Home Forums Classifieds Blogs Today's Posts Search Social Groups



  
SIGN-UP
Notices

Glock Talk
Welcome To The Glock Talk Forums.

 
  
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 01-23-2013, 14:40   #21
hooligan74
Senior Member
 
hooligan74's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 2,911
I haven't read this whole thread, yet, but evolution does not equal abiogenesis.

Abiogenesis, or biopoiesis, is the process by which life arose from inorganic matter.

Evolution is the change in the inherited characteristics of biological populations over successive generations.

People, not necessarily in this thread, seem to conflate these two things often. "God" could have created life on this planet and then evolution occured following that creation. Evolution is not mutually exclusive to the idea of a sentient creator.

Now I'll read the whole thread.
hooligan74 is offline  
Old 01-23-2013, 14:45   #22
hooligan74
Senior Member
 
hooligan74's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 2,911
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cavalry Doc View Post
But you still consider it reasonably possible that life WAS created, right?
Possible? Yes. Reasonably possible? Not without any evidence to suggest it was, IMO.

Last edited by hooligan74; 01-23-2013 at 14:46..
hooligan74 is offline  
Old 01-23-2013, 17:08   #23
ksg0245
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 3,704
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roering View Post
Well, if you believe in evolution I guess you would have to conclude from this example and your logic regarding solar energy as a superior source that plants are more evolved than animals....except for the 3 mentioned.

I thought that the theory of evolution taught the opposite though. That animals are generally a more advanced species than plants and therefore more evolved, not less.

If that is the case, wouldn't this be evidence against the theory of evolution?
Not more or less advanced; better or more poorly adapted. Plants are better adapted for their niche, animals for theirs.
ksg0245 is offline  
Old 01-23-2013, 18:23   #24
Roering
Sorting nuts
 
Roering's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 4,558
Quote:
Originally Posted by ksg0245 View Post
Not more or less advanced; better or more poorly adapted. Plants are better adapted for their niche, animals for theirs.
Correct, but I'm using Gunhavers logic on this one.
__________________
------------------------------------------------------
Warranty voiding

Never buy vegan tacos from a chick with longer armpit hair than yourself. - Woofie
Roering is offline  
Old 01-23-2013, 18:29   #25
Cavalry Doc
Platinum Membership
MAJ (USA Ret.)
 
Cavalry Doc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Republic of Texas
Posts: 42,157


Quote:
Originally Posted by English View Post
No. It is two things. The totality of science, not just evolution, should lead people to believe that there is almost certainly not a creator. When, to that, you add the fact that every single god myth is untestable and that each is logically indistinguishable, in this respect, from every other and from any that is invented afresh, it makes the concept of a creator even more unbelievable. The multiplicity of different religions does no more than demonstrate a strong tendency of humans to invent new religions and gods and to believe in them with a level of inner certainty which will make them sacrifice their lives or kill others for that belief.

This, of course, does not make the existence of a creator at some time in the history of the universe impossible, but it does make it a dumb thing to base your life on.

I can imagine a Religion Shop. Someone goes in a says that his religion is somehow just not giving him what he wants. "Oh yes Sir," says the assistant,"We have lots of people who come in feeling that way but we have 430 different religions you can choose from and I am sure one of them will be just what you want."

"This one has splendid ceremonies with animal sacrifices and the public deflowering of virgins by the priest four times a year. This one gives a special level of approval and extra perks in Heaven for celibates and hermits. Their fellow religionists who are not quite into being hermits themselves gain credit from providing the hermits with food and old sacks for clothes and bedding. Just between you and me, it has fallen out of fashion in the last few years as so many illegal aliens live like that now. It has just lost a certain exclusivity!"

"Now this one associates earthly success with status in Heaven and is particularly good for the go-getter personality types amongst us, but many can't live up to it. This one is more exciting because it gives you categories of people that it encourages you to kill. In fact we have several along those lines with different categories. Some prefer killing homosexuals and others prefer bankers. Still others prefer virgins but we discourage those because the supply is limited. We have a very good special on one where the members practice cannibalism on each other but they are rather secretive about how they decide who eats and who is eaten. It is a rather specialized taste of course and not enough people choose it for us to know quite what personality profile it suits. But, as I say, we have 430 different ones to choose from so why don't you start with some of the characteristics you are looking for and I will try to pick a short list for you?"

When it is possible to choose absolutely any religion or to invent your own, as Ron L Hubbard and the founder of the Mormon's did, and when there is no rational means of choosing between them, why would a sensible person choose any?

English

So, would you say that you believe it is beyond a reasonable doubt that there was a creator?
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.
--Gunhaver
Don't let the guys quoted above contact your reps more than you.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.
Cavalry Doc is offline  
Old 01-23-2013, 18:30   #26
Cavalry Doc
Platinum Membership
MAJ (USA Ret.)
 
Cavalry Doc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Republic of Texas
Posts: 42,157


Quote:
Originally Posted by hooligan74 View Post
Possible? Yes. Reasonably possible? Not without any evidence to suggest it was, IMO.
So, it's beyond a reasonable doubt?
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.
--Gunhaver
Don't let the guys quoted above contact your reps more than you.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.
Cavalry Doc is offline  
Old 01-23-2013, 18:31   #27
Cavalry Doc
Platinum Membership
MAJ (USA Ret.)
 
Cavalry Doc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Republic of Texas
Posts: 42,157


Quote:
Originally Posted by Roering View Post
Correct, but I'm using Gunhavers logic on this one.
Oh, you should have asked him about his concept of money before you went there.
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.
--Gunhaver
Don't let the guys quoted above contact your reps more than you.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.
Cavalry Doc is offline  
Old 01-23-2013, 20:34   #28
hooligan74
Senior Member
 
hooligan74's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 2,911
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cavalry Doc View Post
So, it's beyond a reasonable doubt?

I see no reasonable evidence to suggest a belief in a sentient creative being is warranted, no.
hooligan74 is offline  
Old 01-23-2013, 20:49   #29
Cavalry Doc
Platinum Membership
MAJ (USA Ret.)
 
Cavalry Doc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Republic of Texas
Posts: 42,157


Quote:
Originally Posted by hooligan74 View Post
I see no reasonable evidence to suggest a belief in a sentient creative being is warranted, no.
Not criticizing, just pointing that "beyond a reasonable doubt" is pretty sure.
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.
--Gunhaver
Don't let the guys quoted above contact your reps more than you.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.
Cavalry Doc is offline  
Old 01-23-2013, 21:09   #30
hooligan74
Senior Member
 
hooligan74's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 2,911
Do you know of any reasonable physical evidence that points to a sentient creative being?

You need to prove something beyond a reasonable doubt, absence of belief is the null/default position.
hooligan74 is offline  
Old 01-23-2013, 21:21   #31
Cavalry Doc
Platinum Membership
MAJ (USA Ret.)
 
Cavalry Doc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Republic of Texas
Posts: 42,157


Quote:
Originally Posted by hooligan74 View Post
Do you know of any reasonable physical evidence that points to a sentient creative being?
All I know is that what is, is. I don't even claim to know all of what is. I do understand that there is an order to life, and that it is very complex, and not really very likely to have just come together in a primordial soup somewhere, even with Frankenstein's lightning apparatus.

Right, wrong, or even in the wrong direction, I believe it is roughly equally possible that a deity has existed as it is possible that none has existed.

I have left the unanswered question unanswered. Not everyone can do that.

Quote:
You need to prove something beyond a reasonable doubt, absence of belief is the null/default position.
I've toyed with the concept of the null deity. There are a few that it seems it would fit for, but that's not something I am very sure of.

If you believe something to be true, beyond a reasonable doubt, rephrasing it in the passive sense does not really negate the surety of that belief. The difference in how one leads their life is really negligible.
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.
--Gunhaver
Don't let the guys quoted above contact your reps more than you.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.
Cavalry Doc is offline  
Old 01-23-2013, 21:31   #32
Syclone538
Senior Member
 
Syclone538's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 2,346
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cavalry Doc View Post
Paraphrasing, so the discoveries made of evolution should lead people to understand that there is almost certainly not a creator?
Rejecting the idea of a god has nothing to do with evolution. Evolution shouldn't lead people to doubt there is a god, the complete lack of evidence for a god should lead people to doubt there is a god.

You don't have to have an alternate explanation to say "sounds like BS to me."
__________________
Some people want freedom, even for those they disagree with, and some don't.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.

Quote:
...
The constitution is not, nor was it meant to be absolutely literal.
...
Syclone538 is offline  
Old 01-23-2013, 21:57   #33
Cavalry Doc
Platinum Membership
MAJ (USA Ret.)
 
Cavalry Doc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Republic of Texas
Posts: 42,157


Quote:
Originally Posted by Syclone538 View Post
Rejecting the idea of a god has nothing to do with evolution. Evolution shouldn't lead people to doubt there is a god, the complete lack of evidence for a god should lead people to doubt there is a god.

You don't have to have an alternate explanation to say "sounds like BS to me."
Evolution didn't occur until after there was life capable of adaptation to it's environment, and enough adaptation that such changes increased the likely hood of survival. Extinction is probably the norm, survival the exception of the good ideas.

Like I've said, from the middle, both sides seem to be making assumptions. Why assume at all? Why not accept that we aren't really sure, and get ready for bed, because we have to wake up and go to work tomorrow.

I'm not dictating. Both sides have every right to assume and believe what they wish.


On a day to day basis, it just doesn't come up that often.
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.
--Gunhaver
Don't let the guys quoted above contact your reps more than you.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.

Last edited by Cavalry Doc; 01-23-2013 at 21:57..
Cavalry Doc is offline  
Old 01-23-2013, 23:54   #34
juggy4711
Nimrod Son
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Galveston County, TX
Posts: 3,807
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cavalry Doc View Post
I'd not presume to know what other people should think. It's not a bad idea to understand how they got there thought.

Science is a very good process of discovery, but it is often wrong. It's a human endeavor, and we all know, atheists, agnostics and theists, that humans are imperfect. Right?
Imperfect, without a doubt. But would you care to share the times in the last 100 years in which science has been often wrong?

As far as you not presuming what people should think I call BS. I'm guessing you presume they should think murder is wrong, theft is wrong etc.

Quote:
Originally Posted by English View Post
No. It is two things. The totality of science, not just evolution, should lead people to believe that there is almost certainly not a creator...

English
Brilliant post English.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cavalry Doc View Post
So, would you say that you believe it is beyond a reasonable doubt that there was a creator?
Leave it to Doc to ignore all the points English raised and ask a stupid question to deflect.

And not to answer for English but yes, as he stated, given the totality of science, people should believe is almost certainly not a creator in the religious sense.

Last edited by juggy4711; 01-24-2013 at 00:22.. Reason: spelling, context, avoiding a hopeless topic
juggy4711 is offline  
Old 01-24-2013, 03:57   #35
Gunhaver
the wrong hands
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 2,736
Blog Entries: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by void * View Post
That is not automatically indicative of a lack of design. For instance, when we as humans design things, we will in fact make decisions that will result in not using the most efficient available energy source/engine/whatever. It depends on the design criteria, and the cost limitations. (Of course, an all-powerful deity would not have cost limitations).

I don't see it as evidence, as there's nothing about the mere fact that only 3 animals use this power source that cleanly indicates a designer would not make that choice.

Now, thing like the laryngeal nerve in a giraffe, where there's a more direct route that could have been taken, but wasn't, that kind of thing is certainly something that can be the basis for a statement like 'If this was designed, why is it routed like this?" - precisely because it's easy to see that a designer would route it more efficiently. It's still not strictly indicative of a lack of design, because the "designer" could be bad at designing - but it's a far stronger statement.

Now, if it could be shown through data that this energy source actually would confer a general advantage *and* that it was a relatively recent development when looked at from an evolutionary perspective, you'd have the argument "This is the absolutely the best power source, evolution can explain why more animals aren't using it, whereas the posit of a designer cannot". But without such data it seems a bit of a stretch. (That data may exist, for all I know, all I'm saying is that the mere existence of these three animals, and their use of photosynthesis, is not enough information to build a good argument).
Understand that none of this eliminates the possibility of a designer to me. It only contradicts the very detailed accounts of what kind of designer was involved by those that are sure they know Him to exist. They claim Him to be benevolent, all powerful, omnipotent, ect. In other words, He really loves and cares more that we can possibly imagine and there's nothing He can't do. You can tell by overuse of capital H who I'm talking about.

To me, the fact that predation far surpasses photosynthesis as an energy system in animals contradicts those claims. It's obvious that photosynthesis works in animals and if it's not the most advantageous energy system then it could have been made more efficient by His Omnipotence if He wished.

It's like if you told me that you have a friend named Sarah. I can't disprove that and have no reason to try. If you then tell me that Sarah is a custom jewelry designer and she's the best there ever was at it you nail down your claims down to something that can be evaluated and spark my interest in testing those claims in a single statement. Now show me some work of hers and, knowing a bit about the subject myself, if I see solder joints that are poorly fitted and boiled out, bad eutectic bonds and plain old sloppy fabrications marks left behind I can reasonably say that this person has not shown the level of craftsmanship that would be expected given the claims made of her abilities. Obviously there is some kind of relationship between Sarah and you that makes you biased and gives you motivation to inflate claims of her abilities.

I often refer to The Great Giant Magnet. That's my placeholder term for any magic or supernatural requirements for this universe as yet undiscovered, a label for that .001% possibility of deity that open mindedness requires. I see everything working in nature as moving along perfectly and ingeniously if created, but, most surely created by an indifferent deity with limited power, if created. At the very least that deity cannot create a rock so heavy that he cannot move it. But then, when I imagine what deity might look like I don't get carried away in the character development phase because I'm not trying to sell you anything.
Gunhaver is offline  
Old 01-24-2013, 04:25   #36
Gunhaver
the wrong hands
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 2,736
Blog Entries: 1
Well, if G36 is back to responding to you then I'm not going to be the only one that misses out on the fun of pointing out your BS logical fallacies.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Cavalry Doc View Post
All I know is that what is, is. I don't even claim to know all of what is. I do understand that there is an order to life, and that it is very complex, and not really very likely to have just come together in a primordial soup somewhere, even with Frankenstein's lightning apparatus.
Again, how do you arrive at the likelihood of abiogenesis in our entire universe? Is a number of natural laboratories uncountable to the billionth power running experiments for what may as well be infinite time not enough for some elements to come together in nearly every possible way? Do you not see that a few hundred years of humans working on the problem is nothing compared to that? How many lightning strikes happen simultaneously in one second in all of existence and how many other energy discharges that we don't even know about?

We just discovered a new particle and from what I hear it's a pretty important one. How do you know there wasn't some past discharge of that particle that may have kicked the whole thing off? Some as yet undiscovered particle? Who's to say we should have this life thing worked out by now? We're still improving on the internal combustion engine.

Nobody is claiming to know all of what is but many of us are real keen on keeping up the investigation rather than assigning credit to figments of imagination.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cavalry Doc View Post
Right, wrong, or even in the wrong direction, I believe it is roughly equally possible that a deity has existed as it is possible that none has existed.
Wait, you just said it's not very likely that life just happened without divine intervention and now you're giving it a 50-50 probability? It's obvious that you aren't thinking about this as much as you'd have us believe.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cavalry Doc View Post
I have left the unanswered question unanswered. Not everyone can do that.
Well you're right about that. Those that can't do that are called scientists.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cavalry Doc View Post
I've toyed with the concept of the null deity. There are a few that it seems it would fit for, but that's not something I am very sure of.

If you believe something to be true, beyond a reasonable doubt, rephrasing it in the passive sense does not really negate the surety of that belief. The difference in how one leads their life is really negligible.
And the rest is of very little substance so I have no response to that.
Gunhaver is offline  
Old 01-24-2013, 07:04   #37
Cavalry Doc
Platinum Membership
MAJ (USA Ret.)
 
Cavalry Doc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Republic of Texas
Posts: 42,157


Quote:
Originally Posted by juggy4711 View Post
Imperfect, without a doubt. But would you care to share the times in the last 100 years in which science has been often wrong?

As far as you not presuming what people should think I call BS. I'm guessing you presume they should think murder is wrong, theft is wrong etc.



Brilliant post English.



Leave it to Doc to ignore all the points English raised and ask a stupid question to deflect.

And not to answer for English but yes, as he stated, given the totality of science, people should believe is almost certainly not a creator in the religious sense.


English can probably see the point, but I'll try to use small words to help you follow.

He laid out a series of man described religions and deities (gods). Some of them, people just made up. So why choose one? Got that. I'm not bypassing(going around) the point, I'm taking it one more level. The descriptions of a god or other religions by men, that are very fallible (they make mistakes), are unacceptable (he doesn't like them). Got it. Do his examples and the rest of his experiences rule out the possibility of any deity as a creator?




I find your inability to discuss things without losing your temper funny. But I don't wish you any harm. Try to relax.
I am going to ignore your point, maybe not forever, but at least for a while. You won't like the answer. Don't want you to stroke out too soon.
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.
--Gunhaver
Don't let the guys quoted above contact your reps more than you.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.

Last edited by Cavalry Doc; 01-24-2013 at 07:05..
Cavalry Doc is offline  
Old 01-24-2013, 08:50   #38
hooligan74
Senior Member
 
hooligan74's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 2,911
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cavalry Doc View Post
All I know is that what is, is. I don't even claim to know all of what is. I do understand that there is an order to life, and that it is very complex, and not really very likely to have just come together in a primordial soup somewhere, even with Frankenstein's lightning apparatus.

Right, wrong, or even in the wrong direction, I believe it is roughly equally possible that a deity has existed as it is possible that none has existed.

I have left the unanswered question unanswered. Not everyone can do that.



I've toyed with the concept of the null deity. There are a few that it seems it would fit for, but that's not something I am very sure of.

If you believe something to be true, beyond a reasonable doubt, rephrasing it in the passive sense does not really negate the surety of that belief. The difference in how one leads their life is really negligible.
Are humans born with an innate belief in a creator, yes or no?
hooligan74 is offline  
Old 01-24-2013, 08:52   #39
English
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: London
Posts: 5,599
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cavalry Doc View Post
So, would you say that you believe it is beyond a reasonable doubt that there was a creator?
That is a strangely ambiguous sentence. Did you miss a "not"?

The concept of "beyond a reasonable doubt" is the basis of working decisions in a law court. It never means that there can be no doubt but only that the space left for doubt is small enough to neglect even though that means the decision will sometimes be wrong. On that basis, I believe the belief that there was a creator is false beyond a reasonable doubt and I lead my life on the assumption that there is no god and never has been.

English
English is offline  
Old 01-24-2013, 10:46   #40
Cavalry Doc
Platinum Membership
MAJ (USA Ret.)
 
Cavalry Doc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Republic of Texas
Posts: 42,157


Quote:
Originally Posted by hooligan74 View Post
Are humans born with an innate belief in a creator, yes or no?
Well, I would guess no. Over time, even a person with no human interaction might wonder where they came from. I'd guess there is more than one possible answer.
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.
--Gunhaver
Don't let the guys quoted above contact your reps more than you.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.
Cavalry Doc is offline  

 
  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump




All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:40.




Homepage
FAQ
Forums
Calendar
Advertise
Gallery
GT Wiki
GT Blogs
Social Groups
Classifieds


Users Currently Online: 644
149 Members
495 Guests

Most users ever online: 2,672
Aug 11, 2014 at 2:31