Just Accidental?

[ImmortalFlame]

What does "naturally" mean to you? Something that happens for no intelligent reason? Reason requires a mind, doesn't it? There always seems to be a very good reason for what "nature" produces. Its systems are well designed and interactive, yet there is no designer in your scenario. That makes no sense to me.

You see "reason" and "design" for the same reason people see a face on the surface of the moon. Humans are pattern-seeking animals. We see something serve a function, and we assume this function is some how intelligently reasoned into the design. But function and intent are two different things. It may not be very intuitive, but when you think about things in terms of function, rather than intent, you realize how fallacious this kind of reasoning is.

I couldn't agree more! We are the only creatures designed to appreciate beauty and be moved to praise the one who produced it. Who walks into an art gallery and assumes that the artwork was a product of natural selection?......who can observe the talent of the craftsman and deny the existence of the artist?

Only an idiot. (complete or otherwise)

Paintings aren't naturally reproducing organisms. Frogs are.

When was the last time you saw a cow standing in a field appreciating the beauty of a sunset? Or a bird or butterfly consulting his GPS in order to know where to migrate to?

Never. But what does that mean? I've also never seen a human fly with its wings.

How many birds refer to a manual in order to construct a specific type of nest according to their species? It seems that you evolutionists take a lot for granted with very little real evidence required to believe your fantasy.
I prefer my fantasy over yours. At least its logical. (It doesn't have to be scientific, because the Creator is not bound by human rules concerning what little it knows about creation.)

Nothing you've said here is an argument. You seem to just be saying "Things happen - therefore, evolution is a fantasy". Have you never even TRIED searching for actual explanations?

 

[Deeje]

But if it was a falsehood, then obviously it wasn't THAT which made you a better person.

Then I am a better person than you, because I don't need a Creator, and I can accept that we are animals, and yet I am still more than capable of all of your virtues.

You may well be a better person than me.....I have no idea....but God does....it was my God who taught me what it means to be created. That engenders appreciation for life on a whole other level to evolutionists. It also engenders reverence for the Creator as well as loyalty and faith....which do not manifest themselves much at all in the world today.

You've demonstrated no understanding of it to date.

I know enough to identify suggestion masquerading as fact when I see it. You guys apparently think that they mean the same thing. That "might have" or "could have" mean the same as "must have". I suppose that explains the need to redefine the meaning of the word "theory"?

Hard to be mad at something that you don't believe exists. Why is it that you struggle so much with the concept of people not believing what you believe?

I don't struggle at all......I just see human nature for what it is.....and what it has always been.....at odds with its Creator from the get go, because humans want to do their own thing, not wanting to answer to anyone.

We are by nature spiritual beings as our history testifies. I see where this attitude of self importance has taken us down through the ages and where we stand at present with megalomaniacs seemingly running the show. Do you see a Pyrrhic victory looming? Can science predict what will happen? The Bible does, just as it has predicted every other feature of the "sign" Jesus gave to tell us that we are in the "last days" of this present system. (Matthew 24:3-14; 2 Timothy 3:1-5) I believe what I see.

Then stop insinuating that hey haven't considered the bleeding obvious. I guarantee that I have thought longer and harder about my beliefs and the consequences of them than you have.

Perhaps that is because your position makes it apparent to you just how much you have to lose. Do you see nothing more than this life? Is it enough for you to just exist, maybe reproduce, and then die? That isn't enough for me....I am programmed to expect so much more than humans can offer. This world is not the one I was supposed to live in. Humans have a collective desire to live in paradise (whatever they envision that to be) so I do not think it is accidental that we are programmed to expect good health, a happy family life and to go on living indefinitely. That was what God offered initially and because some rebels disobeyed, we lost it.
The Creator made the way to get it all back. That is my expectation. This life is not all there is.....or its not really worth living at all. Fleeting moments of happiness amid the turmoil just don't cut it for me. I identify with what the Creator is offering......you may not.

Or not, which is the more likely conclusion.

We are all able to exercise our free will in whatever way our heart chooses. But along with the decision, there is always an outcome. If you know the outcome before you make the choice....who do you blame when it all goes belly up?

 

[Deeje]

When rocks are blown into a hole by the wind such that only rocks of a certain size fall town to the bottom of the hole and other rocks get stuck, is that the wind or hole "intelligently determining" which rocks should be at the bottom of the hole? No. It's the same for evolution. The organisms that have mutations that are beneficial to reproduction and survivability will be more likely to pass on those genes to their children, thus resulting in it eventually influencing the overall allele frequency of a population. If you wish to believe an intelligence is behind this, go ahead, but you cannot argue that it is necessarily required without fundamentally misunderstanding how natural selection actually works.

"Natural selection" is science's substitute for "God did it". "Selection" requires what? A choice.....no? How does a creature mutate genetically and then 'select' which traits it will pass on? Mutations are almost always detrimental to any species, so the number of beneficial mutations it would take to make amoebas into dinosaurs....or dinosaurs into chickens is more a product of human imagination than actual science. You can use the lingo to make is sound more "scientific", but at the end of the day you are trying to promote as big a fantasy as you believe we have.

The only kind of 'evolution' you can prove is adaptation, which only happens within a species. Never has it been observed that any creature can morph outside of its taxonomic identity. That idea is pure fiction.

Actually, that is false. The Christian system of forgiveness and salvation allows a person to be an incredibly rotten person throughout their entire life and still escape any kind of punishment by being saved at the end of it. Your doctrine specifically promotes the notion that punishment isn't always forthcoming because anyone can be saved through grace. It is a fundamentally unjust system of faith.

Oh, but you are wrong! No one gets away with anything when Christ comes as judge. (Matthew 7:21-23)

Hebrews 4:12-13
"For the word of God is alive and exerts power and is sharper than any two-edged sword and pierces even to the dividing of soul and spirit, and of joints from the marrow, and is able to discern thoughts and intentions of the heart. 13 And there is not a creation that is hidden from his sight, but all things are naked and openly exposed to the eyes of the one to whom we must give an account."

No one will escape God's judgment. You have my beliefs mixed up with Christendom's teachings. My doctrine is from the Bible, which states that anyone can be saved as long as they genuinely repent. This means that a kid raised in the ghetto by drug addicted parents, and who was influenced by the gangs that roamed the street looking for trouble, can make mistakes and come to his senses. He can see the error of his ways and turn his life around, even if he is in prison because of his crimes. If there was no forgiveness, then why did Jesus bother to come at all? He came to give hope to the hopeless and life to the lifeless. How do you see that as a negative?

Those who pretend to be what they are not have fooled no one....least of all God.

 

[Deeje]

You see "reason" and "design" for the same reason people see a face on the surface of the moon. Humans are pattern-seeking animals. We see something serve a function, and we assume this function is some how intelligently reasoned into the design. But function and intent are two different things. It may not be very intuitive, but when you think about things in terms of function, rather than intent, you realize how fallacious this kind of reasoning is.

We are designed to create, like our Maker. To see patterning is programmed into our DNA. We are created to appreciate design and the symmetry of patterns. I am an artist so I can vouch for the fact that I probably see patterns where others may not. I am grateful for the ability.

Paintings aren't naturally reproducing organisms. Frogs are.

The frog pics I posted (along with all the other pics on this thread) are examples of beautifully designed creatures. If you have ever done color theory, you would appreciate the existence and blending of color more fully. There are only three primary colors.....red, blue and yellow. Black and white are not technically colors.
Every color you can think of is a blend of the three.....the primaries feature quite strongly, but many plants and insects display an awesome blending of color.....to think that these colors could just naturally occur with no intelligent direction is absurd. Artists know exactly what colors to blend to create any shade or color. They can't happen by chance.

Never. But what does that mean? I've also never seen a human fly with its wings.

What do you mean? Humans fly all the time.....it requires wings on an aircraft that somebody designed and made.

Have you never even TRIED searching for actual explanations?

I have all the explanations I require. They make perfect sense to me....they may not to you.
I reject the explanations of 'scientists' who just want to make guesses about what they cannot possibly test.

 

[Olinda]

Really? Nature is just "naturally programmed" to select the best for itself....a bit like us going into a store and selecting the things we want in clothing and food and footwear.....but its a conscious choice based by an intelligent mind with an outcome envisaged.

Yes. Really. The 'programming' is that the more poorly adapted variants breed less. Also analogy isn't an argument, but an aid to understanding. You need evidence, logic or both.

That is true.....the wrong kind of worship can set a person up for bad parenting. Ancient peoples sacrificed their children to their gods, so I agree with you. But the right kind of worship can be very advantageous, imparting good principles and having a Higher Authority to account to at the end of the day, means that no injustice goes unpunished.

I would need a clearer understanding of the difference between right and wrong worship. Can you demonstrate that individuals who do not accept a "Higher Authority" are less principled?

You are absolutely entitled to think so. Makes no difference to me.

You repeat yourself. And I respect your beliefs also. My issue is with false quotes, assertions that you 'see more clearly' etc.

I believe all will be revealed soon enough, and then we will all see whose argument is flimsy.

OK, fine. Meantime, if your argument is not that flimsy. how about some evidence to back it up?

If we are wrong, what have we lost? An unfulfilled expectation.......if you are wrong, what have you got to lose?

Food for thought.

Do you really think this "Higher Power" will forbid us to follow where the evidence leads, and reward you for closing your minds to it?

 

[Olinda]

If you have ever done color theory.........

Colour THEORY?? It's just a theory. Shouldn't be taught in schools!

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

If we are wrong, what have we lost?

Your only shot at an authentic existence, Blaise, which entails autonomy and self-actualization. You've conceded that option for self-loathing, and chosen voluntary subjugation to the will of a self-serving priesthood and the chance to worship the air instead. It's a state of perpetual immaturity - permanent childhood.

You still believe that you have somebody watching over you, judging you, and punishing you when you slip or experiment, and that this is how it should be. You never properly mature under those circumstances. Every good parent understands that his or her child needs a little space (autonomy) and privacy. Those watched over even into their late teens as they imagine this god does don't do well. Just look at the Duggar kid, whose parents did that, and who went wild the first chance he got.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

wait till you meet him......

The last refuge of the frustrated apologist.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

You may well be a better person than me.....I have no idea....but God does....it was my God who taught me what it means to be created. That engenders appreciation for life on a whole other level to evolutionists.

False. I appreciate life as a result of the natural, emergent properties of the Universe, which allows me to appreciate it as it is rather than how I wish it to be. I also would not let my child die for want of a blood transfusion.

It also engenders reverence for the Creator as well as loyalty and faith....which do not manifest themselves much at all in the world today.

You are not qualified to judge the world as the whole.

I know enough to identify suggestion masquerading as fact when I see it. You guys apparently think that they mean the same thing. That "might have" or "could have" mean the same as "must have". I suppose that explains the need to redefine the meaning of the word "theory"?

It's called honesty. When something is not known for certain, it is honest to talk about it in those terms. I would gladly trust someone who dealt with me honestly than with someone who only deals in claims of absolute certainty - it makes them more reliable, not less.

I don't struggle at all......

Then why are you here?

I just see human nature for what it is.....

No you don't.

and what it has always been.....at odds with its Creator from the get go, because humans want to do their own thing, not wanting to answer to anyone.

Sure. That's why we constructed systems of governments, laws and human rights. Because we don't believe in responsibility or answering to others.

We are by nature spiritual beings as our history testifies.

We are also beings who like killing as our history testifies, but I'm up for getting rid of both.

I see where this attitude of self importance has taken us down through the ages and where we stand at present with megalomaniacs seemingly running the show.

You mean, the religious megalomaniacs?

Do you see a Pyrrhic victory looming? Can science predict what will happen? The Bible does, just as it has predicted every other feature of the "sign" Jesus gave to tell us that we are in the "last days" of this present system. (Matthew 24:3-14; 2 Timothy 3:1-5) I believe what I see.

The Qur'an also makes claims about the future. Yet you aren't a Muslim.

Perhaps that is because your position makes it apparent to you just how much you have to lose.

All odds on nothing.

Do you see nothing more than this life?

Pretty-much.

Is it enough for you to just exist, maybe reproduce, and then die?

Yes. Although if that is your honest summation of all that is done in a lifetime, you lead a very sad existence indeed.

That isn't enough for me....I am programmed to expect so much more than humans can offer. This world is not the one I was supposed to live in. Humans have a collective desire to live in paradise (whatever they envision that to be) so I do not think it is accidental that we are programmed to expect good health, a happy family life and to go on living indefinitely. That was what God offered initially and because some rebels disobeyed, we lost it.
The Creator made the way to get it all back. That is my expectation. This life is not all there is.....or its not really worth living at all. Fleeting moments of happiness amid the turmoil just don't cut it for me. I identify with what the Creator is offering......you may not.

In other words, you have a selfish desire to live forever because you feel you're too important/scared to die, and that's the basis for your entire faith. Gotcha.

We are all able to exercise our free will in whatever way our heart chooses. But along with the decision, there is always an outcome. If you know the outcome before you make the choice....who do you blame when it all goes belly up?

Who do you blame when it turns out the Muslims were right and you were giving all your reverence to the wrong God?

 

[ImmortalFlame]

"Natural selection" is science's substitute for "God did it". "Selection" requires what? A choice.....no?

I've just explained how a selective process can occur without a choice, Deeje. That was the entire point of what I just wrote. Did you even read it?

How does a creature mutate genetically and then 'select' which traits it will pass on?

It doesn't. DNA replicates itself through reproduction.

Mutations are almost always detrimental to any species, so the number of beneficial mutations it would take to make amoebas into dinosaurs....or dinosaurs into chickens is more a product of human imagination than actual science.

That is just plain false, again. The vast majority of mutations are neutral - providing not detriment or benefit. Only a very small number are detrimental or beneficial, but that doesn't matter when you have organisms reproducing very rapidly over millions of years.

You can use the lingo to make is sound more "scientific", but at the end of the day you are trying to promote as big a fantasy as you believe we have.

You have already exposed your ignorance of the subject. You are not qualified to tell me what is and is not a fantasy.

The only kind of 'evolution' you can prove is adaptation, which only happens within a species. Never has it been observed that any creature can morph outside of its taxonomic identity. That idea is pure fiction.

Speciation has been directly observed multiple times. Also, nothing is SUPPOSED to evolve "outside its taxonomic identity". Populations don't evolve into something else entirely, they evolve into a variation of what it is. Hence how all life can share a common ancestor that was a eukaryote - because all living things ARE eukaryotes. No evolution "outside of taxa" are required.

Oh, but you are wrong! No one gets away with anything when Christ comes as judge. (Matthew 7:21-23)

Hebrews 4:12-13
"For the word of God is alive and exerts power and is sharper than any two-edged sword and pierces even to the dividing of soul and spirit, and of joints from the marrow, and is able to discern thoughts and intentions of the heart. 13 And there is not a creation that is hidden from his sight, but all things are naked and openly exposed to the eyes of the one to whom we must give an account."

No one will escape God's judgment. You have my beliefs mixed up with Christendom's teachings. My doctrine is from the Bible, which states that anyone can be saved as long as they genuinely repent. This means that a kid raised in the ghetto by drug addicted parents, and who was influenced by the gangs that roamed the street looking for trouble, can make mistakes and come to his senses. He can see the error of his ways and turn his life around, even if he is in prison because of his crimes. If there was no forgiveness, then why did Jesus bother to come at all? He came to give hope to the hopeless and life to the lifeless. How do you see that as a negative?

A hypothetical:

A man goes through life raping and murdering whomsoever he pleases. He inflicts countless horrors on women, men and children alike, but, due to multiple odd quirks of chance, he is continually able to get away with it. In fact, he gets away with it his whole life, murdering and torturing countless people. Then, at the ripe old age of 95, he is diagnosed with terminal cancer and put into hospice care. While at the hospice, he reads the Bible and comes to believe in it very strongly. He sincerely repents and then immediately dies.

What is their punishment?

 

[ImmortalFlame]

We are designed to create, like our Maker. To see patterning is programmed into our DNA. We are created to appreciate design and the symmetry of patterns. I am an artist so I can vouch for the fact that I probably see patterns where others may not. I am grateful for the ability.

Our ability to SEE it doesn't mean that it is actually THERE, just like the face on the surface of the moon I mentioned. It's like saying that, after rainfall, a hole in a ground must have been perfectly designed to hold the water it contains to form a puddle. Do you not see the flaw in that reasoning?

The frog pics I posted (along with all the other pics on this thread) are examples of beautifully designed creatures. If you have ever done color theory, you would appreciate the existence and blending of color more fully. There are only three primary colors.....red, blue and yellow. Black and white are not technically colors.
Every color you can think of is a blend of the three.....the primaries feature quite strongly, but many plants and insects display an awesome blending of color.....to think that these colors could just naturally occur with no intelligent direction is absurd. Artists know exactly what colors to blend to create any shade or color. They can't happen by chance.

So colours don't occur in nature?

What do you mean? Humans fly all the time.....it requires wings on an aircraft that somebody designed and made.

I said "with their own wings"

I have all the explanations I require.

So did the ancient Aztecs.

They make perfect sense to me....they may not to you.

They make no sense, period.

I reject the explanations of 'scientists' who just want to make guesses about what they cannot possibly test.

While you accept your guesses and just assume that they are true. Very wise.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

This life is not all there is.....or its not really worth living at all. Fleeting moments of happiness amid the turmoil just don't cut it for me.

You asked recently, "If we are wrong, what have we lost?"

Had you lived life as a humanist, you would have had a very different mindset. You would have learned to treasure life and to be grateful for having participated in it.

And you would have seen the good in your fellow man, many of whom are honorable and work to improve the human condition even if it's only in their own households and circle of friends.

Doesn't that describe you, too? I sense that you are a decent and responsible person who cares about others around her. If you are a wife and mother, you probably tried to do everything you could for your family just as I did and millions of others.

Do you visit the sick? Do you do volunteer work? Do you like hearing about when good things happen and prefer that to bad outcomes? Probably.

Are you unaware that you are mostly surrounded by similar people - just as decent, just as well-meaning? Why wouldn't they be more or less like you?

If because of your beliefs you see no value in living life if there is no afterlife, you see the journey as nearly perpetual turmoil punctuated by brief moments of happiness, and you fail to see that the people around you are mostly noble and decent people trying to make their little piece of the world better - not the depraved species that you describe - would you consider that paying a price?

 

[Polymath257]

They look like beautifully designed creatures to me....hand crafted works of art.

I'm sure they do. And yes, they are beautiful. Now, what evidence do you have that they are 'hand'made works of art' as opposed to living things that have differential reproduction leading to the selection of bright colors and distinguishing patterns?

Natural selection has a flare for color and design?....how clever of something that has no intelligent direction.

Once again, such coloration tends to happen when it is selected for via some mechanism. In thiese cases, the frogs are poisonous and they survive better when that poisonous aspect is clearly marked for other animals. One good test would be to see whether there are other animials in their environment that can see color and will refuse to eat such frogs but will choose to eat other similar sized frogs that are not brightly colored.

If you say so......wait till you meet him......

I have no fear that your mythology is valid.

 

[Polymath257]

That "falsehood" has made me a better wife and mother...a better and more caring friend and neighbor....a person concerned about the welfare of others and in teaching my children the same values. We are not animals who can excuse our behavior based on that premise.We have a Creator who is also the best teacher in existence.

Thank you for sharing your myth. I am glad it has made you a better person. It *hasn't* made you a more informed person.

What evidence? The stuff evolutionary science wants you to swallow.......? All the best with that.

Yes, you refuse to look at any evidence that disagrees with your myth.

Do they?

Yes, they do.

Or are they so mad at God for not revealing himself more clearly that they let their anger cancel him out altogether?
In cancelling out God through lack of what people require as evidence, they cancel out what he is offering to all humanity. That is a choice we must all make for ourselves. God already knows those who belong to him through faith in his word.....but he lingers, waiting for others to find him....those who aren't shaking their fist at him.

You are assuming that they consider or reject evidence based on an anger to a deity.

Here is a basic fact: most people see the question of God as beside the point. It isn't that they are angry with God. It's that they don't see God as relevant to the scientific questions here. And they have found that the assumption of divine intervention isn't required to explain the evidence. This is true even for those who *believe* in a deity.

YOU are the one that is God-obsessed. YOU are the one that looks through God-colored eyes at everything, whether that is reasonable or not. YOU are the one that believes without looking *deeply* into the evidence, learning what the actual evidence is, and who refuses to do more than read overviews. You are like the person who reads 'Reader's Digest' and things they are reading fine literature.

No not a "complete" idiot.

I see it as "blindness"....the kind induced in those who do not want to see what is right under their noses. (2 Corinthians 4:3-4)

And, again, you seem to think that those who disagree with you don't know your position. They have usually looked closely at what religion has to offer. Some accept it into their lives and can *still* do actual science, reading the religious books as allegory.

There is an invitation with every human's name on it......most will refuse it, for a variety of reasons.
They will still miss out.

Most people have looked at the offering. I have. And I have found the myth uninspiring.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

What does "naturally" mean to you? Something that happens for no intelligent reason? Reason requires a mind, doesn't it? There always seems to be a very good reason for what "nature" produces. Its systems are well designed and interactive, yet there is no designer in your scenario.

Two fallacies there:

First, an equivocation fallacy using two definitions of "reason" interchangeably.

Then, begging the question (circularity) by sticking a designer into your premise and concluding that therefore, there must be a designer. Call it a configuration or pattern rather than a design, and try that argument again.

Who walks into an art gallery and assumes that the artwork was a product of natural selection?......who can observe the talent of the craftsman and deny the existence of the artist? Only an idiot. (complete or otherwise)

Another fallacy: Faulty analogy: "This fallacy consists in assuming that because two things are alike in one or more respects, they are necessarily alike in some other respect." Paintings do not reproduce. They are not biological systems, and cannot evolve in the biological sense.

 

[gnostic]

"Natural selection" is science's substitute for "God did it". "Selection" requires what? A choice.....no? How does a creature mutate genetically and then 'select' which traits it will pass on?

There you go, you are showing your ignorance.

Everything "genetics" are passed on through reproduction, it is not conscious choice by made by God, Designer or spirit.

Let's just focus on hypothetical example or scenario, just on genetic between parents and immediate offspring without the very long process of natural selection evolution:

I am sure you have seen video about the animal kingdom, where you see two or more male creatures contesting each other for rights to mate with a female or group of female creatures. It is to see which one of the contestants is "alpha".

Sometimes is about strength, which could mean violent clash (fighting), but that's not alway the case.

Sometimes such contests are about their looks (eg which has brightest hide, fur or feathers), or the ways one move (eg the ability to dance), or the voice (eg some birds are known to contest each others, by it singing).

There could be any number of reasons, in what ways it is chosen and which male contestant wins. Not all contests involve who is the strongest.

So the winner of contest, get to mate with a single female or with a number of females. And whatever partnership involved with the matings, the offspring will inherit traits genetically.​

Now here are some questions for to answer:

Does God factor to any of this (above) example that I have given you?
Did God choose who is the winner?
Or is it all selected by the winner and female(s) that witness the contest?​

In such a video, I see everything goes through genetics, via reproduction, hence by nature, not by chosen by a supreme divine being that you called God.

You keep showing images of animals with many different colours, eg birds, frogs, fishes, etc, but what I see is just "nature", all natural and all genetic, with no God involved in the ways they all look in those photos.

Lastly, in every science and in every technology, I see it is done through human understanding, human creativity in finding applicable solutions, human experiences (eg trial-and-error (testing, and developing prototypes), hard works, etc).

It is not just evolution that don't involve God, every other branches and fields don't involve god, eg physics, astronomy, chemistry, geology, any field of engineering, electronics, etc. None of these involved "God did it".

Any answer that involved "God did it" is nothing more than lazy cop-out, ignorance, blind faith and superstition.

Saying "God did it" isn't science, and it isn't testable, observable or measurable explanation.

So why single out evolutionary biology to be the only one that don't involve "God did it", when every other science don't god for anything?

You mention "colour theory". Nothing in colour theory involved "God did it". Does this theory, ever mention "God"?

I find whenever you claim that scientists are committing vast conspiracy against god and religion, to be absurd, biased and worse of all, dishonest.

And you should look yourself in mirror. The person who's being a conspiracy theorist, is you.

 

[gnostic]

Thank you for sharing your myth. I am glad it has made you a better person. It *hasn't* made you a more informed person.

That's so true, on so many levels.

Sadly it also doesn't make her honest person.

 

[gnostic]

Most people have looked at the offering. I have. And I have found the myth uninspiring.

Actually, I do find myths to be very "inspiring".

I just don't treat myths as "history" or "science".

Parts of understanding humanity and their respective cultures, are understanding how they think (eg their imaginations), why they would they invent such stories in their traditions.

I actually love myths, more so than I do science, mainly because I like old storytelling. But I don't try to confuse the two.

If you visited my two websites, Timeless Myths and Dark Mirrors of Heaven (click on either link at the bottom of each of my posts), you would see that I enjoyed researching stories from myths and religious texts, as stories, not as history and certainly not as science.

Despite my frequent arguments with creationists, like Deeje, I actually do like Genesis stories about Creation and Flood...I just don't believe it to be literally true, like science or history.

To me, myths are entertainment, like reading novels, watching movies at the cinemas or on tv. I can enjoy them, doesn't mean I have to believe in them.

 

[Deeje]

Everything "genetics" are passed on through reproduction, it is not conscious choice by made by God, Designer or spirit.....

It is not just evolution that don't involve God, every other branches and fields don't involve god, eg physics, astronomy, chemistry, geology, any field of engineering, electronics, etc. None of these involved "God did it".

First of all gnostic, please allow me to suggest that if English is not your first language, you might try either proof reading your responses or else take some English lessons. The odd typo is forgivable, but whole posts full of grammatical errors just makes you seem a little "ignorant".

Any answer that involved "God did it" is nothing more than lazy cop-out, ignorance, blind faith and superstition.

Saying "God did it" isn't science, and it isn't testable, observable or measurable explanation.

So why single out evolutionary biology to be the only one that don't involve "God did it", when every other science don't god for anything?

You mention "colour theory". Nothing in colour theory involved "God did it". Does this theory, ever mention "God"?

I find whenever you claim that scientists are committing vast conspiracy against god and religion, to be absurd, biased and worse of all, dishonest.

And you should look yourself in mirror. The person who's being a conspiracy theorist, is you.

"Saying "God did it" isn't science, and it isn't testable, observable or measurable explanation." means what to one who believes in ID? We see God's work as completely testable in our way of measuring things....it is observable with all our senses. We do not need to learn the ins and outs of science to appreciate any of it, or to lead us in another direction. If your excursion into science has led you away from the Creator, then that is entirely your prerogative. Believe whatever you like.

The mention of color theory was to demonstrate how ridiculous it is to suppose that blended colors can just happen by chance....that flowers can somehow choose their own color scheme, undirected.

Look at them and see.....really look at the color combinations and patterns and then ask yourself why we find these so aesthetically pleasing.....? How is it that we humans alone can appreciate plants and flowers for their beauty, and not primarily as a food source?

Its hard to talk about the blind forces of evolution when you are staring at the most dazzling display of creation.

I know where the blindness is. But that is your choice. God does not need you to believe in him, nor will he force you to.....he just wants you to.

 

[Darkstorn]

Look at them and see.....really look at the color combinations and patterns and then ask yourself why we find these so aesthetically pleasing.....?

Because of subjectivity. Not everyone finds them aesthetically pleasing. You are being way too generalizing here. But since you're asking for the why, it's this simple:

Your subjective perception is the why.

It's alarming you don't recognize this.

I know where the blindness is.

Gross misunderstanding of the situation and reality around you. I could call you blind and it'd be an equivalent claim. Both without merit. Yet yours is approaching pure madness: You accuse EVERYONE not seeing what you see of being blind.

Special snowflake.

But that is your choice. God does not need to to believe in him, nor will he force you to.....he just wants you to.

"He" could do with a better lackey than yourself. Maybe one that isn't doing harm for your own cause? Your agenda seems to be for god, yet your actions would lead me to believe that you're a covert evolutionist trying to incite chaos around you.

I'm totally torn regarding my absolute judgement regarding your character because of my keen understanding of the Poe's Law. Since i can't with enough certainty consider you either a troll or an idiot, i think it's easier to think that you might be both at the same time.