Atheists believe in miracles more than believers

[cladking]

Why wouldn't pattern recognition and experience benefit an individual of any species?

Those weren't beetles, wasps, and bugs that used to plug radiators on cross country trips. Every single one was an individual which was doing everything it could to survive when misadventure struck.

Our job is to try to assess exactly what "Everything it could" entails but we can't do this because many scientists don't even believe in free will and there is no definition for "consciousness" other than my own.

We owe a great debt to ancient bugs all the way back to Henry Ford. More importantly we have a great debt to ourselves.

 

[cladking]

I think we are just a detour on his road to complete understanding and his excursion here has only reinforced his opinions.

I hate going off topic but will for innuendo, sometimes. I post principally on several very high quality sites. As far as that goes Graham Hancock's site has been one of the best for discussing pyramids and has numerous excellent posters. I prefer high quality sites but surprisingly few discuss any subject in which I'm interested.

Your tactics remind me of someone who used to follow me around the net calling me a liar and delusional, and has managed to get "themself" banned at a few sites.

I am on this site primarily to discuss science and religion but have ventured to other forums.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

How can you know what the evidence is or what it supports with no definition for consciousness?

Th only one offered so far is "wakefulness". Is not a dancing bee awake? Would the dance be better if it were asleep? Is the bee more likely to successfully avoid predators and gather food asleep?

Why wouldn't a conscious ant have an evolutionary advantage to one that was sleepwalking or acting only on instinct?

Why wouldn't pattern recognition and experience benefit an individual of any species?

I'm done talking with you. I find it boring, uninformative, one-sided and useless. Why bother trying to engage someone that doesn't listen to me or care what I have to say and thinks I'm an idiot, because I don't embrace their revealed truths.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Change in species is a random walk. If a million individuals come into existence each year then the species will normally take a half million baby steps in one direction and a half million in the other. In a few generations it is an entirely different species that is for all intents and purposes the exact same species as its great great grandparents. It requires an outside force to cause a change in species. The nature of this force and its magnitude determines the way and the speed at which species change. Rapid change normally only results from extreme predatory forces like in peppered moths or from population bottlenecks where unusual behavior is selected. Gradual change is very rare because it reflects a coherent and steady change in the species' biological niche but these changes tend to be rapid as well such as when one of its chief food sources or predators change. Certainly there exist long term changes in niches that will affect change in species such as increasing oxygen in the atmosphere. Such gradual changes apparently are more likely to result in extinctions than bottlenecks resulting in no or little change to species.

It should be pointed out as well that it is hubris of our species to say things like cockroaches are changeless. The fact is we don't even know all the sensory organs and processing capabilities of species. We don't know anything about consciousness. We have no means of knowing that a fossilized cockroach from 1.90763 million years ago is the same species as one from 1.90764 million years ago. They look alike we assume they are alike.

The very first thing Dr Hawass did when he saw a beetle inspect the camera lowered into the boat pit next to G1 wasn't to dissect or study the individual, it was to kill it and fumigate. We believe in the miracle of species and its inability to maintain its shape in the face of evolutionary pressures. So a beetle is a beetle is a beetle. It's the way we think. Logic has nothing to do with it.

I find nothing useful here. It appears to me to be rambling, incoherent claims without basis. I would say it is a random walk going nowhere from what I'm reading here and agree that logic has nothing to do with it.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

I hate going off topic but will for innuendo, sometimes. I post principally on several very high quality sites. As far as that goes Graham Hancock's site has been one of the best for discussing pyramids and has numerous excellent posters. I prefer high quality sites but surprisingly few discuss any subject in which I'm interested.

Your tactics remind me of someone who used to follow me around the net calling me a liar and delusional, and has managed to get "themself" banned at a few sites.

I am on this site primarily to discuss science and religion but have ventured to other forums.

Perhaps that is why I have come to find this all so boring. Discussion and the discussion of science never seems to have taken place.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Another product of this religion. Aren't we all better off if this religion stops turning minds this way?

Their interpretation of the scripture was incorrect in my view. I see it as further indication of bad fruit.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

There is no evidence and observation as per science that there is religious bull as bull. That is a belief without evidence.

I got the impression from what I read that @ChristineM was stating that she came to the conclusions she has for lack of evidence. The other was just personal commentary of her feelings about religion as it is sadly so often practiced.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

Their interpretation of the scripture was incorrect in my view. I see it as further indication of bad fruit.

There's so much of that bad fruit. It's not a bad apple or a bad tree. It's a bad orchard full of bad trees and the occasional healthy one.

You know my opinion by now. You're a decent Christian, but I don't think Christianity contributed to that. You ended up more or less where atheistic humanists have, and I understand that as you refusing to imbibe the bigotries, support of immoral politicians and Christian theocratic tendencies, and the anti-intellectualism that that religion inculcates into so many. That is, if Christianity didn't exist, you be the same person except not claiming to be a Christian, and there'd be far fewer of the types I just described. This is why I call the Christian church anti-American, anti-people, and a bad neighbor that we would be better off without. Certainly, pregnant American women would be. The less of this religion, the better.

I'm really sorry for the decent people calling themselves by that name, but what is it that makes them decent? They reject Christian the teaching that contradicts humanist teaching and advocate for human freedom, development, and opportunity. Their religion doesn't teach them that. They get it from where the atheistic humanist does: his own innate senses (reason and conscience). The religion would have you disable your innate sense of reason and decency and substitute its alternative thinking. Thank you for refusing.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

It would require a miracle to run a many year experiment while maintaining strict controls on every parameter. The largest single factor in this control while observing e coli would be the food that was given them. I wager that the "Evolution" of the species merely reflects the evolution of the food provided to them.

And again, changes on the order that humans can see is virtually by definition; "sudden". This "experiment" simply can not show Evolution by survival of the fittest. E coli are not so complex as bees and beavers.

According to what I believe, Bees and the Beavers are on board with this. I'm pretty sure they consider it to be one of the most well-run experiments demonstrating evolution that they have ever seen. They may have convinced, the upside-down, backward-facing, counter-rotating flies of the soundness of the science behind the Lenski experiment as well.

I don't think this conclusion was sudden. I'm almost certain that the Bees and the Beavers decided to actually learn science, biology and the theory of evolution before coming to their conclusions. It is widely recognized and, I think rightly recognized, that that sort of knowledge and understanding takes time and real effort. It can't come to exist on the wishful thinking of the fast food, I want it all without effort, mentality. And I think that they don't want to start rambling on and on and on and on and constantly repeating things they don't know anything about as if they were one of those sudden, baseless, experts in material they don't really understand.

Personally, I commend them and was thinking about presenting them with a diploma, a testimonial, a silk heart and some ruby slippers. But I don't want to give the appearance that I'm some unseen wizard hiding behind a curtain. One that really has no power or authority to dictate to others what they should think. I'll leave that to those that seem to want for themselves what seems to me like manipulation and illusion.

 

[gnostic]

Change in species is a random walk. If a million individuals come into existence each year then the species will normally take a half million baby steps in one direction and a half million in the other. In a few generations it is an entirely different species that is for all intents and purposes the exact same species as its great great grandparents. It requires an outside force to cause a change in species. The nature of this force and its magnitude determines the way and the speed at which species change. Rapid change normally only results from extreme predatory forces like in peppered moths or from population bottlenecks where unusual behavior is selected. Gradual change is very rare because it reflects a coherent and steady change in the species' biological niche but these changes tend to be rapid as well such as when one of its chief food sources or predators change. Certainly there exist long term changes in niches that will affect change in species such as increasing oxygen in the atmosphere. Such gradual changes apparently are more likely to result in extinctions than bottlenecks resulting in no or little change to species.

All that you have described…have absolutely nothing to do with speciation in biology. It is not Evolution that you are describing.

The rest of the quote are just as ridiculous fiction, that you have made up.

You are trying to reinvent Natural Selection, with Punctuated Equilibrium, and yet, you have twisted PE to the extent that it is no longer recognisable as Punctuated Equilibrium.

It is like parody of Punctuated Equilibrium.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

All that you have described…have absolutely nothing to do with speciation in biology. It is not Evolution that you are describing.

The rest of the quote are just as ridiculous fiction, that you have made up.

You are trying to reinvent Natural Selection, with Punctuated Equilibrium, and yet, you have twisted PE to the extent that it is no longer recognisable as Punctuated Equilibrium.

It is like parody of Punctuated Equilibrium.

I believe you are being too kind. Personally, I found the entire post to be ridiculous fiction.

I think that anyone making such statements should be made aware of this observation in order that they can dig deeper and learn. But I don't see that happening. Especially in a person for whom I get this personal sense that they believe they know everything and have no need to learn.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

@John53 if you are still interested in those symbols that are found in European caves there is a TedTalks video available by paleoanthropologist Genevieve von Petzinger. It is a bit brief and seems more like an introduction to a fuller discussion, but more knowledgeable than anything you'll find here. It is only about 15 minutes.

She is definitely not claiming these symbols are a language.

Her MS thesis is also available to download at Making the abstract concrete: the place of geometric signs in French upper paleolithic parietal art

 

[ChristineM]

@John53 if you are still interested in those symbols that are found in European caves there is a TedTalks video available by paleoanthropologist Genevieve von Petzinger. It is a bit brief and seems more like an introduction to a fuller discussion, but more knowledgeable than anything you'll find here. It is only about 15 minutes.

She is definitely not claiming these symbols are a language.

Her MS thesis is also available to download at Making the abstract concrete: the place of geometric signs in French upper paleolithic parietal art

That's my thing. One of several reasons we moved here is my interest in the cro magnon era. I've seen around 40 caves with art and symbols and been on 4 digs. (I found my avatar on one)

 

[Dan From Smithville]

That's my thing. One of several reasons we moved here is my interest in the cro magnon era. I've seen around 40 caves with art and symbols and been on 4 digs. (I found my avatar on one)

None of the Missouri caves I've been in have symbols are art that I've found. Although, I understand that Picture Cave in Warren County west of St. Louis has incredible art. I've not been there.
Picture Cave - Wikipedia.

Europe has had a human population much longer, so perhaps that has been part of the reason for the greater numbers of those caves there having art. As well as more than one species (or subspecies) of Homo.

 

[ChristineM]

None of the Missouri caves I've been in have symbols are art that I've found. Although, I understand that Picture Cave in Warren County west of St. Louis has incredible art. I've not been there.
Picture Cave - Wikipedia.

Europe has had a human population much longer, so perhaps that has been part of the reason for the greater numbers of those caves there having art. As well as more than one species (or subspecies) of Homo.

Neanderthal and Cro Magnon (early modern human) coexisted here about 40,000 years ago.

There are around 100 caves in this area with Cro Magnon paintings. The most famous being Lascaux


lascaux - Google Search

 

[cladking]

@John53 if you are still interested in those symbols that are found in European caves there is a TedTalks video available by paleoanthropologist Genevieve von Petzinger. It is a bit brief and seems more like an introduction to a fuller discussion, but more knowledgeable than anything you'll find here. It is only about 15 minutes.

She is definitely not claiming these symbols are a language.

Her MS thesis is also available to download at Making the abstract concrete: the place of geometric signs in French upper paleolithic parietal art

Yes! She said "it is highly unlikely these symbols were abstract written characters". I could not possibly agree more.

They are representative characters. They are not even "written" in terms we understand because these representations are the things themselves to the authors.

Who died and left Von Petzinger as the arbiter of reality? She has her beliefs. I have mine.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Yes! She said "it is highly unlikely these symbols were abstract written characters". I could not possibly agree more.

They are representative characters. They are not even "written" in terms we understand because these representations are the things themselves to the authors.

Who died and left Von Petzinger as the arbiter of reality? She has her beliefs. I have mine.

Don't care.

 

[John53]

Don't care.

She does research and presents it for others to examine, doesn't make ridiculous claims with no evidence and doesn't try to change the meaning of words.

 

[gnostic]

Science is a lie for most part, do some deep history on all those running this world and see what fruits they lack. They possess bad fruits and are full of deception. Jesus says judge those by their fruits.

What part of “most part” are you talking about?

And you don’t think the churches, Christian leaders and the average Christians, don’t lie? Don’t become corrupted by greed or by power?

There have been history of Christians doing bad things in the name of God, Jesus and of whatever churches or sects they followed, not only did they ignore the law to not bear false witness, but i don’t know many others have broken the other Ten Commandments. Even Jesus’ Love thy neighbours and turn the other cheek, are often conveniently forgotten, by bad Christians.

i have lost count of the numbers of persecutions and wars committed in Jesus’ name, by the so-called Christian kingdoms or nations…but not just against non-Christians, but also against fellow Christians.

The problems are, being called Christians, some people and some sects (not all Christians, and not all sects) think they are “entitled”, that they should be treated “special”…entitled and special enough that they think they can mistreat others, judge others.

Right now, jesussetsusfree, you are judging others, even Jesus explicitly stated to not judge & persecute others. You saying science is a lie, actually calling scientists “liars”.

Why do you have to judge who is lying? And I think I will ask you, what are they lying about…for the “most part”?

Has Jesus set you free, to judge others?

 

[gnostic]

Nobody on the planet can read, write, or understand ancient Egyptian unless I do. This is because it is superstitious gobbledty gook as defined by the translators themselves and by their own admission they can't really translate it but can only "circumscribe" the meaning. If I am right I am the only one who can "translate" it and I am telling you that it is impossible to translate a metaphysical language into a symbolic language.

It could be translated into a sort of flow chart in English but this flow chart would be almost indecipherable without extreme effort by most individuals. Simply stated we don't think like the pyramid builders did and trying is very difficult. I myself have spent 17 years building the models required to "translate" it. Since it can not be translated I've used relatively little source material in the effort.

You haven’t translated anything.

All you are doing is interpreting what others have translated into English. You have translated nothing. Interpreting what others have translated, don’t mean that you are translating, so your so-called model, is just a fake model, a pseudo-translation.

The people who wrote the Pyramid Texts, were from the pyramids of the 5th & 6th dynasties, not from the 4th dynasty, and these pyramids (that contained the Pyramid Texts) were from Saqqara, not from Giza. The Pyramid texts left no instructions on how they build their pyramids.

As fabulous as the Great Pyramid, of Khufu, is, neither his pyramids, nor the neighbouring pyramids of his successors, contain much hieroglyphs writings. As I said, the only real information written contemporaneously about Khufu’s pyramid was some papyri discovered 130 km from Giza, some logs about shipping supplies and materials from a harbour. These too contain no instructions on how pyramids were built.

of course, I am in your ignore list, but this is to counter whatever claims, for other people’s benefits than for you.