-
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!
What We Thought
- Thread starter nPeace
- Start date
muhammad_isa
Veteran Member
I agree .. eyes can evolve, but the concept doesn't .
TagliatelliMonster
Veteran Member
Unsurprisingly, you sound like someone who doesn't understand the difference between the facts of evolution and the theory of evolution.
Facts are facts.
Theories are explanations of sets of facts.
Yes, eyes evolve.
Evolution theory explains how that occurs.
I accept the explanation provided by evolution as it is the best evidenced one. Like with any scientific theory, I accept it provisionally until new evidence requires me to reconsider.
No, I don't expect that to happen any time soon (that evidence comes up that forces us to reconsider). Evolution is so well established that it is extremely unlikely that new evidence would overturn it. It's just very unlikely.
But I guess it could. And if it would, I'ld have no problems absorbing that new knowledge and moving on.
muhammad_isa
Veteran Member
..so all that we see has happened, just "because" .. just because it can?
A poor explanation of why we have eyes, imo.
TagliatelliMonster
Veteran Member
..so all that we see has happened, just "because" .. just because it can?
Not "just because".
Because of the properties life has. Evolution is inevitable.
Just like how it is inevitble that an object with mass within earth's gravitational field, will fall to earth. Not "just because", but due to how mass is subject to gravity.
Life evolves because it reproduces with variation and is in competition with peers over limited resources in an ever changing environment. That's really all there is to it. Whenever you have a system with such properties, those systems will evolve (or go extinct). It's inevitable.
Right, because the textbook of evolution has only 1 page where it only says "it just happened".
Yes, that's an accurate representation of a theory so big that it stretches out over multiple fields like paleontology, genetics, comparative anatomy, etc etc.
Like talking to an ostrich.
muhammad_isa
Veteran Member
..but "life" only has these properties "because it does", according to you.
It is Almighty God who is responsible for all we see.
There could be no evolution in a "void". There would be nothing to observe.
TagliatelliMonster
Veteran Member
Everything that exists is going to have some properties by which they manifest in reality.
Those properties are going to determine how the interaction with the environment, other objects, the forces of nature etc is going to occur / manifest.
I don't understand what point you think you are making.
Yes, I know that that is your religious belief.
The evidence doesn't support it.
We don't exist in a void. We exist in a universe filled with interacting stuff.
Another moot point.
There would be nothing to observe.
Yes, if there would be nothing, there would be nothing.
But we don't exist in a universe filled with nothing. We exist in a universe filled with stuff. So what's your point?
muhammad_isa
Veteran Member
Of course we do .. but you say that eyes evolved, due to the universe being as it is [ "properties of life"]
Can't you see that it is a circular argument? .. "life as it is" cannot evolve without reason.
That's what scientists do .. they look for reasons.
..and many atheists who fancy themselves as scientists, just answer "evolution" tor questions that they can't answer.
i.e. can't explain in terms of atoms and equations etc.
Please justify your claim that there has to be a reason for stuff in general to exist or to have properties. Only if it can be shown that stuff in general can completely cease to exist and loose any and all properties, would we need a reason for stuff in general to exist and to have properties.Of course we do .. but you say that eyes evolved, due to the universe being as it is [ "properties of life"]
Can't you see that it is a circular argument? .. "life as it is" cannot evolve without reason.
That's what scientists do .. they look for reasons.
..and many atheists who fancy themselves as scientists, just answer "evolution" tor questions that they can't answer.
i.e. can't explain in terms of atoms and equations etc.
muhammad_isa
Veteran Member
Is it possible for scientific observation to have all the answers to "why the universe behaves as it does"?
I don't think so: "evolution" cannot be the answer to things we can't explain in any other way.
Naturally, evolution occurs .. it is a well-accepted fact, and can be proved to be true.
..yet claiming evolution is the reason for ALL is deceitful and NOT a fact.
TagliatelliMonster
Veteran Member
Of course we do .. but you say that eyes evolved, due to the universe being as it is [ "properties of life"]
Can't you see that it is a circular argument? .. "life as it is" cannot evolve without reason.
That's what scientists do .. they look for reasons.
..and many atheists who fancy themselves as scientists, just answer "evolution" tor questions that they can't answer.
i.e. can't explain in terms of atoms and equations etc.
???
I'm sorry I really don't follow what point you are trying to make.
What circular argument? What on earth are you on about?
TagliatelliMonster
Veteran Member
Huh??
Again, what are you on about?
Can you stop with the vaguery and just state your point clearly?
For example, when you say ""evolution" cannot be the answer to things we can't explain in any other way.", what exactly do you mean? Can you perhaps give a specific example?
"ALL" of what?
Let us assume that there are X number of different self-consistent ways in which the universe can be be conceived to have existed. The universe, necessarily, will exist in one and only one of these possible ways. Since every one of these ways are logically possible, there is no further fact of the matter that can possibly exist that determine which one will be actualized in an existant universe. So no explanation is needed for your why question.
muhammad_isa
Veteran Member
Maybe not for you, but for me, it makes no sense that life as we know it just came about by accident.
Saying that it is no accident, and evolution is responsible is not a valid answer .. because evolution does not apply, unless there is something to evolve in the first place.
Did you understand what I was trying to say? I showed that it is logically impossible for any reason for existence to exist. So what you want cannot be had.
muhammad_isa
Veteran Member
One can reckon they've proved something by playing with words..
If there IS no reason, then we shouldn't be here.
Why does existence require a reason?One can reckon they've proved something by playing with words..
If there IS no reason, then we shouldn't be here.
rational experiences
Veteran Member
A human is meant to always be naturally innate Conscious self aware. The healer life with nature.
Looks at a tree ....says tree. One word truth.
Theist uses a lot of non reality words about the tree.
Then burnt his mind again in his constant earth mass communication converting. Lost common sense.
Two types transmitters ..
Asteroid and earths both cooled to be the transmitter. Nuclear hot changed its mass. Destroyed it's mass back to hot dusts....cooling.
Human not hot mass. Human not transmitters of hot mass cooled. We arent dusts.
Theist uses word out of one's only context. Lots of words not relaying or relating owned to one object only.
Correct known use one word only the teaching exact.
Said lying I think we are part machine.
Machine in first fixed body compared to a human. Nothing alike. Begins lying. Proven.
I'm not a greedy wanting rich organised technology inventor. The Get rich scheme evil brothers known owned lying history. Life's destroyer by all nasty choices thoughts beliefs.
Transmitter the state....
By ice cooling water as heated water cooling to cools as a cooled transmitter to be the transmitter.
Transmitter he says contacts biology. I know machines came from earth mass is why. Humans walk around harmed by state.
The contact point he says makes you my victim as now part machine. Lying again.
Okay nasty minded human proven by how you relate advice. Is the state you thought about already caused?
Yes.
It's why I make all claims as I was taught.
Okay you want to make a transmitter now what?
A new point to get mass energy to resource. Via heavens body.
Okay so you proved only you evilly said a human and a machine begins at dusts.
You melt dusts to begin science.
Am I melted?
No he says I'm talking about dusts co converting inside the machine.
I'm not inside your machine you liar..so don't compare biology to a dust.
I do as I'm the science medical Branch.
Okay what dusts do humans own then,,? Oh minerals. So you are falsifying medical knowledge?
Of course.
Of living as just the human?
Yes.
You now want suns transmitters to contact biology?
No I want them in my machine reaction. You're lying he reflects his lying.
But you said that position is machine to body human also equal....proven lying.
Oh. I live in heavens. What do I get then if I'm not lnside the machine?
Reality burnt to death in terms comparing theism biology to machine at dust of science only.
Machine place I now own put coldest gas at ground ....
biology never did....ever own it.
Machines and converting mass.
Did Jesus save it as the stop. Hole opening?
No. Jesus said it made the hole.
Who stopped sacrificed body on cross addition maths loss of natural four seasons?
Mother void space vacuum womb had.
Ok.
So Jesus made sin. It got stopped by a God cause yet man did it! You said Jesus the wrong thesis. Jesus terms criminal science thesis.
As worded answers sometimes need human related continuance as consciousness first is natural.
A holy teacher interpreter was only ever allowed to read. By their proven mind status. No one else was as you misinterpret what small warnings were heard.
Did man get hurt?
Yes.
What saved man?
Gods cooling above with mother term.
Okay.....what stopped sin? It wasn't stopped. A hole did had opened. Always had.
More sin was stopped only .....the
Teaching in actual taught terms.
You just don't read it how it was taught.
Theists are of no excuse innate liars as just humans....already known. Already taught they were. Legal was a rich man versus evil rich men. The history.
Looks at a tree ....says tree. One word truth.
Theist uses a lot of non reality words about the tree.
Then burnt his mind again in his constant earth mass communication converting. Lost common sense.
Two types transmitters ..
Asteroid and earths both cooled to be the transmitter. Nuclear hot changed its mass. Destroyed it's mass back to hot dusts....cooling.
Human not hot mass. Human not transmitters of hot mass cooled. We arent dusts.
Theist uses word out of one's only context. Lots of words not relaying or relating owned to one object only.
Correct known use one word only the teaching exact.
Said lying I think we are part machine.
Machine in first fixed body compared to a human. Nothing alike. Begins lying. Proven.
I'm not a greedy wanting rich organised technology inventor. The Get rich scheme evil brothers known owned lying history. Life's destroyer by all nasty choices thoughts beliefs.
Transmitter the state....
By ice cooling water as heated water cooling to cools as a cooled transmitter to be the transmitter.
Transmitter he says contacts biology. I know machines came from earth mass is why. Humans walk around harmed by state.
The contact point he says makes you my victim as now part machine. Lying again.
Okay nasty minded human proven by how you relate advice. Is the state you thought about already caused?
Yes.
It's why I make all claims as I was taught.
Okay you want to make a transmitter now what?
A new point to get mass energy to resource. Via heavens body.
Okay so you proved only you evilly said a human and a machine begins at dusts.
You melt dusts to begin science.
Am I melted?
No he says I'm talking about dusts co converting inside the machine.
I'm not inside your machine you liar..so don't compare biology to a dust.
I do as I'm the science medical Branch.
Okay what dusts do humans own then,,? Oh minerals. So you are falsifying medical knowledge?
Of course.
Of living as just the human?
Yes.
You now want suns transmitters to contact biology?
No I want them in my machine reaction. You're lying he reflects his lying.
But you said that position is machine to body human also equal....proven lying.
Oh. I live in heavens. What do I get then if I'm not lnside the machine?
Reality burnt to death in terms comparing theism biology to machine at dust of science only.
Machine place I now own put coldest gas at ground ....
biology never did....ever own it.
Machines and converting mass.
Did Jesus save it as the stop. Hole opening?
No. Jesus said it made the hole.
Who stopped sacrificed body on cross addition maths loss of natural four seasons?
Mother void space vacuum womb had.
Ok.
So Jesus made sin. It got stopped by a God cause yet man did it! You said Jesus the wrong thesis. Jesus terms criminal science thesis.
As worded answers sometimes need human related continuance as consciousness first is natural.
A holy teacher interpreter was only ever allowed to read. By their proven mind status. No one else was as you misinterpret what small warnings were heard.
Did man get hurt?
Yes.
What saved man?
Gods cooling above with mother term.
Okay.....what stopped sin? It wasn't stopped. A hole did had opened. Always had.
More sin was stopped only .....the
Teaching in actual taught terms.
You just don't read it how it was taught.
Theists are of no excuse innate liars as just humans....already known. Already taught they were. Legal was a rich man versus evil rich men. The history.
TagliatelliMonster
Veteran Member
Sounds like your objection is emotional.
TagliatelliMonster
Veteran Member
One can reckon they've proved something by playing with words..
If there IS no reason, then we shouldn't be here.
That doesn't follow.
Plenty of things happen for no reason, which is to say - without intentionality.
No clue where you got the idea of "no intentionality" = it doesn't happen.
When I put water in my freezer for the purpose to create ice, then there is intentionality.
But water out in the wild still freezes without such reason when it's cold enough.
The statement "If there IS no reason, then we shouldn't be here" thus makes absolutely no sense.