Christian misconceptions about he so-called failings of evolution

bluedog · #31 (**permalink**) 05-04-2008, 12:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by A. Crowley

"Really? Then how do you know that I am a bushbot? "

That part came easy, dumbshit.

Yes, you had to "read" what was presented to conclude as such. Therefore you do not "ignore" anything as you lied about in previous posts. As I said, your own words present the depth of your lies. BD

A. Crowley · #32 (**permalink**) 05-04-2008, 12:16 PM

The first sentence of the first post I encountered was sufficient, knucklehead.

A. Crowley · #33 (**permalink**) 05-04-2008, 12:18 PM

You might string-along a dumbshit wanker like Itsplayed, but nobody else reads your fantasies.

bluedog · #34 (**permalink**) 05-04-2008, 12:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by itsplayed

So your basing your belief in the unknown....that's fine, but it's still just a faith based belief, nothing more.

So, the fact of physical reality offers no proof of the fact that it indeed exists....just what kind of a paradox to logic is that? By the fact that the universe and everything in it exists presents the fact that it had to be created...as nothing can exist before it is created by some force of energy and even that energy had to have a causing effect. Your circular reasoning brings us right back exactly where we started. By your conclusions....we are a product of the magically conceptual idea of a "cosmic egg", an energy source that just happened to "self gestate" from nothing. And therefore it existed before it was.......created? Really? And, you do not consider this faith, of the "unknown". ALWAYS LEARNING, BUT NEVER COMING TO THE KNOWLEDGE OF THE TRUTH....They profess themselves to be wise but have become fools. {The Apostle Paul speaking to the great minds of Greece and Rome, 1st century AD}

I will go you one better....present me the "evidence" of just "ONE" star being born, and I will bend a knee to the theorized ideas of the pseudo intelligent. JUST ONE. No theories please...show me a "NEW STAR". BD

itsplayed · #35 (**permalink**) 05-04-2008, 12:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bluedog

So, the fact of physical reality offers no proof of the fact that it indeed exists....just what kind of a paradox to logic is that? By the fact that the universe and everything in it exists presents the fact that it had to be created...as nothing can exist before it is created by some force of energy and even that energy had to have a causing effect. Your circular reasoning brings us right back exactly where we started. By your conclusions....we are a product of the magically conceptual idea of a "cosmic egg", an energy source that just happened to "self gestate" from nothing. And therefore it existed before it was.......created? Really? And, you do not consider this faith, of the "unknown". ALWAYS LEARNING, BUT NEVER COMING TO THE KNOWLEDGE OF THE TRUTH....They profess themselves to be wise but have become fools. {The Apostle Paul speaking to the great minds of Greece and Rome, 1st century AD}

I will go you one better....present me the "evidence" of just "ONE" star being born, and I will bend a knee to the theorized ideas of the pseudo intelligent. JUST ONE. BD

Not exactly, I do believe in a supreme entity, but as I see it now, this enity is all that is nature and not of a single entity creating nature itself, but that nature is the supreme entity and we are all just a part. Now whether or not this supreme entity is consciously aware leaves room for debate.

And don't you see the following statement as contradictory, if you apply it to everything else but the "creator"?

Quote:

.....as nothing can exist before it is created....

bluedog · #36 (**permalink**) 05-04-2008, 12:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by itsplayed

Not exactly, I do believe in a supreme entity, but as I see it now, this enity is all that is nature and not of a single entity creating nature itself, but that nature is the supreme entity and we are all just a part. Now whether or not this supreme entity is consciously aware leaves room for debate.

You are speaking of the Ideology of materialism...where the created is assumed to be superior to the producer of such material. Nature also had to have a beginning, and therefore was a "PRODUCT". Of What? This the failure of this conceived idea. BD

itsplayed · #37 (**permalink**) 05-04-2008, 12:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bluedog

You are speaking of the Ideology of materialism...where the created is assumed to be superior to the producer of such material. Nature also had to have a beginning, and therefore was a "PRODUCT". Of What? This the failure of this conceived idea. BD

Again I disagree, wouldn't the same laws hold true for the creator?
The universe is still an open book and we have just barely scratched the surface of it's secrets.....nature itself could be the end all, where we are just a part.

Suburbanite · #38 (**permalink**) 05-04-2008, 12:56 PM

sry, been away:

Quote:

Originally Posted by bluedog

How can anyone understand "mental imagery" that exists only in the mind of the one that makes comprehension to such image? Theory in any shape, mold, or mental projection that you wish to try and establish it as fact.....just does not have the backing of physical law to declare it such as a "FACT". You may be the master of any "idea" that you wish to reason on, but this only makes you a master of unprovable ideology and science "fiction", not a master of facts. Show me the definitive "empirical" scientific evidence that declares "evolution" as a fact of nature and your mastery, even though self professed, may be a valid indicator or your intelligence. If not what you are a master of is "crap", hell Bill Clinton was as such, and he certainly was no indicator of projected intelligence, just look at who he "choose" to marry. BD

Your dog is a by-product of human controlled genetic drift. You think there are Dalmatians or Pugs in the wild naturally? We controlled their evolution, bred animals with desirable qualities with one another over and over again to produce specific looking creatures. Dogs with long bodies and short legs, for example. Or bovine with extra meat. Or horses bred to run faster than any horse in existence 1,000 years ago. We've exploited evolution to mutate single and multi-celled organisms into cleaning products and vaccinations. So... those are a few of many examples where you can go out and see evolution at work right now. What am I missing? Is that not empirical proof? The fact that you can observe controlled experiments in evolution with creatures whose life span is less than our own? Or that amongst several life spans we can witness the genetic drift of other creatures.

Quote:

Originally Posted by bluedog

It is a proven fact of physical science that nothing "just happens", for every effect, there must be a cause. Again the question is asked, "What caused the existence of the cosmic egg/mass-matter that supposedly produced the big bang to get things rolling?" It cannot be answered in theory...only speculated upon, at some point one must admit to some force "not of this universe" creating something.

You can't confuse the Big Bang with evolution, they are two separate theories by two different people over a hundred years apart.

itsplayed · #39 (**permalink**) 05-04-2008, 01:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by A. Crowley

You might string-along a dumbshit wanker like Itsplayed, but nobody else reads your fantasies.

Who's stringing who along asswipe....see that's your problem, you don't read. But I have this gut feeling that even if you did, comprehension would be your next big obstacle.

A. Crowley · #40 (**permalink**) 05-04-2008, 01:13 PM

The gut feelings of a retarded Bushbot like you are as irrelevant as all your proclamatins, fool.
Some are worth reading; and some are not.

Bleudawg falls into the latter category.