Creation vs. Evolution

[DFT_Dave]

The fossil record is consistent with evolution.

DNA evidence supports evolution, there is sooo much. For one, HERVs. Broken vitamin c genes another. Similarities between the genomes of related species and groups another. Etc.

And Physics contradicts it? And you claim that with what evidence? It is daft, Dave, to put your trust in arguments you don't understand. Have you ever studied Physics beyond high school level?

So far the case I've made is clear, even to you. Not agreeing with what I have said does not mean you haven't understood what I've said.

--Dave

 

[DFT_Dave]

So again, we are right back to the beginning of your insane cycle of unsubstantiated claims. And you wonder why competent people just laugh at you for being a charlatan.

Here come the "competent laughing ad hominems"

:rotfl::crackup::kookoo::chuckle::loser::reals:::BRAVO::mock: Dave's a charlatan.

--Dave

 

[Stuu]

No, it's a premise for a proposition that requires faith.

So you don't care about the quality of information according to Occams' Razor, you just pile up assumptions.

Creationism requires faith just as evolution requires faith.

Creationism is a rational faith in that the premise is consistent with a conclusion, evolution is not.

The cell has functional information that has purpose.

Nature has no intelligence and therefore cannot create cells with information that has purpose.

God is intelligent and therefore can create cells with information that has purpose.

Explanations that imagine how nature can be purposeless and yet create cells with purpose is saying nature is both purposeless and purposeful which is irrational, having it both ways.

The mutation is a product of nature, nature is also the environment that selects the useful mutations it has created before hand. This amounts to giving nature a purpose for the mutation and therefore also giving it intelligence. This contradicts the original premise that nature has no intelligence.

I asked you this:

How does [your god belongs in some category invisible to science], and if you can't explain exactly how, then on what grounds do you expect to be taken seriously?

But you don't appear to have given me an answer. Just platitudes. And you have added a new claim, that 'evolution requires faith'. As with your previous failures on 'information theory' you are still equivocating on, for example, the meanings of words like purpose, in an obvious attempt to cloud the situation and avoid clarity, not explain clearly, which is what I asked you to do.

Stuart

 

[Stuu]

The fact is the entropy principle of physics contradicts it.

But you couldn't say how, earlier. Can you explain how this works?

Stuart

 

[DFT_Dave]

So you don't care about the quality of information according to Occams' Razor, you just pile up assumptions.

I asked you this:

How does [your god belongs in some category invisible to science], and if you can't explain exactly how, then on what grounds do you expect to be taken seriously?

But you don't appear to have given me an answer. Just platitudes. And you have added a new claim, that 'evolution requires faith'. As with your previous failures on 'information theory' you are still equivocating on, for example, the meanings of words like purpose, in an obvious attempt to cloud the situation and avoid clarity, not explain clearly, which is what I asked you to do.

Stuart

The answer I gave you is clear, you just don't like it.

--Dave

 

[Stuu]

You make the mistake of requiring physical evidence for non physical intelligent spirit.

There you go again. WHY is that a mistake?

Stuart

 

[DFT_Dave]

But you couldn't say how, earlier. Can you explain how this works?

Stuart

I already did.

--Dave

 

[DFT_Dave]

There you go again. WHY is that a mistake?

Stuart

Because it's not possible.

--Dave

 

[Stuu]

The answer I gave you is clear, you just don't like it.

--Dave

The answer is platitudes. If you intended to communicate something of meaning to me, then you failed. I guess it would be up to others to judge whether I had been unreasonable in my interpretation of what you said, but it means nothing to me.

All that seems consistent with the fact that you don't appear to know what natural selection, information theory or entropy are.

Stuart

 

[Stuu]

Because it's not possible.

--Dave

Not an explanation.

Stuart

 

[Stuu]

I already did.

--Dave

Remind me. Maybe describe for me the role of the sun in the application of the Second Law of Thermodynamics to life on earth.

Stuart

 

[gcthomas]

When you are willing to misrepresent the science in order to attack it (as if proving the science wrong automatically makes your imaginings right! ) of course those who have some expertise will laugh at the amateurish attempts at critiques.

 

[noguru]

Here come the "competent laughing ad hominems"

:rotfl::crackup::kookoo::chuckle::loser::reals:::BRAVO::mock: Dave's a charlatan.

--Dave

:rotfl:

Dave, you are a charlatan. You call naturalistic explanations "irrational" without any substance other than your messed up opinion. You have deceived yourself and you are now trying to deceive others. But as gcthomas pointed out those with expertise will see right through your empty bluster.

 

[MichaelCadry]

Dear All,

I don't see anything wrong with what Dave has said. He is FAR from a charlatan. He's VERY knowledgeable for a man to be. You all just don't want believe in Hell because you don't want to go there. Noguru should know that Jesus received the keys of Death and Hell. Hell is written in Rev. 1:18, 20:14. So noguru, you being a Christian, how can you overlook this, what the Bible says or what you say. Whom are we to believe in?? You or the Bible? BTW, I would believe in DFT_Dave anytime over someone else. He is very knowledgeable. You just expect him to have all of the answers that four or five of you gang up on him. He's got to answer four or five people, and you only have to address him. It's simply not fair. Noguru, do you believe in Christ? What He had to say? What's going on? DFT_Dave is more knowledgeable about the Bible than you. Jesus said there was a Hell.

 

[gcthomas]

Dear All,

I don't see anything wrong with what Dave has said. He is FAR from a charlatan. He's VERY knowledgeable for a man to be. You all just don't want believe in Hell because you don't want to go there. Noguru should know that Jesus received the keys of Death and Hell. Hell is written in Rev. 1:18, 20:14. So noguru, you being a Christian, how can you overlook this, what the Bible says or what you say. Whom are we to believe in?? You or the Bible? BTW, I would believe in DFT_Dave anytime over someone else. He is very knowledgeable. You just expect him to have all of the answers that four or five of you gang up on him. He's got to answer four or five people, and you only have to address him. It's simply not fair. Noguru, do you believe in Christ? What He had to say? What's going on? DFT_Dave is more knowledgeable about the Bible than you. Jesus said there was a Hell.

Michael, I spend my days diagnosing and trying to correct student misconceptions about the concepts of Physics. Dave has them aplenty, yet he continues to claim that his opinions should be taken more seriously than those of actual Physicists who have spent years learning how to handle counter-intuitive physical concepts. He doesn't appear to have studied Physics beyond the introductory high-school courses, for reasons of lack of potential I suspect, so he should show more humility and stop misrepresenting the science.

That he is very certain of his own infallibility is no reason to accept his word without question.

 

[MichaelCadry]

Dear gcthomas,

He believes in the Bible. You don't. That's what makes you lacking and him not lacking. Do you understand?? He knows plenty about our 'Invisible Friend.' You are going to get your proof. You know that, don't you? The problem is that you won't like the results of it. That, to me, is why I believe in David more than in you!!

Michael

 

[alwight]

Do you really think that you have in any way shown specifically how the ToE is not strictly in accordance with reason and logic? I don't think so btw.


Yes but I'm quite fair and reasonable about it Dave, I don't think that anyone's untestable claims of a supernatural are in the least bit admissible as science. Which btw also goes for astrology, alchemy, voodoo, black magic and witchcraft.

Special pleading for one specific supernatural isn't exactly scientific either Dave. Afaic while no supernatural claims can be put to the test or perhaps falsified then I can see no reason for even considering anyone's woo as being more than just worthless bald assertion.

You make the mistake of requiring physical evidence for non physical intelligent spirit. You think it black magic to believe in a supernatural intelligent being but have no problem believing that intelligence has evolved from non intelligent physical material.

You want it both ways Dave, if your intelligent spirit has no testable effects at all then that is in effect no difference from not existing. Either your spirit causes detectable effects or else may as well not exist, even if it does.

The Bible accurately informs us of origins that are confirmed in the fossil record as fully formed humans and every living thing created in distinct forms (sudden appearance), with diversity encoded into every cell--DNA.

I don't accept any such thing, but simply going by the geological column from early fractal based creatures, now long extinct (perhaps more plant than creature), through all of life's previous manifestations up until now, human-like creatures have only been involved for a tiny fraction. We were not there "in the beginning" and perhaps won't be there at the end, Genesis is clearly not factual and literally true Dave.

The Bible also accurately informs us of an ancient global flood confirmed by geology, sudden burial animals, and a massive burial of plant life that produced coal.

Bunny rabbits were better swimmers than diplodocus apparently. Henry Madison Morris a founding father of YECism proposed "hydraulic sorting" I gather, to explain how after a mythical global flood rabbits appear only at the top of geology (good imaginative work from the mind of a former hydraulics engineer then). But in a mythical global flood that didn't actually happen, as geological evidence confirms no sign of it, I suppose anything can be imagined as true.

Unfortunately for you the Bible also issues a Burn notice.

--Dave

You should give up the science Dave, since you obviously don't have a clue, and stick to Bible thumping.
Pretending that science is somehow confirming a literal Bible is just a lie that you'd probably like to bamboozle your punters with in Washington Square, but it won't work here.

 

[noguru]

Dear All,

So noguru, you being a Christian, how can you overlook this, what the Bible says or what you say.

Michael the Bible says what the Bible says. Just because you and Dave are as incompetent at understanding the Bible as you are at science does not mean your word is God's word.

Stand right up Michael and if Dave would like also. I would welcome you both to compare your understanding of scripture to mine. I am game, are you guys up for it?

I say come on with your bad selves, I'm prepared. Are you?

 

[noguru]

Dear All,

I don't see anything wrong with what Dave has said.

:rotfl:

Well Michael, the fact that you can't see a problem does not mean there is not one. I hope you can understand that you are fallible, as well as quite a foolish human. Who has not demonstrated any real ability of reason.

He is FAR from a charlatan.

Says you. I have my own opinion.

Of course someone like you who is not experienced or observant enough, and is a gullible faggot, would not recognize errors in others. I fully expect you to make such a mistake.

He's VERY knowledgeable for a man to be.

:rotfl:

Based on whose opinion?

 

[alwight]

Michael the Bible says what the Bible says. Just because you and Dave are as incompetent at understanding the Bible as you are at science does not mean your word is God's word.

Stand right up Michael and if Dave would like also. I would welcome you both to compare your understanding of scripture to mine. I am game, are you guys up for it?

I say come on with your bad selves, I'm prepared. Are you?

Can I hold your coat?