The Four Dirty Secrets Against Darwin Evolution

[Kenny]

Your side were anecdotes.
It matters not if the anecdote comes from a "medical profession" or not.
It's still anecdotal.

Again, i'm sorry you refuse to understand the difference.

I say "refuse", because I don't think you are incapable.

I guess the question is, what isn't anecdotal?

 

[SkepticThinker]

Funnily enough (well, I can laugh about it now anyway....) this wasn't the first time my dad went through the needle.

6 years ago, he got admitted to that same hospital, under the care of in fact the same doctors, with an extreme case of hyper calciemy (not sure of english spelling). He had a non-malicious tumor on one of his parathyroid glands. That thing produces a horomone that regulates calcium levels and due to the tumor, it went into complete overdrive. Calcium levels skyrocketted in his body.

He lost 15 kg and suffered major mental setbacks as a result. He was no longer able to for example calculate 7+6. And this is a guy that is very intelligent. His chess score is near grandmaster level. Doctors also thought it was over. Their literal words were that they had never seen a case where someone went so deep into hyper calciumy. Most people die way before it gets that bad. And those that don't, barely recover.

After 6 weeks he left the hospital, still a bit weak and mentally not really fit either.
Another 3 months on and he was back his old intelligent self, whooping chess grandmaster butts on the internet.

Last week at the hospital, that doctor joked by asking me if he could have a sample of my DNA to research, because he thinks my dad isn't human.

I've got some stories too.

A couple of decades ago, my father got into a terrible car accident where his truck went end over end into a ditch on the side of the highway. The entire passenger side roof caved in, so if anyone were sitting there, they'd have been a goner. The driver's side, where my dad was sitting, was not crushed, although he smashed his head off the side window and was also hit in the back of his head with some of his plumbing equipment he had in the back of the truck. The doctor's said they couldn't believe a person walked away alive from that accident. The truck was totaled. My dad was in terrible shape, but he "miraculously" pulled through. Turns out, the reason he survived the accident was probably that he was trashed out drunk.

Cut to, another decade later and now my 54-year-old dad has had a massive stroke and he's in a coma being kept alive by machines. His brains scans show little brain activity and his brain was swelling uncontrollably, and so I knew he wasn't going to make it. The doctors confirmed as much to me. But my evangelical uncle was sure all he had to do was pray over his body and god would save him. So, we got to the point where we turned all the machines off, and we're all around him, holding his hand as he dies. Well, all of us except for my uncle - he was praying loudly and flailing his arms around, making a big show of it, putting his hands over my dad's head and stuff like that. It bothered me to no end, but I thought, well if this is his way of dealing with his brother's death, what can I say about it? My father died that day, just a few minutes later. As expected. Gods and angels didn't intervene, despite my uncle's efforts.

So when I think about people's claims about prayers working, I think about this and how such cases are ignored in favour of the ones where it seems the prayer has been answered. And I think about the poster telling us that god answered his prayers to help him sell a typewriter, while prayers made by dying loved ones, starving children and amputees go unanswered by a supposedly loving god who thinks typewriter sales are more important than human life, apparently.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I guess the question is, what isn't anecdotal?

Events that are repeatable. Events that are objective.

 

[YoursTrue]

Sorry, but I was expecting to see a miracle in your example, but nothing I see there that defy nature in the “supernatural“ way.

Going with the concept that there is a God with supreme powers, it would not be irreconcilable that God could not do beyond what we think is normal. Yes, I believe there is a supreme God who can perform miracles as He wills and not hurt the norm.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Going with the concept that there is a God with supreme powers, it would not be irreconcilable that God could not do beyond what we think is normal. Yes, I believe there is a supreme God who can perform miracles as He wills and not hurt the norm.

That is true. An omniscient God could conceivably do anything. That leads to the all important quesiton:

Can God lie?

 

[Heyo]

Again, i'm sorry you refuse to understand the difference.

I say "refuse", because I don't think you are incapable.

Violating Hanlon's Razor? What is your evidence that @Kenny does have the capability to understand?

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

I guess the question is, what isn't anecdotal?

That which is independently verifiable through repeated experimentation and alike.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

I've got some stories too.

A couple of decades ago, my father got into a terrible car accident where his truck went end over end into a ditch on the side of the highway. The entire passenger side roof caved in, so if anyone were sitting there, they'd have been a goner. The driver's side, where my dad was sitting, was not crushed, although he smashed his head off the side window and was also hit in the back of his head with some of his plumbing equipment he had in the back of the truck. The doctor's said they couldn't believe a person walked away alive from that accident. The truck was totaled. My dad was in terrible shape, but he "miraculously" pulled through. Turns out, the reason he survived the accident was probably that he was trashed out drunk.

Cut to, another decade later and now my 54-year-old dad has had a massive stroke and he's in a coma being kept alive by machines. His brains scans show little brain activity and his brain was swelling uncontrollably, and so I knew he wasn't going to make it. The doctors confirmed as much to me. But my evangelical uncle was sure all he had to do was pray over his body and god would save him. So, we got to the point where we turned all the machines off, and we're all around him, holding his hand as he dies. Well, all of us except for my uncle - he was praying loudly and flailing his arms around, making a big show of it, putting his hands over my dad's head and stuff like that. It bothered me to no end, but I thought, well if this is his way of dealing with his brother's death, what can I say about it? My father died that day, just a few minutes later. As expected. Gods and angels didn't intervene, despite my uncle's efforts.

So when I think about people's claims about prayers working, I think about this and how such cases are ignored in favour of the ones where it seems the prayer has been answered. And I think about the poster telling us that god answered his prayers to help him sell a typewriter, while prayers made by dying loved ones, starving children and amputees go unanswered by a supposedly loving god who thinks typewriter sales are more important than human life, apparently.

Sorry for your loss.
Seeing such bs by "believers" is infuriated when you have gone through something like that.

Like in that other thread, where some fundie poses next to an expensive supercar saying that "his belief in god made it such that god made his dreams come through", meanwhile children in africa are dying of hunger and diarrhea with desperate parents and other loved ones begging their god on their knees to save their children.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Violating Hanlon's Razor? What is your evidence that @Kenny does have the capability to understand?

Just my relentless optimistic faith in the potential of human intelligence.

Maybe it's the closest thing I have to "blind faith". It's irrational, I know... since many such people have never given me any evidence to justify that faith I have in their potential.

All I have is an assumption that because they are human, they at least have the potential capacity to think rationally.

 

[Heyo]

All I have is an assumption that because they are human, they at least have the potential capacity to think rationally.

I feel you, I also make that error frequently. But I also assume that, because they are human, they at least have the potential capacity to act morally.
That's what Hanlon's Razor is for. Assuming rationality leads to the conclusion that there must be bad intend. And it is better to assume stupidity than immorality.

 

[Kenny]

That which is independently verifiable through repeated experimentation and alike.

And that is probably why you have a problem with miracles which is fine. Living this life without miracles can still be lived... I just choose to live with them rather than without them.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

And that is probably why you have a problem with miracles which is fine.

It's why I have a problem with (fantastical) anecdotes, regardless of them being about "miracles" or anything else.
That claimed "miracles" are only ever just that (claims / anecdotes) is not my problem but yours.

Living this life without miracles can still be lived... I just choose to live with them rather than without them.

Yeah well... I care about actually being rationally justified in my beliefs. Some people don't care about that. You're one of them apparently

 

[Kenny]

It's why I have a problem with (fantastical) anecdotes, regardless of them being about "miracles" or anything else.
That claimed "miracles" are only ever just that (claims / anecdotes) is not my problem but yours.


Yeah well... I care about actually being rationally justified in my beliefs. Some people don't care about that. You're one of them apparently

And because of my rational beliefs, i enjoy God's presence and miracle.

\

 

[SkepticThinker]

Sorry for your loss.

Thank you, much appreciated.

Seeing such bs by "believers" is infuriated when you have gone through something like that.

That's for sure.

Or like, when there's a plane crash and one guy survives, it's viewed as a miracle that guy survived while the other 300 passengers all perished. Sorry, don't see the miracle there.

Like in that other thread, where some fundie poses next to an expensive supercar saying that "his belief in god made it such that god made his dreams come through", meanwhile children in africa are dying of hunger and diarrhea with desperate parents and other loved ones begging their god on their knees to save their children.

Yes, exactly. It's absurd and contrary to the idea of a loving god. I have a hard time actually getting a response from anyone when I point that out.
Or I just get "well god works in mysterious ways" kinds of non-responses.

 

[SkepticThinker]

And because of my rational beliefs, i enjoy God's presence and miracle.

\

Which rational beliefs?

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

And because of my rational beliefs, i enjoy God's presence and miracle.

\

Beliefs that rely only on anecdotes and bare claims, are not rational beliefs off course.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Thank you, much appreciated.

That's for sure.

Or like, when there's a plane crash and one guy survives, it's viewed as a miracle that guy survived while the other 300 passengers all perished. Sorry, don't see the miracle there.

Yes, exactly. It's absurd and contrary to the idea of a loving god. I have a hard time actually getting a response from anyone when I point that out.
Or I just get "well god works in mysterious ways" kinds of non-responses.

Reminds me of an episode of the Atheist Experience.

The week before there was (yet another) mass shooting in the US. Someone had a bullet in the head and "survived". Quotes, because she had severe braindamage and it was unclear if she would actually ever be able to walk and talk again.

Some guy called in saying "it's a miracle! the doctor said he didn't understand how she survived! it's a miracle!!"

The host replied: "What about the other 7 that died???? Also, what's the miracle? That a person lives on as a plant unable to talk and walk?"

Deafening silence after that followed by quickly changing the subject.
All the while, off course, not acknowledging the point made.

 

[wellwisher]

The issue here is not an interpretation issue. It is literally how the Fall of Adam and Eve formed from a perfect world without death and sin, and Original Sin took place to justify the purpose of Jesus Christ.


Not meaningful response relevant to the issue of the text.


Obvious too many contradictions of mythology.


Which is the problem.


Science does not consider the nature of our existence happening all by itself.

I am civil but blunt. I do not believe you give adequate responses. I may have to live with that. You dodge around without responding directly. Yes, the concept of a perfect world without death and suffering as described specifically in the Bible is completely in contradiction with the scientific evidence that natural evolution with death and suffering throughout the entire existence of life on Earth. You offering vague off-the-wall alternatives does not change the facts of the scripture. There is absolutely no evidence of any sort of past perfect world. You confirm you believe this, which confirms an extreme contradiction with the actual facts of the history of life on Earth and the history of humanity

The way you resolve this is that the Bible is speaking about consciousness, and not external materialism. Science does not even know how to define consciousness in a consensus way. It is better at exploring external materialism. It works under assumption of its own strong suit; Materialism must also be the foundation premise for the Bible. It then sees that Science contradict the materialism of the Bible. This is a false premise.

The Bible is really about the evolution of modern human consciousness. It starts the story about 6000 years ago. The stories and symbols reflect the inner workers of the human psyche, marking and describing updates; milestones in human consciousness. The evolution of the human ego alter the world view of consciousness; new universe appears.

If you were totally natural, with no ego will or choice, the world could look like paradise. All your needs would be met with an evolved inner drive, based on million's of years of natural selection, that had become spatially integrated into natural eco-systems, in which you play an important part; apex critter in paradise.

The tree of knowledge of good and evil was an consciousness milestone. It tells of a wild card, where humans start to learn knowledge of good and evil, and not just flow with their natural inner instinct. This appears to be connected to the invention of written language which science can carbon date to be about 6000 year ago A bogeyman was aded to natural consciousness; law and evil. All natural animals can become very relaxed or very alert. But the ego and his bogeyman does not allow any rest; dreams and nightmares. This was a millstone in modern conscious evolution.

You could list all the thing that are wrong with the earth and humans and get all bummed out. But the natural man and woman were not preoccupied with that. There were no books and learning was in front of you. They flowed with instinct, which was more like being on vacation in paradise. The outward world still could be the same for both, it was all a matter of attitude via consciousness.

A good analogy is, people on cell phones, today. Twenty years ago, cells phones were not as common or as functional, so one could take or leave it. Today, some people would freak if they did not have their phone. A whole new good and evil was added; phone, to make things more obsessive and less relaxed. Fake news alone make paradise disappear.

In the 1980's, before personal computers and when the Internet was more a college science thing, life was simpler and human interaction was much more important. An innovation like written language, in a natural world, would alter consciousness even more than the internet or cell phone of today. Adam from the dust of the earth was connected to the stone dust, as he learned to write on stone tablet. It was mind altering. Eve learns to read his writing and they collaborate. The taboo is when they write down rules of good and evil, which carved into stone would become repressive, unable to flow with natural instinct. This causes chaos in paradise; attitude.

I see religion as the IT or information technology of consciousness. It symbols reflect the layout of the human psyche and the brain's operating system, as a function of time. The ancients were more open to the internal feedback and projected it into their stories. These stories are like memory pegs; compressed files, that are easy to learn and remember, yet hard to forget and erase. Even an Atheists, can recite these childhood stories and in spite of being negative toward them. They cannot easily erase them. These compressed files speak to higher areas of consciousness, and can be decompressed and unpacked as consciousness needs and allows. The Bible is not about hardware; materialism, but software; consciousness.

 

[shunyadragon]

The way you resolve this is that the Bible is speaking about consciousness, and not external materialism. Science does not even know how to define consciousness in a consensus way. It is better at exploring external materialism. It works under assumption of its own strong suit; Materialism must also be the foundation premise for the Bible. It then sees that Science contradict the materialism of the Bible. This is a false premise.

The above is just verbiage without references. This does not remotely reflect the current knowledge of science concerning consciousness. Yes, science does have a consensus as to how to define and describe consciousness.

The Bible does represent an ancient tribal worldview without science, and yes, widely contradicts science, which is based on objectively verifiable evidence

The Bible is really about the evolution of modern human consciousness.

Nothing in the Bible remotely represents this.

It starts the story about 6000 years ago. The stories and symbols reflect the inner workers of the human psyche, marking and describing updates; milestones in human consciousness. The evolution of the human ego alter the world view of consciousness; new universe appears.

Yes, it starts with stories and mythology thousands of years old, and nothing of relevance to the contemporary scientific knowledge of science

If you were totally natural, with no ego will or choice, the world could look like paradise. All your needs would be met with an evolved inner drive, based on million's of years of natural selection, that had become spatially integrated into natural eco-systems, in which you play an important part; apex critter in paradise.

Humanity and life being natural does not negate nor limit the nature of the ego, will, or choice. These are descriptive of the nature of being human and have no problem being based on nature

The tree of knowledge of good and evil was an consciousness milestone. It tells of a wild card, where humans start to learn knowledge of good and evil, and not just flow with their natural inner instinct. This appears to be connected to the invention of written language which science can carbon date to be about 6000 year ago

More ancient tribal stories and mythology

A bogeyman was aded to natural consciousness; law and evil. All natural animals can become very relaxed or very alert. But the ego and his bogeyman does not allow any rest; dreams and nightmares. This was a millstone in modern conscious evolution.

The bogeyman is in the mythology of Genesis, There are no bogeymen in science just the knowledge of science developed by objectively verifiable evidence and not ancient mythology..

You could list all the thing that are wrong with the earth and humans and get all bummed out. But the natural man and woman were not preoccupied with that.

. . . but Christianity and belief in ancient mythology are preoccupied with the above, not science. Science is not bummed out. The natural man and woman consciousness functions very naturally with all the good, bad, and indifferent natures of fallible humans, and not based on the mythology of the ancient religions of the world.

There were no books and learning was in front of you. They flowed with instinct, which was more like being on vacation in paradise. The outward world still could be the same for both, it was all a matter of attitude via consciousness.

Not meaningful

A good analogy is, people on cell phones, today. Twenty years ago, cells phones were not as common or as functional, so one could take or leave it. Today, some people would freak if they did not have their phone. A whole new good and evil was added; phone, to make things more obsessive and less relaxed. Fake news alone make paradise disappear.

Terrible mechanical analogy.

In the 1980's, before personal computers and when the Internet was more a college science thing, life was simpler and human interaction was much more important. An innovation like written language, in a natural world, would alter consciousness even more than the internet or cell phone of today. Adam from the dust of the earth was connected to the stone dust, as he learned to write on stone tablet. It was mind altering. Eve learns to read his writing and they collaborate. The taboo is when they write down rules of good and evil, which carved into stone would become repressive, unable to flow with natural instinct. This causes chaos in paradise; attitude.

The nostalgia of a past world of Barbie dolls and 56 Chevies, with ancient mythology thrown in is not productive

I see religion as the IT or information technology of consciousness. It symbols reflect the layout of the human psyche and the brain's operating system, as a function of time. The ancients were more open to the internal feedback and projected it into their stories. These stories are like memory pegs; compressed files, that are easy to learn and remember, yet hard to forget and erase. Even an Atheists, can recite these childhood stories and in spite of being negative toward them. They cannot easily erase them. These compressed files speak to higher areas of consciousness, and can be decompressed and unpacked as consciousness needs and allows.

The Bible is not about hardware; materialism, but software; consciousness.

The Bible represents an edited, redacted, and compiled collection of stories and ancient tribal narratives set in history, but not remotely related to the science of consciousness today.

If that is your only reference to support your argument lol.

 

[wellwisher]

The above is just verbiage without references. This does not remotely reflect the current knowledge of science concerning consciousness. Yes, science does have a consensus as to how to define and describe consciousness.

The Bible does represent an ancient tribal worldview without science, and yes, widely contradicts science, which is based on objectively verifiable evidence

Casino science, which is the foundation of the Life Sciences and many others, is not objective. That approach is based on fuzzy dice data in a black box, which cannot be used for objectivity. You can correlate with that approach but a correlation is not solid for foundation premises. The black box adds a data gap and emotional subjectivity; Climate change fear. That semi-subjective objective approach, allows bad theory to linger, since you you cannot falsify fuzzy dice theory, especially if you induce fear; risk, or desire; winner.

For example, the theory of life on other planets have never been proven. It lingers because casino science give it some base logic and odds like winning the lottery; fuzzy dice desire. If the religious says there is God, but do not prove it, the theory is dead according to Atheists. They did not get the same benefit of a doubt as a similar fuzzy dice theory. The reason I religion claims determinism with such theory causal and falsifiable. Fuzzy dice allows you to play the dual injustice game we see in US politics. Politics also uses fuzzy dice and cannot be trusted.

The consciousness approach I take, in interpreting the Bible, may not be common, but it correlates. Carbon dating at about 6000 years ago; science approach, shows the start of civilization and the invention of written language. This was how I interfaced the two. Both innovations would be mind expanding and behavior altering. Both will also cause humans to leave natural selection in favor of manmade selection, which impacted the mind and consciousness; repressed instincts or as the bible says, loss of paradise.

The consciousness approach agrees with material evolution, but human departs from natural selection, about 6000 years ago, as human consciousness changes; ego added, apart from nature and natural selection; man made selection. Consciousness today can alter the DNA, via will and choice, and not have wait for evolution; genetically modified food. It was not always that way. The stories of creation give us eyewitness clues on it update processes.