussion are people who have made up their mind on what to believe. They have decided to interpret their reality with or without a divine conductor. This is nothing new; people have been killing each other by the millions over difference of opinion in faith for millennia. It's both comforting and challenging to maintain believe in a creator entity. The animal inside us is not wired to trust, to have faith. It is, however, wired to lash out when people call your version of reality a delusion.

Give it up, find ways to live in each others' world without murdering each other because some people chose to believe in an invisible man in the sky that really loves them. Live your life the way you want to and try to be decent to your fellow humans. Whether you chose to do this in devotion to The Creator or just common decency does not matter. The only commandments you need in life are 1) don't be a dick and 2)try to think of others once in a while.
Click to expand...

Very wise well put and true...props to you +rep

Awesome way to be

Namaste':peace:
 
edwardtheclean

edwardtheclean

Well-Known Member
people are going to believe what they choose to believe. Sometimes even when a fact is presented, others will still dismiss it for whatever reason they choose. this thread is still intense tho.
 
Tym

Tym

Well-Known Member
I'm still waiting for him to actually uphold his responsibility and provide some evidence..
If he fails to do so, his claims aren't worth the bandwidth they consume.
 
Heisenberg

Heisenberg

Well-Known Member
Athiest billboard

So the American Athiests with support from the JREF bought billboard space outside the Lincoln tunnel for this message. "You KNOW It's a Myth. This season, celebrate reason." The Catholic League responded by buying space on the opposite side, for the message, "You Know It's Real. This season, celebrate Jesus."

Bill Donohue spoke for the Catholic League, and wasted no time connecting atheists to evolution.
Athiests are apparently too proud to admit their sin and need of a Savior, so they flee to “REASON.” Yet, their atheistic reasoning is so inconsistent and depressing. It is atheism that is based on fairy tales and myth – notions like evolution. "To believe that nothing created everything is to lack that necessary 'reason' of which American Atheists speak,"
Click to expand...
I suppose I don't need to point out the profound ignorance this statement suggests. Science is unfortunately limited to fact, and can not religh on the limitless supply of bullshit and deceit religion has at it's disposal.
 
guy incognito

guy incognito

Well-Known Member
I would say it's an utter waste of time to bother reading or thinking about any of this bullshit, like Bill Donohue (obviously retarded), except it has infected so many people. How do you even respond to a comment like the one quoted by Bill? If it was any other subject besides religion EVERYONE would look at the horseshit he spouts and simply dismiss it, and quickly think of how amazing it is that someone with such apparently diminished mental faculty was able to actually string words together to make a sentence. Nevermind it's total non-sense, he at least seems to have a grasp on the concept of language.

I feel like i'm in a twilight zone or something. A crazy, absolutely unbelievable belief system is out there, and everyone but me is going "yea that makes perfect sense!!!!" WTF?

Seriously man, welcome to the scary door.
 
S

Scrooge

Member
mindphuk said:
Okay, but where is the design? Since evolution is an unguided process, which Dr. Miller will agree with, then except for the initial life that started evolving, what exactly is designed? Did God sent the Chicxulub asteroid to earth to wipe out the dinosaurs so that mammals could get going? What about all of the other chain of events that had to occur for us to be here? If you believe that there was more than a Deistic approach, that of a God that interferes in the natural order of the evolutionary process, then you aren't accepting evolution at all. Non-naturalistic evolution is not evolution, its magic. Most Catholics don't believe in a literal interpretation of the bible which is what contradicts science.
Did you see Religulous?
Click to expand...

Sorry, I didn't see "Religulous". I don't get my information from a stand-up comedian and failed actor with an agenda.

I simply believe that the universe is just too perfect to have happened by accident. That is my belief and there is nothing that can shake my Faith.

You folks put too much effort into this and spend an inordinate amount of time on debating "What IF's" instead of concentrating on "What IS".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top