Darwin's Illusion

[Jimmy]

I'm not sure we want to go down this particular rabbit hole, but I imagine there are many more branches to be found if we thought about it. Often, belief systems are arise out of existing systems. This was a point of some of the work of Joseph Campbell.

I’m sure people have all kinds of dates the world began

 

[Jimmy]

Consider the origins of Christianity and Islam from pre-existing religion.

I’ve researched. It is fascinating

 

[Subduction Zone]

You'll have to explain this to me. Of course, you'll not respond at all or will respond off topic because believers believe, they don't address other arguments. I respond to everything and believers respond to nothing at all. They just repeat their own beliefs.

A response might be fun though, eh?

Yes but do you think that you could understand it? I have serious doubts. If you believe the Garden of Eden myth but blame Adam and Eve then I can guarantee that it would be beyond your understanding.

This is another that eludes me. I have to prove there is a need for a God but you have theory which is proof enough for believers. And you believe I don't know how science works.

Is English a second language for you? You should be able to understand that from context. I means that you need to provide evidence for your beliefs. Opps, my bad. I am sorry, you do not understand the concept of evidence and are afraid to learn. I do not know how you can fix that problem.

Why don't you describe my version of God?

Have you ever actually read one of my posts while trying to understand?

You cannot even make your beliefs clear to yourself. Do you really think that you have ever properly explained your beliefs to others? Did you not notice that I used a qualifier in that statement? Read the whole phrase. Do not cherry pick.

And again, homo omnisciencis.

There you go refuting yourself with foolish made up terminology again. Let me do you a favor. Every time that you use such a term that will be interpreted as you just admitting that you are wrong. We all already know that you are wrong. You would just be the last to know.

Kuhn is just one more scientist/ metaphysician that you don't understand. I'm sure you didn't read Burtt.

https://www.hrstud.unizg.hr/_download/repository/Burtt,_The_Metaphysical_Foundations_of_Modern_Science.pdf

It seems someone who doesn't understand there is a basis to science wouldn't go around trying to explain science to others.

You clearly did not understand those sources either. You like to link articles at times that are beyond you and do not help you. You cannot even quote how they supposedly support you. Links by themselves are often worthless in a debate.

Nope; "settled science" doesn't exist. It's political claptrap with no referent. There is only "theory" and it is an interpretation of a set of experiments known as a "paradigm". Every paradigm is overturned in the long run (so far). I am suggesting that the current paradigm is based on old science. It is a poor explanation of how species change and exists in part because modern biology won't jettison Darwin's Illusions.

Settled science exists. It is just a phrase that you do not understand. When you are willing to learn people on this thread will be glad to help you overcome your endless misconceptions.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

I’m sure people have all kinds of dates the world began

His work was more about the similarities in mythology and religions and how new ones sprang from existing ones rather than dates when this happened.

 

[Jimmy]

His work was more about the similarities in mythology and religions and how new ones sprang from existing ones rather than dates when this happened.

I wasn’t referring to him

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Yes but do you think that you could understand it? I have serious doubts. If you believe the Garden of Eden myth but blame Adam and Eve then I can guarantee that it would be beyond your understanding.



Is English a second language for you? You should be able to understand that from context. I means that you need to provide evidence for your beliefs. Opps, my bad. I am sorry, you do not understand the concept of evidence and are afraid to learn. I do not know how you can fix that problem.




You cannot even make your beliefs clear to yourself. Do you really think that you have ever properly explained your beliefs to others? Did you not notice that I used a qualifier in that statement? Read the whole phrase. Do not cherry pick.



There you go refuting yourself with foolish made up terminology again. Let me do you a favor. Every time that you use such a term that will be interpreted as you just admitting that you are wrong. We all already know that you are wrong. You would just be the last to know.




You clearly did not understand those sources either. You like to link articles at times that are beyond you and do not help you. You cannot even quote how they supposedly support you. Links by themselves are often worthless in a debate.



Settled science exists. It is just a phrase that you do not understand. When you are willing to learn people on this thread will be glad to help you overcome your endless misconceptions.

It is beginning to appear that when we do get links, they will be random and not really supporting what is claimed. I suppose it will be honored by reference to "I posted links".

 

[Dan From Smithville]

I’ve researched. It is fascinating

It is fascinating. I lament that I have only this life to devote to learning when there is so much to learn.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I’m sure people have all kinds of dates the world began

Yes, but what are they based upon? Are they based upon rational thought or superstition?

 

[Jimmy]

I thought it was created last Thursday.

Last thursdayism was created more to be a joke I think

 

[Dan From Smithville]

I wasn’t referring to him

I see. I stand corrected.

 

[Jimmy]

Yes, but what are they based upon? Are they based upon rational thought or superstition?

Idk. For me it based on my gut.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Last thursdayism was created more to be a joke I think

Humorous sarcasm and satire, yes I think.

 

[Jimmy]

Humorous sarcasm and satire, yes I think.

Yup reducing an idea to absurdism

 

[Jimmy]

Humorous sarcasm and satire, yes I think.

That’s what everyone posts here to dig at what I believe. It’s all good. Atleast I don’t speak in riddles or hide behide terms like heaven afterlife armageddon resurrection in a book etc. I asked myself how we got here and how it will all end 15 years ago and my answers came. I’ve believed them ever since.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Idk. For me it based on my gut.

Then that would be an irrational belief. You might think that it is ten mile walk to a destination because of how tired you were when you arrived, but you could be surprised that when reliably measured it is only six miles. Especially when one has no training in an area one's "gut" will almost always lead to wrong answers. You should be trying to understand how various groups got their numbers.

 

[Jimmy]

Then that would be an irrational belief. You might think that it is ten mile walk to a destination because of how tired you were when you arrived, but you could be surprised that when reliably measured it is only six miles. Especially when one has no training in an area one's "gut" will almost always lead to wrong answers. You should be trying to understand how various groups got their numbers.

I’ve strongly believed it for 15 yrs and I will die believing it. No skin off my a**

 

[Jimmy]

Then that would be an irrational belief. You might think that it is ten mile walk to a destination because of how tired you were when you arrived, but you could be surprised that when reliably measured it is only six miles. Especially when one has no training in an area one's "gut" will almost always lead to wrong answers. You should be trying to understand how various groups got their numbers.

A while ago Made a thread stating I changed my belief but that wasn’t true. It was a joke to see peoples responses.

 

[YoursTrue]

So the current ToE is not proven true.
So what, because I actually read your link and it didn't say evolution was wrong. It just used another explanation as to the ToE.

I could say so what to a lot of things, but at any rate I no longer see the ToE as a scientifically true basis. That means that (1) I don't see that life somehow chemically emerged from non-living matter explained by abiogenesis, and (2) that I no longer agree that the various forms of life such as plants, fish, birds, humans come from one or two combined cells multiiplying by natural selection. I do agree and understand that some populations of humans have different skin colors, some sheep and other forms of life can be interbred to have different colored wool. Much beyond that I no longer go. I realize there are scientists who say differently, but that is where their minds lead them right now. I no longer agree although I can basically understand it. Does not mean I believe it as presented by evolutionists any more.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I’ve strongly believed it for 15 yrs and I will die believing it. No skin off my a**

For you it really does not matter how old the Earth is. For others, especially those in certain fields of science that you do rely on it does matter a bit. Oil and Flat Earth or Young Earth beliefs simply do not go together. There is no "science" from those beliefs that allow us to find oil reliably. To find oil one must not only be able to spot the proper underground sedimentary traps, one also has to know that one is drilling in strata of appropriate ages.

A while ago Made a thread stating I changed my belief but that wasn’t true. It was a joke to see peoples responses.

Not a very good joke. That would only make you look a bit foolish. And of course, if you rely on what others that do have to know during your life more than a bit hypocritical.

 

[cladking]

Did you not notice that I used a qualifier in that statement?

You said if A then B.

I suppose you can construct a semantically null sentence when you have proof there is no God and Evolution is exactly right.

But what is the point?

I'm done with your semantical games for now so I seriously doubt I'll respond to anything you try to add.