The Mystery Thread

[leibowde84]

I was taught evolution for 5 years in school. As an unbeliever I discounted the evidence set before me. Here is what I saw. Someone, apparently Darwin, put forth the proposition that we evolved from apes. Though, in fact, evolution was taught in Greek philosophy thousands of years before that. From this supposition any deviation in species was then assumed to be evolution. For example, the pepper moth. I would look at something like that and say, that is obviously no indication of evolution. It's an indication of pollution. This is how evidence works. Just because you say the pepper moth is evidence of evolution doesn't make it so. It's easy to say you have "mountains of evidence for evolution" when all you have is nothing.

The only reason the atheists cling so desperately to evolution is because they think that it means there is no god. Which is what they want to believe. That isn't so with me.

But, what you are claiming here isn't true. It isn't mere examples of living species that make up the evidence for evolution. We have fossil records where we can see, mutation by mutation, how one species evolved into another. We can literally see (and prove) these very subtle, gradual changes occuring over vast amounts of time. There is no doubt, unless you think God is trying to trick us with the evidence or something like that.

 

[leibowde84]

I used to like to watch nature documentaries. Once I was watching an ABC documentary on the Amazon river and a respected Zoologist who specialized in Ichthyology went there to study the local's knowledge on the subject. He sees this fish eating nuts that fell into the river and he says "That bump on his head evolved there to crack open the nuts." Or something like that, it was a long time ago.

That's evidence for evolution.

I have been shown pictures of the skulls of apes lined up with the skull of a human. Evidence for evolution. The pepper moth I've mentioned before. All sorts of examples that were thought to be "evidence for evolution" that were fraudulent.

There's lots of evidence for evolution! Tons and tons of it. You know what though? When a creationist says to me that the trees and grass etc. are evidence of God I say - no. They are evidence of trees and grass.

You merely haven't made the effort to study the evidence for evolution, which is made obvious by the ludicrous examples you have put forward here. Do yourself a favor and actually study the science (beyond documentaries). It is interesting stuff, and if you actually take the time to consider the evidence with an open mind, you will surely be convinced. Here, it seems, you are purposely pointing out occasions where scientists have claimed something specific is part of the evidence for evolution without even bothering to look into the context and background of that evidence (why it is considered to be evidence of evolution ... and the use of a skull to crack nuts aint it, buddy).

 

[ecco]

ecco said: ↑​

If not the Christian Bible, then on what do you base your views of a god?

What I say is based on what I have discovered.

OK. But that does not address my question. What were your "discoveries " based on? Ancient texts? Hari Chrishna lectures? A session in a sweat lodge with peyote?

 

[ecco]

ecco said: ↑​

Theists:
Every thing has a cause and an origin.
Uh, oh, er, {cough, cough} except my god.

And you really want to talk about logic?

I know how logic works. And i say this with assertive authority. Simple as that.

You dont know logic too well then.

Something has to be the prime reality. The prime mover. Otherwise, logically you fall into the problem of infinite regression. As in, all events would take forever to happen, which means nothing would happen.

Thats logic.

Yes, you fall into the problem of infinite regression. So, how do you not fall into a problem of infinite regression? There are two ways:

1. Recognize that the concept of a "prime reality - prime mover" is just silly fantasy.
2. Handwave away the logical contradiction that the concept of a "prime reality - prime mover" imposes.

In your infinite logical wisdom, you choose to handwave away the problem,

You stated that your logical ability was at the same level as God's. In reality, it is below the level of a tenth grader.

 

[ecco]

ecco said: ↑​

Then I guess I have to go back to the start of this conversation, what Truth can I learn by observing god actions. What actions?

By watching you and your actions, I can discover who you are and a lot more. It doesn't matter what beliefs others might say about you. Your actions will tell all.

By watching and understanding God's actions, I discover who God really is and what God is about, along with what God is doing with this world.Once again, it doesn't matter what beliefs others might say. Actions tell it all. Further, God's actions can not be altered by mankind as so many religious beliefs are.

If one sits next to the smartest kid in one's classroom, doesn't one learn more? By studying God, won't understanding bring advanced thinking?

In creating this world along with defining the parameters, can you not see Actions that have been taken? They are everywhere. In this world, knowledge must be earned and discovered. Why is it that way? Why does God do this? In the Big scheme of things, Brains win. Why is it set up this way? Evolution? Why is it set up this way? Fractals? Why does this exist? Earthquakes, as you mentioned. Why kill kids? Sickness? How can sickness ever be a good thing? If you can not find any questions to ask, how can you define a direction by which you can find answers?

Yes, this type of journey takes a lifetime and more. When putting a puzzle together, one works with the easy pieces first until one gets a border. This might be a good idea for anyone.

Yadda, yadda, yadda. A lot of words. The only ones that address "What actions" are: Fractals, Earthquakes, killing kids and Sickness.

So you are saying that Fractals, Earthquakes, killing kids and Sickness are god's actions that you learned from; that I can learn from. That's really vague. What did you learn from God killing children? What should I learn from God killing children?

 

[ecco]

Who said anything about religion? I've nothing to do with any religion.

Sure you do. You are making it up as you go along.

 

[Earthling]

That may be the case, I can't speak to your individual experience, but I find it to be true that religious thoughts and texts specifically appeal to emotion rather than reason.


The Bible is a religious text, and you said it is at least partially responsible for turning you from a disbeliever to a believer. I'm not saying you're necessarily a part of a religion, just that it was through a religious scripture you were convinced.

But let's park that to one side and try to engage in a less potentially confrontational level. What is it about evolution, specifically, that you find hard to believe?

Everything.

 

[Earthling]

But, what you are claiming here isn't true. It isn't mere examples of living species that make up the evidence for evolution. We have fossil records where we can see, mutation by mutation, how one species evolved into another. We can literally see (and prove) these very subtle, gradual changes occuring over vast amounts of time. There is no doubt, unless you think God is trying to trick us with the evidence or something like that.

You've seen this? Show me.

 

[Earthling]

Sure you do. You are making it up as you go along.

You haven't even the slightest idea of what you are talking about.

 

[ecco]

ecco said: ↑​

Sure you do. You are making it up as you go along.

You haven't even the slightest idea of what you are talking about.

But I do. You believe in a god.
You have your thoughts about what your god is and is not.
You have your thoughts about what your god can and cannot do.
You have your thoughts about how to relate to your god.

That's called religion:
re·li·gion
/rəˈlijən/
noun

1. the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, especially a personal God or gods.

Since no one else shares these beliefs with you, can make them up as you go.

 

[Prometheus85]

Order, patterns, complexity, many parts that serve a function that work in conjunction with all the other parts. We see this all over the place. Our bodies as an example.

Order. There's no reason given for this. Because If the universe was created with us in mind, why is so much of it inaccessible and deadly? It's entirely possible that God wanted another entity to exist, and humans are just an unfortunate byproduct; given how little of the universe is habitable to humans, this appears even more likely.

Patterns. That can easily be described in terms of evolutionary principles.

Complexity. Give me an example of someone that is to complex to have evolved.

If We see this all over the place including our bodies then explain the lack of perfection we see in all living things. If each one were designed by a perfect god then we would expect each one to be a perfect example of whatever it was. We would expect human vision to be well designed for example. What we would not expect to find would be things showing evidence of evolution such as vestigial organs.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Everything.

I did ask "specifically".

 

[Bird123]

ecco said: ↑​

If not the Christian Bible, then on what do you base your views of a god?



OK. But that does not address my question. What were your "discoveries " based on? Ancient texts? Hari Chrishna lectures? A session in a sweat lodge with peyote?

You still do not get it. It is based on what actually exists around us all. When I watch your actions to discover who you are, why would I look at books and beliefs about you when I have the Real Thing in front of my nose???? It seems what I have been saying to you is beyond you. It's going to take much work for you to find understanding.

 

[Bird123]

ecco said: ↑​

Then I guess I have to go back to the start of this conversation, what Truth can I learn by observing god actions. What actions?


Yadda, yadda, yadda. A lot of words. The only ones that address "What actions" are: Fractals, Earthquakes, killing kids and Sickness.

So you are saying that Fractals, Earthquakes, killing kids and Sickness are god's actions that you learned from; that I can learn from. That's really vague. What did you learn from God killing children? What should I learn from God killing children?

What should you learn? You should be able to Discover the Truth, find Understanding and Learn what it's all about.

Clearly, you are not ready. There are other things you would rather hold onto. That's ok too. In time, what I have said will become more important to you. Until then, as I see it, there are other things you need to work out first.

 

[Jollybear]

ecco said: ↑​

Theists:
Every thing has a cause and an origin.
Uh, oh, er, {cough, cough} except my god.

And you really want to talk about logic?





Yes, you fall into the problem of infinite regression. So, how do you not fall into a problem of infinite regression? There are two ways:

1. Recognize that the concept of a "prime reality - prime mover" is just silly fantasy.
2. Handwave away the logical contradiction that the concept of a "prime reality - prime mover" imposes.

In your infinite logical wisdom, you choose to handwave away the problem,

You stated that your logical ability was at the same level as God's. In reality, it is below the level of a tenth grader.

Why not refute the point of the tenth grader then?

 

[Jollybear]

Order. There's no reason given for this. Because If the universe was created with us in mind, why is so much of it inaccessible and deadly?

Thats not my view. The EARTH was designed with us in mind. The OCEANS wer designed with fish in mind. You see? Not every design is with humans in mind. But, everything is designed.

It's entirely possible that God wanted another entity to exist, and humans are just an unfortunate byproduct; given how little of the universe is habitable to humans, this appears even more likely.

Unfortanate? Lol. Are you saying its unfortanate you exist?

Also, again, the whole universe is not designed for humans. Furthermore, you nor i know what parts are habitable out there. There very well could be. Nasa most certainly hasnt even scratched the surface of exploration.

Patterns. That can easily be described in terms of evolutionary principles.

Complexity. Give me an example of someone that is to complex to have evolved.

What evolved first, the brain, heart, lungs, legs, arms, bladder, ect?

For the organism to survive all parts need to be spontaniously there at once.

"Chicken and egg" problem for you.

If We see this all over the place including our bodies then explain the lack of perfection we see in all living things. If each one were designed by a perfect god then we would expect each one to be a perfect example of whatever it was. We would expect human vision to be well designed for example. What we would not expect to find would be things showing evidence of evolution such as vestigial organs.

Saying something is not perfectly designed is not a case against actual design. Its akin to saying cars in the 18 hundreds wer not as good design as cars today. But, they wer still designed. Likewise, even if you think some things in nature are poorly designed, there still designed.

Secondly, the "imperfect" design is also accounted for due to design breaking down. Just like cars break down over time. That dont mean there not designed. It just means things break down.

Also these "vestigial organs" are not truely vestigial. Many of them help the immune system currently.

Fourthly, not all believers in God reject evolution. They see God DESIGNING through evolution.

Ok, your turn.

 

[Earthling]

I did ask "specifically".

What's it to 'ya?

 

[ImmortalFlame]

What's it to 'ya?

I'm trying to be polite in an effort to bridge a gap between perspectives; there's no need to get defensive. I just want to understand your position.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

What evolved first, the brain, heart, lungs, legs, arms, bladder, ect?

That's not how evolution works.

First, start by asking yourself what is the broadest definition of the function of each of those organs. We'll take lungs as an example. Lungs take oxygen from the air and turn it into energy to fuel the body, so the broadest definition of their function is converting things from our environment into energy for the organism - it is merely a specialized form of that function. With this in mind, imagine generation after generation of organisms, each one with some way to derive energy from their environment, until they eventually evolved specifically specialized organs for doing so in a more efficient or convenient way in their particular environment. It's not "one evolving before the other" - evolution doesn't work on producing one organ at a time - all functions of an organism are in constant development.

For the organism to survive all parts need to be spontaniously there at once.

What on earth gives you that impression? You are aware that there are lots of organisms that survive without all of those organs, right?

"Chicken and egg" problem for you.

Except chickens evolved from earlier egg-laying animals, so the egg came first.

Saying something is not perfectly designed is not a case against actual design. Its akin to saying cars in the 18 hundreds wer not as good design as cars today. But, they wer still designed. Likewise, even if you think some things in nature are poorly designed, there still designed.

So whether it's a good design or not, it's still a design because you deem it to be a design, even if it's not actually very good at doing the thing you alleged it's designed for?

How did you determine design again?

Also these "vestigial organs" are not truely vestigial. Many of them help the immune system currently.

"Vestigial" does not mean "useless", it means "reduced function".

 

[Earthling]

I'm trying to be polite in an effort to bridge a gap between perspectives; there's no need to get defensive. I just want to understand your position.

You want to proselytize.