Topic: 22 Messages From Creationists To People Who Believe In Evolution - page 10. (Read 18771 times)

lol - wrapping creationism in layers of pseudoscience does not lend it any credence or make it smell any better than the bullshit it is.  

The big argument of without god, how did life just poof out of no where.

Here is my counter offer, if god has always been and always will be, why cant life always have been and always will be?

People look at evolution like pokemon, one day we became what we are today, just evolved, no process.
That's not how it works, every time a baby is born, they're different, do this for millions of years, things change.

One day you realize bringing your food back to store is better, 1 million years later, you find out living in a cave is safer, 3 million years later food is scarce and you have to follow it, now you're nomadic, now you need to learn to move around a lot, and walk, and run.

I can try to summarize but I cannot do the scientist credit.  He is a German geneticist an do goes into great detail with examples.

But I will do my best here:

Information is complex.  The amount of information in even a small part of our DNA, for example, is more than thousands of pages of a book.  This information comes from somewhere.  All information comes from someone putting that information there.  This is a scientific "law."  He has proof of that law.  Therefore, there had to be intelligent design because of how information works. 

Linking me to a website called answersingenesis.org is about as much use as me linking you to one called religionisbullshit.org or evolutionisfact.co.uk.

Bronze Age Goat Herders.   

Math requires information.  Watch the video.  It discusses math quite a bit as well as "language" and really is compelling.   I can't do it justice.  My brain does not have enough "information" in it.  I am humbly aware of my limitations but I feel fairly confident that most of you on this board will be able to follow it fine.

http://www.answersingenesis.org/media/video/ondemand/beginning-was-information/beginning-was-information

Religion - for those too stupid to understand science and math.  

Plants are complicated organisms.

Symmetry is a fundamental property of many physical processes.  In some systems, a symmetric state is lower in energy than an asymmetric state.

There's patterns and symmetry because of math which is a universal language. God didn't make it; it's just there. If god has a symmetrical face, does that mean he needs a creator too?

And what do you mean 'symmetry and patterns coming from nothing'? That happens all the time. There's no amount of facts or evidence that any one could ever provide that will satisfy you. God could come down from the sky and tell you evolution was true and the bible is bullshit and you'd probably still question it.

I watched an interesting video about how the fact we even have "information" or the ability to think proves that the information was put there to begin with.  http://www.answersingenesis.org/media/video/ondemand/beginning-was-information/beginning-was-information

I used to teach Kindergarten and in teaching math to young children there is some time spent on symmetry and pattern recognition.  Patterns as well as symmetry are everywhere in our world. Even the simplest things like a leaf on a tree has symmetry.  It obviously takes order and a plan for things to be made like they are.  Where did the plan and order come from?  For evolution to be a good theory we should see evidence of chaos becoming more orderly or symmetry and patterns coming from nothing, but this just isn't the case. 

Better to just point out that the earth is powered by the sun.

So is Satoshi the Creator or did bitcoin evolve?

After all, once upon a time there were lowly little one digit numbers swimming around.  Then they combined.  But nobody has ever shown a number simply arise out of the swamp.  Every number came from another number.

Hmkay, so it looks like I scored a direct hit dead-center, sorry to hear that the truth hurts you.

PS.
If that statement of yours that I quoted was not intended to read what it clearly read, then you had more than enough time to correct or specify.
Since you didn't, I assume it's exactly what you meant and naturally represents your position. If that for some really wicked reason is not the case, please stop discussing in internet forums for a while and work on your communication skills ASAP (reason : you'd basically be incapable to express your position in writing !? )

I'm not going to debate anything when it's clear you have no idea what I meant in the first place.  You don't get to tell me what my position is, that's my job!

*ugh*

I find it irritating to say the least if me pointing out that the entire foundation for your line of argument is 100.0% false... is regarded as not relevant (?!).
Frankly, that's about as relevant as it can possibly get. That's a point that isn't even debatable anymore to any degree as it's just a complete error in plain sight negating your entire argumentation.

Put in other words : if an entire bulding collapses into itself because its foundation was built on sand and made of grossly inadequate materials - you really don't discuss whether the window dressing in that building was appropriate or not.

Look, if you want to debate a point, that's fine.  But can you at least debate against something relevant to my position?

Maybe I should have highlighted the hilarious part I was referring to then.

Basically your statement has the facts a full 100.0% wrong. If you were to replace "scientific method" with "religious method" in that sentence, things would be looking much more realistic.
I really liked that you put "philosophy" into that, as it does not belong there in the 1st place.
Never mix up philosophy with science, as it operates under completely different premises/rules and never "results" in "truth" even if you or I may fully agree with it on certain terms. Philosophy and science are two entirely different entities.

It would've made sense if I said that the scientific method was useless.  But, I didn't.  So, no, it makes no sense.

If you're going to jump in to defend someone, you shouldn't assume they understand what they're responding to.

Problem is - what he said made alot of sense. You just didn't understand/accept the hint
When it comes to statements not making any sense , the first quote clearly beats everything. Science ignoring mathematics... now that's a new one *g*
If that was to be the case, you'd be living in some very unstable and asymetric housing construction and none of today's hightech would even exist. No vehicles, no large buildings, no digital communication, no computers whatsoever, no electricity, at best some leaking/unreliable water supply coming from a dirty river where poeple wash their clothing in and take a bath while dumping their feces into it (think Ganges river in India).

The more I read the irrational and sometimes completely nonsensical statements of people defending religion, the more they (unintentionally) make it clear that they have literally little or no education whatsoever. As religion/superstition often has a correlation (but no causation) with lack of education or show clear signs of intense brainwashing, this comes with little surprise.
Still, it's always amazing to watch how clueless these people sometimes act and "reason" (in big parentheses) in arguments.
This is the reason they often come along as if they were drug abusers or downright mentally retarded. They're likely not, but the effects of reducing/destroying a human's intellect are strikingly similar.

Please stop having thoughts.  Thoughts are non-empirical and therefore useless.

^^ See?  I can say stupid things that don't make any sense, too.