-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Just Accidental?
- Thread starter Deeje
- Start date
- Status
Jose Fly
Fisker of men
Only one way to find out. You either do the math or you don't...it's up to you.
Right, because you can't provide any sort of meaningful, useful definition of "life form". Again, you're the one appealing to math here, so it falls on you to actually do some math. You either do it or you don't.
I am aware I look stupid to people, but, wow!
This is evidence of a life form.
This is evidence of a life form.
How many times did one change to eventually become another one? I say, too many.
You seem to be saying, just the right number of times.
Both of us do not know the answer. Nobody knows the answer.
This is evidence of a life form.
How many times did one change to eventually become another one? I say, too many.
You seem to be saying, just the right number of times.
Both of us do not know the answer. Nobody knows the answer.
I am saying that amoebas evolving into dinosaurs in some kind of slow accidental process, is a fairy story all by itself.....you say there is no way this could happen with divine intervention because you cannot define the power of the Creator in human terms. He isn't human. There is no way to quantify a being powerful enough to create the universe. Are there no powers yet for science to discover?
I cannot comprehend how anyone could contemplate the magnitude of life on this planet without divine intervention!
The proof of the Creator's power is right in front of your collective noses, yet you say you can't see him or measure him. Blind Freddy can see what is "created" as opposed to what happens by "accident". How many "accidents" are we talking about?.....and what is the statistical possibility of it ever taking place by chance?
The human body is well designed to deal with all outside invaders, but humans lost their perfection due to disobedience in the beginning. The Creator has allowed humanity ample time to experience the folly of trying to rule themselves without him.
Man (in his wisdom) has also created a toxic environment where these detrimental genetic mutations are more likely to happen. (Mostly thanks to some branches of science)
All life has its place when the balance is right....that balance was set off kilter a long time ago and the circumstances have not produced anything good ever since. At this point in history, when humans have supposedly advanced so far, is there any excuse for the state of this world?
The Bible at least gives us a hope for the future where the Creator puts everything back into balance. He has the power and the will to do what he promises.
What hope does evolution give anyone?
Jose Fly
Fisker of men
Yes that is indeed your opinion. But as has become abundantly clear, that opinion is one of extreme, deliberate ignorance that is entirely motivated by absolute allegiance to a religious doctrine.
I've not said anything like that at all.
Do you understand why supernatural causation cannot be a part of science? Probably not, so I'll go on and explain.....see, it's not because of some anti-God agenda, or the biggest conspiracy in the history of all mankind. No, it's because God, by definition, can do absolutely anything imaginable. God could have created everything 30 seconds ago, and just supernaturally made it seem otherwise. God could have created every single organism that's ever existed in some completely unknown way, but supernaturally made it look like they came about differently. Every experiment we run could just be God messing with us and making things seem different than they really are. Under "God did it", any of that could be true and we would have absolutely no way of knowing, which renders any sort of scientific endeavor completely pointless.
Understand?
Example?
Again we see just how ignorant of this subject you are. I'm sure others have explained this to you before (and obviously to no avail), but evolution does not occur "by chance". That whole natural selection thing is decidedly non-random.
So your framework is basically "Everything good and pretty is evidence of God's handiwork, and everything nasty and ugly is evidence the we live in a fallen universe". That about right?
The rest of your post is more of the same, i.e., you stating your religious beliefs.
It is true that my beliefs govern my opinion about intelligent creation, but then so does my God-given intelligence and sense of logic. What would be the point of intelligence if there is nothing in our mental or physical capacity to appreciate or to analyze any of it? What is the point of our five senses if there is no way to process them? If you think that the human brain is the product of mindless evolution, then I can suggest that I have a computer tree in my backyard and the fruit is almost ripe....would you like one?
What creatures, other than man, study creation? Invent things from their own imagination? What creatures, other than man, have the capacity to use all their senses to delve into how things in the natural world function? How many other intelligent creatures have evolved as we have? Why only us?
Why are we the only creatures who feel the need to worship? There are no other 'animals' like us....why? How does evolution explain spirituality? Human interest in art? Literature? Theatre? Architecture? Look at the elaborate structures built exclusively for worship....
Why doesn't any other species do this?
Do we see cave paintings done by any other species? Do we see them using written language? Why is human communication so different?
Science dismisses the existence of a Creator because he doesn't fit inside the box they created. Is that a valid reason to dismiss him?
Of course I understand.....I always have....but what makes you think that the Creator would do that? He has no need to "mess" with humans any more than he "messes" with any other creature on this earth. He has given us intelligence that surpasses any other earthbound creature, and also given us a curiosity about how things function. We alone have a need to gain knowledge incessantly. This makes us like our Creator....infinitely creative in our thinking and in our inventiveness and ingenuity. Does he test us?.....yes he does, but then we test one another all the time. Whenever we educate ourselves for a specific role, we are tested as to fitness first. God is no different.
We have the faculty of imagination and an understanding of time in its three manifestations. What other creature understands past, present and future and can consciously plan future actions based on past and present knowledge? No other creature can process the information gained through the senses like we can. No creature can create like we do.
What reason can evolutionary science give for our uniqueness?
You emulate the Creator every time you take something from nature and try to copy it. The original is so clever in its construction, that its design can be used to benefit man in many ways. Imagine a rope so strong that it could capture a jumbo jet in mid flight? That is the equivalent strength of a spider's web. Jet propulsion....Velcro....aerodynamics....sonar.....and a host of other ideas gleaned from nature....all contribute to human life in many ways. The copies needed intelligent minds to produce them....but to you the original designs are undirected by any intelligence. That to me is completely illogical.
Who Designed It First? — Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY
Might I suggest an equal ignorance on your part about what creation is in reality.....beautifully designed.....?
'Natural selection' might explain adaptation because that 'program' is 'installed' in all living things......but nothing science has by way of solid conclusive evidence supports macro-evolution....except the "interpretation" of their "evidence". We interpret that same evidence to see positive proof of an Intelligent Designer. The truth is, we have as much actual "proof" for our position as you do. We suggest a different scenario is all. We can prop up our beliefs with 'suggestions' too.
Depending on a person's natural spiritual condition, they either have no belief in an Intelligent Creator at all.....compromise by accepting something they invented to explain how you can combine creation and evolution (theistic evolution)....or various explanations of creationism, which don't seem to take real science into consideration. Some people chuck it all in the "too hard" basket and are content not to even think about it.
Our position is none of the above. We accept an old earth and ancient fossils, but we don't believe that all this life on planet earth is "just accidental". We believe that separate acts of creation brought all "kinds" of living things into existence. We don't believe that one kind of creature can morph into a completely different kind, no matter how much time you throw at it. Insects are insects, marine creatures are created to live in the ocean and land animals are designed to live on land. Amphibians are designed to enjoy life on both land and water and those that fly were designed to do so. It is no accident that the environments were ready and waiting when living things were introduced into their habitats.
You have your explanation, and we have ours. People will choose their own position, but it's important that they understand that evolution is not based on solid scientific evidence, but on science's ideas about what they think might have taken place. It's more educated guessing than fact. You can couch this in scientific jargon, but you can't really deny that this is true.
Are you going to tell me that life in this world is what most people imagine it should be? What gives humans a collective expectation that life should be a whole lot different to what they experience?
Neither poverty nor riches brings people happiness. Materialism appears to be the religion of the western world, but does it ever satisfy the spiritual need in us? Humankind are the only ones who have this need, demonstrated in every culture. Science seems to enjoy dismantling this spirituality as if it's an affront to their educational standing in the world of academia.
Since science and the originator of science cannot be separated in our way of thinking, the Creator remains for us, the logical answer to all questions. There are no unanswered mysteries.
You don't like talking about the downside of science, do you?
Last edited:
SkepticThinker
Veteran Member
Evolution isn't about hopes and dreams. It's simply the explanation that's given to observed phenomena. Hopes and dreams are up to you.I am saying that amoebas evolving into dinosaurs in some kind of slow accidental process, is a fairy story all by itself.....you say there is no way this could happen with divine intervention because you cannot define the power of the Creator in human terms. He isn't human. There is no way to quantify a being powerful enough to create the universe. Are there no powers yet for science to discover?
I cannot comprehend how anyone could contemplate the magnitude of life on this planet without divine intervention!
The proof of the Creator's power is right in front of your collective noses, yet you say you can't see him or measure him. Blind Freddy can see what is "created" as opposed to what happens by "accident". How many "accidents" are we talking about?.....and what is the statistical possibility of it ever taking place by chance?
The human body is well designed to deal with all outside invaders, but humans lost their perfection due to disobedience in the beginning. The Creator has allowed humanity ample time to experience the folly of trying to rule themselves without him.
Man (in his wisdom) has also created a toxic environment where these detrimental genetic mutations are more likely to happen. (Mostly thanks to some branches of science)
All life has its place when the balance is right....that balance was set off kilter a long time ago and the circumstances have not produced anything good ever since. At this point in history, when humans have supposedly advanced so far, is there any excuse for the state of this world?
The Bible at least gives us a hope for the future where the Creator puts everything back into balance. He has the power and the will to do what he promises.
What hope does evolution give anyone?Man has the power to destroy but no power to fix what he has broken.
Are you also upset that germ theory and gravitational theory don't provide hopes and dreams?
Last edited:
Jose Fly
Fisker of men
What's the point of having intelligence if you put it in the box of your religion, and never, ever, ever let that intelligence go outside of it?
Just below I explain to you why God cannot be incorporated into science, and you say you understand. Try and remember that.
Good. Try and retain this understanding.
Doesn't matter. The fact remains, by definition God can do absolutely anything imaginable, which makes God completely untestable.
It almost seems like you're advocating that science become a religious exercise, where scientists spend their time trying to figure out why God does things.
You can suggest it all you like, but without any actual examples it's just empty rhetoric.
I guess it's progress to see you acknowledge that scientists do indeed have evidence for evolution. That you disagree with their interpretation of it is hardly surprising, given that--as you note above--your views on the subject are "governed" by your religion....a religion that dictates denial of evolution.
Good for you. Flat-earth geocentrists say the exact same things.
And some people are emotionally strong and brave enough to follow the evidence wherever it leads, regardless of any theological or social consequences.
Again, hardly surprising to see you say all that given that your views on the subject are governed by your religion, which dictates denial of evolution.
None of that is relevant to the point you were allegedly responding to.
The fact remains, you've created this emotionally convenient framework where God gets credit for everything pretty and nice, and everything ugly and nasty is chalked up to a fallen universe.
But the thing is, it avoids one fundamental question......by what mechanism did all those ugly and nasty things become ugly and nasty? You've been consistent in arguing that evolution just flat out doesn't happen, so that leads to the obvious question......how did all those nasty and ugly things get to be so ugly and nasty? Let's take the parasite that causes malaria. At some point in its history it had to have acquired the abilities and traits necessary to infect and cause malaria. According to you, evolution couldn't have produced them and it would seem that your position is that only God can create such complex things, right?
So did God deliberately create and/or modify the parasite so that it could cause malaria in humans? If not, how did the parasite get those abilities?
SkepticThinker
Veteran Member
How does science (which is a tool for discovery) dismantle this spirituality you think exists?It is true that my beliefs govern my opinion about intelligent creation, but then so does my God-given intelligence and sense of logic. What would be the point of intelligence if there is nothing in our mental or physical capacity to appreciate or to analyze any of it? What is the point of our five senses if there is no way to process them? If you think that the human brain is the product of mindless evolution, then I can suggest that I have a computer tree in my backyard and the fruit is almost ripe....would you like one?
What creatures, other than man, study creation? Invent things from their own imagination? What creatures, other than man, have the capacity to use all their senses to delve into how things in the natural world function? How many other intelligent creatures have evolved as we have? Why only us?
Why are we the only creatures who feel the need to worship? There are no other 'animals' like us....why? How does evolution explain spirituality? Human interest in art? Literature? Theatre? Architecture? Look at the elaborate structures built exclusively for worship....
Why doesn't any other species do this?
Do we see cave paintings done by any other species? Do we see them using written language? Why is human communication so different?
Science dismisses the existence of a Creator because he doesn't fit inside the box they created. Is that a valid reason to dismiss him?
Of course I understand.....I always have....but what makes you think that the Creator would do that? He has no need to "mess" with humans any more than he "messes" with any other creature on this earth. He has given us intelligence that surpasses any other earthbound creature, and also given us a curiosity about how things function. We alone have a need to gain knowledge incessantly. This makes us like our Creator....infinitely creative in our thinking and in our inventiveness and ingenuity. Does he test us?.....yes he does, but then we test one another all the time. Whenever we educate ourselves for a specific role, we are tested as to fitness first. God is no different.
We have the faculty of imagination and an understanding of time in its three manifestations. What other creature understands past, present and future and can consciously plan future actions based on past and present knowledge? No other creature can process the information gained through the senses like we can. No creature can create like we do.
What reason can evolutionary science give for our uniqueness?
You emulate the Creator every time you take something from nature and try to copy it. The original is so clever in its construction, that its design can be used to benefit man in many ways. Imagine a rope so strong that it could capture a jumbo jet in mid flight? That is the equivalent strength of a spider's web. Jet propulsion....Velcro....aerodynamics....sonar.....and a host of other ideas gleaned from nature....all contribute to human life in many ways. The copies needed intelligent minds to produce them....but to you the original designs are undirected by any intelligence. That to me is completely illogical.
Who Designed It First? — Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY
Might I suggest an equal ignorance on your part about what creation is in reality.....beautifully designed.....?
'Natural selection' might explain adaptation because that 'program' is 'installed' in all living things......but nothing science has by way of solid conclusive evidence supports macro-evolution....except the "interpretation" of their "evidence". We interpret that same evidence to see positive proof of an Intelligent Designer. The truth is, we have as much actual "proof" for our position as you do. We suggest a different scenario is all. We can prop up our beliefs with 'suggestions' too.
Depending on a person's natural spiritual condition, they either have no belief in an Intelligent Creator at all.....compromise by accepting something they invented to explain how you can combine creation and evolution (theistic evolution)....or various explanations of creationism, which don't seem to take real science into consideration. Some people chuck it all in the "too hard" basket and are content not to even think about it.
Our position is none of the above. We accept an old earth and ancient fossils, but we don't believe that all this life on planet earth is "just accidental". We believe that separate acts of creation brought all "kinds" of living things into existence. We don't believe that one kind of creature can morph into a completely different kind, no matter how much time you throw at it. Insects are insects, marine creatures are created to live in the ocean and land animals are designed to live on land. Amphibians are designed to enjoy life on both land and water and those that fly were designed to do so. It is no accident that the environments were ready and waiting when living things were introduced into their habitats.
You have your explanation, and we have ours. People will choose their own position, but it's important that they understand that evolution is not based on solid scientific evidence, but on science's ideas about what they think might have taken place. It's more educated guessing than fact. You can couch this in scientific jargon, but you can't really deny that this is true.
Are you going to tell me that life in this world is what most people imagine it should be? What gives humans a collective expectation that life should be a whole lot different to what they experience?
Neither poverty nor riches brings people happiness. Materialism appears to be the religion of the western world, but does it ever satisfy the spiritual need in us? Humankind are the only ones who have this need, demonstrated in every culture. Science seems to enjoy dismantling this spirituality as if it's an affront to their educational standing in the world of academia.
Since science and the originator of science cannot be separated in our way of thinking, the Creator remains for us, the logical answer to all questions. There are no unanswered mysteries.
You don't like talking about the downside of science, do you?
gnostic
The Lost One
That because evolution is a study of one specific field in biology. It has nothing to do with spirituality.
Spirituality has no place in biology, even in non-evolution specific biology, like simply anatomy. Spirituality has no more place in evolution than it has in quantum physics, in general relativity, in electricity and electronics, in dentistry or chiropractic, or in bricklaying or in plumbing, in farming, and the list just goes on.
When any of those I have listed above, do they require spirituality to learn them?
And you have post some images of architectural achievements of temples and cathedrals.
Yes, they were built for worship of some gods, but does any of those religions actually teach them to know how to "design" and "build" those buildings?
No, religions, didn't teach them on how to build.
Those buildings were constructed by men's intelligence, ingenuity and hardwork, and not because the gods or the scriptures provided blueprints or manual instructions on how to build them.
A person can own 20-storey building, and you can have people work in the offices or sell their products in the shops. But neither the owners or employees that worked in that building, would require the know-how in design and construction of that building. The 20-floor building would be designed by the architects and engineers and built by construction workers.
And it would be same with those religious buildings, in the images you have posted up. You don't and wouldn't expect the priesthood or the ordinary worshippers to build those temples and cathedrals...not unless some of those builders are among the worshippers.
In modern buildings, it is the jobs of architects to create and design the buildings, the jobs of structural engineers to make sure the buildings meet building and safety requirements, and the jobs construction workers to physically build the buildings.
Like I have said,is one thing to worship in those religious buildings, but it is whole different thing to actually build them, and no gods, prophets, priests or scriptures can tell or instruct people on how to build them.
For centuries, popes have commissioned people (architects and builders) to construct many buildings in the Vatican, but not once did any pope or cardinal or priest did the digging and compacting the earth for suitable foundation, or did the shaping, moving or laying out bricks or stones for walls, or construct the doors and windows.
Did the pope ever hold paintbrush and paint the scene depicting religious themes? Or hold chisels and carve some sculptures from marable?
You also talk of theatres. Did the builders built the theatres? Or were the playwrights and actors the ones who constructed the theatres?
We can clearly see that germs spread disease. We can see that gravity works by what we observe....how is evolution even in the same ballpark?
So why did we evolve these hopes and dreams ST? Why do we have collective expectations about our environment?...our appearance?....the conduct of others?.....a strong sense of justice?....the need for worship? Evolution isn't about anything "human" except the physical.
Humans are not just physical beings.....we are so much more than that. We are like no other being on this planet.....How does evolution explain those things?....oh, I forgot...that is for another branch of science to deal with.
It makes God redundant by attributing creation to the blind forces of evolution. You didn't notice that?
I could say exactly the same thing about you. Science is your religion....great men of science are your prophets, predicting things from the dim dark past to match a new theory that popped up relatively recently. Your holy writings are written in a language that requires translation....not much different to us really.
You throw God away because he is untestable....??? That's a bit like an ant standing on a railway track, denying the approaching locomotive because his ant brain can't test for it with his present ability.
Do you see the ant?.......Neither does the driver.....the train will have to squash him to prove it exists, but it doesn't derail the train or cause it any problems....not even a slight bump.
The ant proved that the locomotive was real....but it was bit late then, doncha think?
You have been provided with many examples....you just can't see past your own mindset. You don't seem to realize how blind you have all become. Yet you have no "actual examples" except in diagrams, which are just illustrated suggestions.....so yours is just empty rhetoric too IMO.
Hmmmm....delusions now? I have never said science has proof for macro-evolution. They have proof for adaptation, which is not the same thing, though scientists like to pretend it is.
And some people will believe evidence that isn't even real.....how real can the evidence be when no one was around to give eye witness testimony about any of it....except, of course, the one who created it....and he's telling a vastly different story to you scientists.
Actually, its the lack of real evidence that's the problem.
"Medical Definition of denial. : a psychological defense mechanism in which confrontation with a personal problem or with reality is avoided by denying the existence of the problem or reality."
It isn't denial because there is no reality to deny. How can you deny something that wasn't real to begin with?
Your 'hypothesis' never really was proven by any real evidence....it was all supposition. I think you guys do denial so much better than we do.
All the "nasty and ugly" things you mention were probably achieved through adaptation. The viruses and the parasites always had the ability to adapt automatically to any environmental change, so as to ensure the survival of the species. The viruses never morphed into anything else and neither did the parasites. The world became a wonderful breeding ground in these later centuries, thanks to many changing environments. The mechanism is adaptation......that is not evolution in the same sense as science uses it.
The human immune system is designed to keep out all invaders. The human body also requires the correct diet with the right amount of nutrients.....but who among mankind can avoid the contributions of science when pollution has sullied the air, the soil and the water? Mineral deficient soils, laced with chemical fertilizers and pesticides, grow food that is not fit for human consumption. Who on earth has an optimum diet today? Who can say that the human immune system is doing what it was designed to do? How can it?
Creation will go back to the way things were meant to be......this is the Creator's promise.....what can science promise?
I see only extinction. Now that is something to look forward to....right?
gnostic
The Lost One
You do provide some absurd and unrealistic example to prove your point.You throw God away because he is untestable....??? That's a bit like an ant standing on a railway track, denying the approaching locomotive because his ant brain can't test for it with his present ability.
Do you see the ant?.......Neither does the driver.....the train will have to squash him to prove it exists, but it doesn't derail the train or cause it any problems....not even a slight bump.
The ant proved that the locomotive was real....but it was bit late then, doncha think?
The driver is sure to see ants before...in his life...so he would know what they look like, so it is hardly unlikely for him to prove ants' existence. And it is even more highly unlikely that he could see the ants to avoid killing ants that would derail the train.
But what is truly nonsense that ants would think like we do, to prove the existence of the train or its driver. I don't think ants are concern about our existence.
This example is something like in children's storybooks, or in tv or movies animation, in which no one would waste their time debating over your outlandish scenario.
gnostic
The Lost One
Your comparison of evidences being requirement for science to your example of ants-train driver scenario is inaccurate allegory and nothing but a joke.Oh dear....
That you can't use a real life example of science, only demonstrate you flippant attitude to honesty.
If JW is anything like you, then it is no wonder that JW have awful reputation.
Jose Fly
Fisker of men
Except for one extremely important difference. In science the primary rule is you follow the evidence wherever it leads. Your religion operates opposite of that, where the rule is that all evidence must conform to your pre-held beliefs.
I have no idea what you mean by "throw God away". The fact is, since God is completely untestable, "God did that" cannot be part of science. It's no different than a Wiccan who insists that things occur by magic.
I have? Where has anyone provided an example of something that was supernaturally designed/created, and explained how they determined it to be so? All I've seen from you so far are pictures of pretty things followed by mere assertion that they are designed/created.
You're either being dishonest again or you have forgotten our earlier exchange where you admitted that evolutionary biology consists of more than just diagrams. So which is it.....dishonesty or forgetfulness?
????????? That's not what I said at all. I noted that when you complained about scientists' "interpretation of the evidence", it was progress because at least you admit that there's evidence to be interpreted (contrary to what you just said above about us only having diagrams).
They have proof for adaptation, which is not the same thing, though scientists like to pretend it is.Adaptation never turns one kind of creature into another. You have no actual proof that anything beyond adaptation within a kind has ever happened.
Now you're just repeating the same phrases over and over and over. Earlier when you did this I asked you to explain the difference between a population adapting and one evolving, and you left the discussion. And you've been asked numerous times what a "kind" is and you've yet to answer. But here you are, acting like none of that happened and just mindlessly repeating the same things all over again.
Then how do we convict people of crimes for which there were no witnesses?
But earlier you were complaining about scientists' interpretations of the evidence. Now you're back to saying there's no evidence to begin with. Make up your mind.
By what mechanisms? Where did the genetic sequences that conferred the ability to infect come from? How did those sequences spread through the population?
So now we're back to the question you dodged earlier.....what's the difference between a population adapting and one evolving?
The human immune system is designed to keep out all invaders. The human body also requires the correct diet with the right amount of nutrients.....but who among mankind can avoid the contributions of science when pollution has sullied the air, the soil and the water? Mineral deficient soils, laced with chemical fertilizers and pesticides, grow food that is not fit for human consumption. Who on earth has an optimum diet today? Who can say that the human immune system is doing what it was designed to do? How can it?
Creation will go back to the way things were meant to be......this is the Creator's promise.....what can science promise?
I see only extinction. Now that is something to look forward to....right?
Then I strongly suggest you disavow yourself of all things connected to science.
SkepticThinker
Veteran Member
Evolution is demonstrable, just like germ theory and gravity.
I don't have the same hopes and dreams as you do. I would imagine that most of us share many of the same goals because we're all human beings living on the same planet together which requires some level of harmony and cooperation.So why did we evolve these hopes and dreams ST? Why do we have collective expectations about our environment?...our appearance?....the conduct of others?.....a strong sense of justice?....the need for worship? Evolution isn't about anything "human" except the physical.
Humans are not just physical beings.....we are so much more than that. We are like no other being on this planet.....How does evolution explain those things?....oh, I forgot...that is for another branch of science to deal with.....not our problem.
Humans are indeed physical beings. There are many other animals that are not like other animals on the planet. So what?
SkepticThinker
Veteran Member
The millions of people who believe in god(s) and accept the theory of evolution don't agree with you that evolution makes god redundant.It makes God redundant by attributing creation to the blind forces of evolution. You didn't notice that?
- Status