Topic: Evolution is a hoax - page 192. (Read 108046 times)

A vicar you call him your father because you are his children and don't know any better..

Just like when i was a caveman and i would tell my children to behave or the thunder will get them..

You are children when really your an adult ..Control you with religion..

I am the king i am closer to god so do as i say..
I am a Vicar priest bishop pope do as i say or you will burn in hell you blasphemer OR maybe if you give me your land i wont let you die for blasphemy..

CONTROL ..

You could basically make people do whatever you wanted, if you were a preacher or maybe the witch who sees the future and consults with the king. You could tell the people that God is angry and he needs this or that and they would obey, that's my definition of control.

Science apeared because of ignorance too, if we already knew everything and being perfectly happy in a world of peace we wouldnt need neither science or religion.

Define control  

If you dont I will give you the definition to show how this sentence is not as meaningful as you would think it is

Religion appeared because of ignorance. However people were smart enough to take advantage from it. As the other guy said, they would tell other people: Do this or this god will punish you, therefore achieving control over the population at the time.

Define control 

Fact ..Religion come from THUNDER..Stories from Thunder to control..
It could be to control your children or tell stories to control..

RELIGION all originally come from THUNDER.. FACT..

Cavemen times the thunder god will get you SO BEHAVE  ..
Then as humans we start to tell LIES..

We HUMANS ARE BORN LIARS..It's fact we are born liars it helps us to get ahead
WE ARE PROGRAMMED LIARS..

When we get older we hope to stop telling lies ..

before we worshipped gods we would worship our ancestors and they would be looking down on us..
They was our gods..

All stories to make you BEHAVE to control..
We invented these stories to control..

RELIGION IS ABOUT CONTROL..FACT..

To make you behave in a certain way..

When i was a caveman i would say to my naughty children you best behave because the THUNDER
will get you ..
And the fact we are born LIARS we will make all sorts of stories up and over many many years
of telling lies to control we are in this situation today with RELIGIOUS FREAKS..

And all they are doing is lying to themselves and their children ..
Just like the cavemen telling the children to behave with the THUNDER GOD..

Why Kids Lie - YouTube
Video for children are born liars youtube▶ 6:06
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pv0U2ecBpzo
8 Jun 2015 - Uploaded by Alyaa Gad
Kids aren't born knowing that lying is bad. It's something they have to figure out. They gradually understand ..

LYING is programmed into humans it helps you get a head..
Did you eat that food NO not me so maybe i can get some more..Programmed to get ahead..

Humans are BORN LIARS some carry it on and some grow out of it..
But all will still tell lies to get ahead..

How many lie about their tax bills ?..Born to lie to get ahead..

And RELIGION IS ONE BIG LIE..

Religions are used to control large groups of people, unite them behind a common goal.

They were used in the past (and to some extend are used today) to make strangers co-operate and work on a common goals without questioning the other party.  Religions establish a common trust between participants.

Functions of religions have been mostly replaced by political and other social group associations.

For example, feminists or Trump supporters might unite and trust each other without really knowing each other.

Every scientific theory is backed up by evidence and proof, I don't know what you mean. Science requires that observations can be replicated. The observations on which evolution is based, including comparative anatomy, genetics, and fossils, are replicable. In many cases, you can repeat the observations yourself.

Repeatable experiments, including experiments about mutations and natural selection in the laboratory and in the field, also support evolution. To be sure, scientific claims are based on, and tested against, evidence drawn from the natural world, rather than dictated by an authoritarian leadership. Therefore, and nonetheless, the scientists who have gathered and analyzed the data that have shaped the scientific understanding of evolution are surely the most qualified to speak as to the nature and weight of the physical evidence. Likewise, professional practitioners and researchers in science education are naturally best situated to remark on the value and relative importance of a given concept when it comes to the teaching and learning of science.

The scientific consensus it's achieved by looking at the evidence. There is no belief based on faith in science.

Many Christians perceive a conflict between reason and faith. On the one hand, God tells us to reason (Isaiah 1:18). We are to have a good reason for what we believe, and we are to be always ready to share that reason with other people (1 Peter 3:15). So we attempt to show unbelievers that our belief in the Scriptures is reasonable, justified, and logically defensible. The Bible makes sense.

The same can be told for science

I'm not denying that it started like that but today, what evidence is there to support the idea of a god? Do you think religious people today have any sort of evidence or they just believe in what they believe based on faith? I can tell you that the majority of people (close to 100%) believe in their religion because that's what they were told, they didn't chose it.

Religion doesnt preclude reasoning and logic lol

On the contrary, the whole idea of logic as truth / logos come from religion.

The first idea of rationalism, need for reasoning, understanding come from religion.

There is nit really much that is not based on faith lol

Reread godbel. .

Can say university is also social conditioning at the same title than religion.

Most people who learn science is for social /  professionnal / economic  goals more than anything.

And neither is religion, you only need your own logic and reasoning. How did religion in egypt make progress in maths? What did religion have to do with that? What understanding of the universe does judaism bring? Christianism did a lot of bad things as well. There is no need for religion specially when any religion definition starts with ''a set of beliefs'' and those set of beliefs aren't based on anything but faith.

The origin of religion come from need for civilisation.

First religion were in sumer or egypt, they made lot of progress. In mathematics, astronomy etc.

Judaism bring a lot to understanding of universe. They invented numbers  ( sephir / cypher ) from the kaballah.

Writing & mathematics was invented by religion in antiquity.

The concept of monotheism is fundemental to get to the point where the concept of science can emerge.

Christianism made revolution and radically changed society.

The need for religion is to recognize between good person or bad person, when it come to build laws to civilise people.

Historically, all concept of law at core of civilisation come from religion.

Science is not so usefull to understand legal maters. What make people better.

Islam invented many thing, algebra ( book of balance ) is at the root of concept of justice.

You still haven't mentioned what applications. What would you need for someone to prove to you that evolution is real then? If there is something that can be done I'm sure scientists did it already so I still don't see the problem. The difference in predictive power between evolution and other sciences is one of degree, not kind. All theories are simplifications; they purposely neglect as many outside variables as they can. But these extraneous variables do affect predictions. For example, you can predict the future position of an orbiting planet, but your prediction will be off very slightly because you can not consider the effects of all the small bodies in the solar system. Evolution is more sensitive to initial conditions and extraneous factors, so specific predictions about what mutations will occur and what traits will survive are impractical. It is still possible to use evolution to make general predictions about the future, though. For example, we can predict that diseases will become resistant to any new widely used antibiotics.

The predictive power of science comes from being able to say things we would not have been able to say otherwise. These predictions do not have to be about things happening in the future. They can be "retrodictions" about things from the past that we have not found yet. Evolution allows innumerable predictions of this sort.

Evolution has been the basis of many predictions. For example:

Darwin predicted, based on homologies with African apes, that human ancestors arose in Africa. That prediction has been supported by fossil and genetic evidence (Ingman et al. 2000).
Theory predicted that organisms in heterogeneous and rapidly changing environments should have higher mutation rates. This has been found in the case of bacteria infecting the lungs of chronic cystic fibrosis patients (Oliver et al. 2000).
Predator-prey dynamics are altered in predictable ways by evolution of the prey (Yoshida et al. 2003).
Ernst Mayr predicted in 1954 that speciation should be accompanied with faster genetic evolution. A phylogenetic analysis has supported this prediction (Webster et al. 2003).
Several authors predicted characteristics of the ancestor of craniates. On the basis of a detailed study, they found the fossil Haikouella "fit these predictions closely" (Mallatt and Chen 2003).
Evolution predicts that different sets of character data should still give the same phylogenetic trees. This has been confirmed informally myriad times and quantitatively, with different protein sequences, by Penny et al. (1982).
Insect wings evolved from gills, with an intermediate stage of skimming on the water surface. Since the primitive surface-skimming condition is widespread among stoneflies, J. H. Marden predicted that stoneflies would likely retain other primitive traits, too. This prediction led to the discovery in stoneflies of functional hemocyanin, used for oxygen transport in other arthropods but never before found in insects (Hagner-Holler et al. 2004; Marden 2005).

With predictions such as these and others, evolution can be, and has been, put to practical use in areas such as drug discovery and avoidance of resistant pests.

If evolution's low power to make future predictions keeps it from being a science, then some other fields of study cease to be sciences, too, especially archeology and astronomy.

Pythagoras could find earth circonference with deduction without measuring it. That's science   that's someone who knew how to use his brain

Einstein could figure time dilation before measuring it. He even said something like if the experience doesnt show the expected result, then the experience is wrong.

Seeing the Apple falling is different from understanding gravity law.

No more than witnessing evolution mean we understand law of evolution.

I can agree that recognition of the Apple falling is the first step. But it's only a first step.

Religion have plenty of application, otherwise there wouldnt be billions of believers and mollah it has probably more short term economic interest than scientific research

Religion has no real applications for real life, otherwise tell me one. You seem to be stuck at, if it can't explain everything then it's wrong. The theory of evolution tries to explain a lot of things. We have fossils and dna to check what species evolved to what species, it's true that we don't know the exact process, then again you can't really know it unless you time travel. It's like proving a murder. You don't have to be there to prove it, dna + motive + murder weapon = guilty. It's the same here and this is the best we can do, at least right now.

Darwin is quite outdated with current state of things. It doesnt account for much.

If it cant explain something, then it's wrong. Or then what the point lol

Usefulness is more the field of marketing and engineering than science.

Most big advance in mathematics like complex numbers square root of -1 didn't have any usefulness when it was discovered.

Im not into a anti religious crusade or after Nobel Prize.

There are already plenty of Nobel Prize who made darwin obsolete. He didn't even know about DNA.

And im not saying we cant form a good picture of chronology, and how life evolved with time.

But having a chronology of event doesnt mean we understand the link between those events. ( liebniz demonstrate this well).

Science is more concerned with law or rules to explain the chain of events, rather than laying out chronology.


The mollah can find lot of useful application  for religion, it's science then ?

It doesn't matter, you are locked into that. Just because it can't explain everything precisely doesn't mean it's wrong. We may never be able to know exactly how everything happened unless you time travel. It's still the only thing to go by, there is nothing else but evolution that tries to explain that. And so far people are finding useful applications for it. If you know of something better go win your nobel prize.

There is not even really "one" theory of evolution

Even if history is to be taken as recent account of evolution in the organisation of cognitive system, it become very hard to really get the "thread" from stonehedge, egypt, Rome etc.

The evolution of semantics, language, culture, philosophy, science, which according to Freud is largely dependent on how it's able to map our physiology , and even for this we often have to rely on art or poetry or metaphor , and yet it's often very hard for us to really convey accurately our own state of mind, and physiological state.

Not even getting into explaining the whole process of how we got there.