Tentacruel Posted December 10, 2009 Report Share Posted December 10, 2009 Maybe God causes Gravity and Evolution [/sarcasm]gtfo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dweller of Parables Posted December 10, 2009 Report Share Posted December 10, 2009 Maybe God causes Gravity and Evolution [/sarcasm]gtfo Agreed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Chaos Pudding Posted December 10, 2009 Report Share Posted December 10, 2009 But see' date=' one could argue that macroevolution is not a fact. One could also argue that gravity is not a fact and that invisible rubber bands are chaining us to the planet. Anywayz, can you give an example of macroevolution that was tested? Please use small words, I'm not good at science.[/quote'] Please stop. You're embarrassing yourself. And I linked you to an index of a bunch of documented cases of speciation, which is the accepted base form of macroevolution. Embarrassing myself? Its the freakin internet. Please. Look I've tried to be nice about it. Can't you just accept that some people might have an opinion that is different than yours? I was totally open to your opinion, but no... You just have to act so freaking superior. There's having an opinion, and there's being stupid. You're being the latter by refusing to accept the facts. I can't just say I don't believe that humans have to breath, or that I don't believe that the ocean has water. It's stupid and insulting to the people who are actually trying to have an intelligent discussion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mindscatter Posted December 10, 2009 Report Share Posted December 10, 2009 Maybe God causes Gravity and Evolution [/sarcasm]gtfo Agreed.At last' date=' someone shares my opinion over Luna's intellect!But see' date=' one could argue that macroevolution is not a fact. One could also argue that gravity is not a fact and that invisible rubber bands are chaining us to the planet. Anywayz, can you give an example of macroevolution that was tested? Please use small words, I'm not good at science.[/quote'] Please stop. You're embarrassing yourself. And I linked you to an index of a bunch of documented cases of speciation, which is the accepted base form of macroevolution. Embarrassing myself? Its the freakin internet. Please. Look I've tried to be nice about it. Can't you just accept that some people might have an opinion that is different than yours? I was totally open to your opinion, but no... You just have to act so freaking superior. There's having an opinion, and there's being stupid. You're being the latter by refusing to accept the facts. I can't just say I don't believe that humans have to breath, or that I don't believe that the ocean has water. It's stupid and insulting to the people who are actually trying to have an intelligent discussion. ADHD: Facts are axioms. They cannot be denied. And as much as you would like to bit*h around, a world without undeniable truths would be a chaotic and stupid world. I personally believe in Scientific Materialism: It doesn't matter if something is wrong as long as it works. Par example, Einstein disproved Newton's law of gravity with his Theory of Relativity (Newton said gravity is a force, Einstein said it is the interaction between matter and spacetime, thus not being a force (the following proves Einstein was right: every force requires energy consumption for every mechanical work, but a rock will fall at the same speed now and over one billion years. So, gravity does not require energy, so, gravity is not a force)). But, although Newton's law of gravity is wrong, it works, and that's why we learn at school that gravity is a force. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Chaos Pudding Posted December 10, 2009 Report Share Posted December 10, 2009 Maybe God causes Gravity and Evolution [/sarcasm]gtfo Agreed.At last' date=' someone shares my opinion over Luna's intellect!But see' date=' one could argue that macroevolution is not a fact. One could also argue that gravity is not a fact and that invisible rubber bands are chaining us to the planet. Anywayz, can you give an example of macroevolution that was tested? Please use small words, I'm not good at science.[/quote'] Please stop. You're embarrassing yourself. And I linked you to an index of a bunch of documented cases of speciation, which is the accepted base form of macroevolution. Embarrassing myself? Its the freakin internet. Please. Look I've tried to be nice about it. Can't you just accept that some people might have an opinion that is different than yours? I was totally open to your opinion, but no... You just have to act so freaking superior. There's having an opinion, and there's being stupid. You're being the latter by refusing to accept the facts. I can't just say I don't believe that humans have to breath, or that I don't believe that the ocean has water. It's stupid and insulting to the people who are actually trying to have an intelligent discussion. ADHD: Facts are axioms. They cannot be denied. And as much as you would like to bit*h around, a world without undeniable truths would be a chaotic and stupid world. I personally believe in Scientific Materialism: It doesn't matter if something is wrong as long as it works. Par example, Einstein disproved Newton's law of gravity with his Theory of Relativity (Newton said gravity is a force, einstein said it is the interaction between matter and spacetime, thus not being a force). But, although Newton's law of gravity is wrong, it works, and that's why we learn at school that gravity is a force. Well, at least 1 person on this site seems to have had an education above the middle school level. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mindscatter Posted December 10, 2009 Report Share Posted December 10, 2009 *8th grader me says*: hi! BTW there is also Mulluck and Brushfire and you and Atlas and... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Chaos Pudding Posted December 10, 2009 Report Share Posted December 10, 2009 *8th grader me says*: hi! BTW there is also Mulluck and Brushfire and you and Atlas and... Well, that's why I said "at least". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mindscatter Posted December 10, 2009 Report Share Posted December 10, 2009 Anyway, my opinion is that if you compare this with all other forums that are based on card games, multiplayer games and flash games, you get one of the highest densities of brain per square inch right here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kizzi Posted December 10, 2009 Report Share Posted December 10, 2009 Maybe God causes Gravity and Evolution [/sarcasm] The idea that evolution is caused by God is actually one of the more intelligent posts in this thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dweller of Parables Posted December 10, 2009 Report Share Posted December 10, 2009 Anyway' date=' my opinion is that if you compare this with all other forums that are based on card games, multiplayer games and flash games, you get one of the highest densities of brain per square inch right here.[/quote'] Your new avatar sucks just as much as that sig.Maybe God causes Gravity and Evolution [/sarcasm] The idea that evolution is caused by God is actually one of the more intelligent posts in this thread. [/not sure if srs .png] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kizzi Posted December 10, 2009 Report Share Posted December 10, 2009 Anyway' date=' my opinion is that if you compare this with all other forums that are based on card games, multiplayer games and flash games, you get one of the highest densities of brain per square inch right here.[/quote'] Your new avatar sucks just as much as that sig.Maybe God causes Gravity and Evolution [/sarcasm] The idea that evolution is caused by God is actually one of the more intelligent posts in this thread. [/not sure if srs .png] SRS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ezio Posted December 10, 2009 Report Share Posted December 10, 2009 Eh' date=' I wouldn't say its a "fact" as much as a "well-supported theory." But, that's just my opinion. I understand how evolution is a believable theory, but how does it explain the origin of life? (This is not a rhetorical question. I am being serious.)[/quote'] We actually pretty much know the Origin of Life on this planet now, I've watch documentaries on it. Overall there are three main theories on the Origin of Life. The first is complete bullsh*t, it's religion, the idea that Life was created by a/many supernatural being(s). The second and third are both very plausible scientific corresponding theories, the second being that due to this critical point in time of the forming of Earth's atmosphere that chemicals, in order to gain their full outer shell of electrons unexpectedly reacted with different chemicals causing certain chemicals to be the result. These chemicals, we are unsure of however nearing finding out all about them, these chemicals produced specific differentiating proteins necessary to remain constant. This was the start of life, and, knowing the theory of Evolution itself, you should know that these chemicals and proteins led to DNA and chromosomes etc. thus being able to mutate, thus being able to evolve, from this point on, Life could flourish on Earth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
problematica Posted December 10, 2009 Report Share Posted December 10, 2009 Maybe God causes Gravity and Evolution [/sarcasm] The idea that evolution is caused by God is actually one of the more intelligent posts in this thread. [/not sure if srs .png] SRS It is a theory that does not contradict any facts. It follows a logical basis of taking facts and real life events and then supplies an answer that does not contradict anything.(Arguing that God doesn't exist will mark you as retarded. Using a logical mind, there is no sufficient evidence to deny God, so a neutral view on whether he exists or not still allows this to be a plausible theory. Similar to the possibility of the String Theory, there is no evidence for or against so it can either be believed or not believed) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dark One Posted December 10, 2009 Report Share Posted December 10, 2009 @ Mindscatter: Flashforward is the shiz. By the way, 95% of that brain density is coming from me, of course. ^.^ @ Invsible rubberbands: While this is true to a certain extent (ie. There is theoretically insufficient evidence to prove anything valid. That includes the correct observation of a "fact." Look up subjectivism for more information if you care.), it completely eliminates the possibility of intelligent discussion. Don't use that as a crutch to support your ideas. Because, no matter what you claim, I going to guarantee you right now that you don't live your life as a subjectivist. Don't be a hypocrite and pick and choose the things you don't like to apply subjectivism to. @ problematica: While certainly there's nothing wrong with personal religious faith, keep in mind that lack of proof is not proof itself. You cannot say that it is smart to say that God guided evolution, because it isn't. It's simply a statement. There is zero evidence for or against it. It's not ridiculous for somebody to assume something false until evidence presents itself. The burden of proof is on you, the one making the positive statement. In addition, though you did not specify, aspects of many "mainstream" religions ARE contradicted by scientific observation. Even the concept of a god is questionable, in my mind. Sentience is defined as much by its limits as it is by its features. To have a sentient god, I would think you would have to have a limited god. In this case, then, what motivates you to call him a deity at all? That's not even getting into all the issues of morality, choice, etc. Religion only makes some semblance of sense when interpreted loosely. But lets not derail the thread too much. ^.^ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dark Posted December 10, 2009 Report Share Posted December 10, 2009 You can't just stick your head in the sand and refuse to listen. ...I'm not sure what world you are living in, Chaos, but on Earth, we have these people called Christians. Or at least most of 'em, before I get yelled at for generalizing. :/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
problematica Posted December 10, 2009 Report Share Posted December 10, 2009 @ problematica: While certainly there's nothing wrong with personal religious faith' date=' keep in mind that lack of proof is not proof itself. You cannot say that it is smart to say that God guided evolution, because it isn't. It's simply a statement. There is zero evidence for or against it. It's not ridiculous for somebody to assume something false until evidence presents itself. The burden of proof is on you, the one making the positive statement. In addition, though you did not specify, aspects of many "mainstream" religions ARE contradicted by scientific observation. Even the concept of a god is questionable, in my mind. Sentience is defined as much by its limits as it is by its features. To have a sentient god, I would think you would have to have a limited god. In this case, then, what motivates you to call him a deity at all? That's not even getting into all the issues of morality, choice, etc. Religion only makes some semblance of sense when interpreted loosely. But lets not derail the thread too much. ^.^[/quote'] I'm not saying a lack of proof is proof. I'm saying a lack of proof against it means that there is no sufficient means to reasonably argue against it in logical and factual means. I didn't say it's smart to believe it, I'm saying that it is a reasonable theory to believe in because there is no facts to contradict it. I specified that arguing against God, at that point, would be idiocy because there are no facts against him, therefore the only arguments can be based on subjective reasoning which would lead to neither sides making valid points and thus not prove nor disprove God. Which allows the theory to stand as one that can or cannot be accepted, depending on the person and not on facts. Science invalidating religious beliefs is an invalid argument as that generalizes the belief of several religions, all of which have ideas that oppose one another or are commonly misinterpreted. These beliefs, when interpreted correctly, actually coincide with scientific research. Interpretations are also being misrepresented in your argument as the view that they have to be loosely based is a subjective observation.Sentience limiting God would not prevent him from being God. Greek and Roman mythology all tell of their gods all having their own limitations and selective powers, yet still being a god. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Huntar! Posted December 11, 2009 Report Share Posted December 11, 2009 Isn't it the Law of Gravity? :/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dark Posted December 11, 2009 Report Share Posted December 11, 2009 Isn't it the Law of Gravity? :/ It can't be a law. Because if you break it, no punitive measures are taken. :/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Huntar! Posted December 11, 2009 Report Share Posted December 11, 2009 Isn't it the Law of Gravity? :/ It can't be a law. Because if you break it' date=' no punitive measures are taken. :/[/quote'] And punitive measures are taken when the laws of motion are broken? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Chaos Pudding Posted December 11, 2009 Report Share Posted December 11, 2009 Isn't it the Law of Gravity? :/ It can't be a law. Because if you break it' date=' no punitive measures are taken. :/[/quote'] And punitive measures are taken when the laws of motion are broken? A scientific law is basically a summary of what to expect when dealing with a physical phenomenon. The Law of Gravity tells us what to expect, the Theory of Gravity explains why we should expect this.Note that I don't usually like linking to Wikipedia to give information (My old AP Bio teacher would pound me for doing so), but I feel that, in this case, it give an excellent summary evolution as fact and theory. I suggest you read it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_as_theory_and_fact Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lemniscate Posted December 11, 2009 Report Share Posted December 11, 2009 Evolution is a fact, it can be observed, tested, etc. Evolution as a theory though is something entirely different. even by the definition of theory, there is not as high a probability of the explanation of evolution being correct as the existence of evolution itself. Evolution, as a fact, exists. But the theory of how species slowly change into new species, which has thus far not been wholly observed, has to be taken on a modicum of faith. Now, I for one believe that the theory of evolution is true, but there are some who don't. I believe also that the attempt to prove the theory of evolution entirely true is a very important undertaking, just as the attempts by other logical people to attack it is. It is imperative within science that we continue to question old ideas, that we improve upon what has been theorized already. The theory of evolution, just as that of gravity, is something that may one day be proven true, may one day be proven not, but until then, something that each individual must make their own opinion about, and something that scientists must continue to question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PowerlinX Posted December 11, 2009 Report Share Posted December 11, 2009 There is a difference. Gravity you can test whenever you want. We have no absolute proof that evolution is real, because it is bulls**t Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lemniscate Posted December 11, 2009 Report Share Posted December 11, 2009 Thank you for lacking basic scientific understanding, please read a textbook, and come back later. Next. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dark One Posted December 11, 2009 Report Share Posted December 11, 2009 There is a difference. Gravity you can test whenever you want. We have no absolute proof that evolution is real' date=' because it is bulls**t[/quote'] You have the IQ of a frog. Excuse me, a bullfrog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tentacruel Posted December 11, 2009 Report Share Posted December 11, 2009 You can't just stick your head in the sand and refuse to listen. ...I'm not sure what world you are living in' date=' Chaos, but on Earth, we have these people called [i']Christians[/i]. Or at least most of 'em, before I get yelled at for generalizing. :/ Thank you for having at least some understanding. And to answer this You can't just stick your head in the sand and refuse to listen. Sure I can! People do this all the time! Its called 'disagreement.' There is a difference. Gravity you can test whenever you want. We have no absolute proof that evolution is real' date=' because it is bulls**t[/quote'] Please don't be so disrespectful. You're just begging for people to make stupid generalizations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.