Evolution Schmevolution
- Started
- Last post
- 164 Responses
- discipler0
hehe, mikotondria (waves back), there are bigger issues than imposing our flawed (but puffed up) notions of what "good design" is upon a limitless entity and attempting to point out apparent dysteleology in biological systems when the bigger picture always yields a more holistic purpose for the alleged "flaws". Bigger questions like: How does and irreducibly complex machine self organize when the only examples in every facet of life of such machines, require a designer? Not to mention the fact that natural selection would prevent said machines from every happening. Or, how did nothing apply nothing and form something from nothingness? And how did said "nothing" fine tune our planet and the relevant physical laws withing an impossible tolerance to support organic life? And where are the cogs and dats (those darn transitions between species)?
Questions like these... for starters.
- discipler0
It's the evolution-of-the-gaps that gets me. The suggestion that proteins somehow self organized magically (given enough time of course) and then formed amino acids and ultimately cells (which are irreducibly complex so they need all components at the same time, or they just don't work) and then the fish became reptiles and then apes and the Rip Taylor and then... ah, I digress.
Have faith! Science is going to come up with a solution!
Nevermind that science is only going to yield more complexity in biological systems. ;)
- discipler0
expounding on increased complexity... the trend over the last 30 years of science has been discoveries which point in a theistic direction (this is why I.D. has grown to the degree that it has and why it will continue to grow). So, the evolution-of-the-gaps notion that says, "give us, time we'll make sense of it from a naturalistic standpoint." has no bearing in ther real world becuase the progressive flow of discovery yields more computer like complexity at the biochemical level as well as the astro-physical level.
I vote for the best POSSIBLE hypothesis. Not the best naturalistic hypothesis.
- discipler0
For now, I'm going to try and give a naturalistic account of how the pyramids were erected by thousands of meteors falling on top of one other over billions of years.
- cosmo0
lets just watch Bill O'Reilly and we all shall be happy.
- mrdobolina0
discipler, it must be sick being so right all of the time.
- discipler0
you get used to it.
;)
- mrdobolina0
it is nice to see that your views on ID and your disdain for gay people jive with the likes of Pat Robertson and James Dobson.
- discipler0
what the???
mrdobs, that's most confusing statement I've read in 3 ice ages.
- mrdobolina0
your beliefs are exactly in line with robertson's on both issues.
must feel nice.
- Crouwel0
CAN SOMEONE POST A FUCKING LINK?
thank you.
:)
- discipler0
I know nothing of Pat Robertson. Only that he makes foolish statements quite often.
- discipler0
that being said, I know mrdobs, how you like to compartmentalize all people of faith. Helps with one's political archetype that way. ;)
- mrdobolina0
you think gay people are sinners, from another thread you posted in. And you think evolution is 'junk science'
same as pat robertson.
- discipler0
I think all people are "sinners", mrdobs. Including myself. Are those the 2 criteria which make people believe just alike? If so, I believe just like a lot of people.
- mrdobolina0
"I think all people are "sinners", mrdobs."
you parse words like a motherfucker.
- i_monk0
end of thread
- theplanet0
Not very funny.
Josh
- Dr_Jay0
Hmmm... I missed the first one... I'll check it out tonight (Tue.).
Kurt Vonnegut is on tonight. Happy to see the old fart is still kicking.
- fate_0
I thought it was funny. Poignant as well. Stewart is preaching to the choir, but it's still refreshing.