Evolution works in mysterious ways

[CataclysmicQuantum]

She is not getting any.

The Digital World. It is an amazing place in which we primitive humans interact. Our flesh made this synthetic machine. You see, we are so smart, we know a lot of stuff. We were grown from cells that came from the universe, which the matter and physics I'm typing in it is amazing how the universe is working. Human life is very amazing. How I experience this sh*t its like wow.

[Lost User]

CataclysmicQuantum wrote:

She is not getting any.

Even off you? I thought that was normal in trailer parks?

Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription

[Oakman]

Thanks for contacting me. Please hold your breath until I get back to you.

Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface

[CataclysmicQuantum]

fat_boy wrote:

Even off you? I thought that was normal in trailer parks?

It is, but I ain't no trailer park person. I need a girl young, at least not fat, good looking.

The Digital World. It is an amazing place in which we primitive humans interact. Our flesh made this synthetic machine. You see, we are so smart, we know a lot of stuff. We were grown from cells that came from the universe, which the matter and physics I'm typing in it is amazing how the universe is working. Human life is very amazing. How I experience this sh*t its like wow.

[Oakman]

Matthew Faithfull wrote:

Not difficult to spot any glaring errors

So there are errors? But you are smart enough to spot every one?

Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface

[Matthew Faithfull]

Thomas George wrote:

I will accept it as the current scientific model until the broad scientific community accepts that the model is flawed beyond usefulness.

Unfortunately much of that broad 'scientific' community now believes in this theory as a matter of religious principle and will not abandon it in the face of mere contradictory evidence.

Thomas George wrote:

There must be other theories that have the same level of problems that theory of evolution has,

There are and where I come accross them I stick the boot in just as vigorously. Basic Cosmology for example is entirely based on circular reasoning, redering it bunkum. Geology where it clings to Lyle's dictum is an aggregation of error based on error. I'm not picky believe me.

Thomas George wrote:

it is perceived as a threat to religion in some way.

No, evolution is not a threat to religion it is a threat to science and to society as I've explained in previous threads. The broken thinking and false view of humanity it engenders is destructive in a extraordinarily far reaching set of fields.

Thomas George wrote:

You, despite not being a biologist, are interested in *disproving* a theory that is accepted now.

Precisely because the scientists who should be doing so are not, they are accepting the theory as fact and relying on it, resulting in bad science.

Thomas George wrote:

Even graduates and post-graduates do not go around discrediting theories without research.

No they go around discrediting theories based on research, often other peoples research, and argument as I have tried to do.

Thomas George wrote:

A similar level of insecurity was shown by the Church regarding Physics in the time of Galileo.

There is no insecurity here as I've said how can a false, failed, discredited theory be a threat to the Church? The case of Galileo is sad and oft repreated but utterly irrelevant. It was power and politics plain and simple and nothing to do with the the Church, only a political organisation set up by and filled with fallable men, i.e. the Vatican.

"The secret of happiness is freedom, and the secret of freedom, courage." Thucydides (B.C. 460-400)

[Lost User]

Oakman wrote:

Evolution works in mysterious ways

Yeah, it produced Henize for christs sake.

Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription

[Oakman]

Thomas George wrote:

A similar level of insecurity was shown by the Church regarding Physics in the time of Galileo.

Interesting. You brought to mind an image of someone in the future apologizing to Darwin in much the same way that the Pope recently apologised to Galileo

Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface

[Matthew Faithfull]

Paul Watson wrote:

You don't need god to be good, Matthew.

You precisely and definitively do need God to be good. All good proceeds from God and without him there is no good.

Paul Watson wrote:

Incapable is a strong word.

And not used lightly. It is precisely what I meant.

Paul Watson wrote:

I see a universe without the touch of god in it.

Perhaps because you need to know God to recognise his touch. Fortunately he has made that possible.

"The secret of happiness is freedom, and the secret of freedom, courage." Thucydides (B.C. 460-400)

[Oakman]

Matthew Faithfull wrote:

filled with fallable men

Unlike you and your church?

Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface

[Lost User]

Matthew Faithfull wrote:

B doesn't win 500 times more than A so once again your math is wrong. By the time B has gone on two generations it's indestinguishable in terms of superiority from A because of it's accumulated damage. You do the math, Presto extinction!

Wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong. Say A wins 50% of the time and B wins 100% of the time. A(t) = A(t-1) + (0.5)A(t-1), A(0) = 500 B(t) = B(t-1) + (1)B(t-1), B(0) = 1 A[0] = 500, B[0] = 1; Solve for B(t) = A(t). Hell, in only 200 generations (and bacteria have a generation time of about 8 hours), there's nearly twice as many B as A. So that's about 2 months. And this is a pretty simple calculation. Let's see yours - go ahead, factor in death rates, food availability, all that stuff. Me? I just look at the papers that have done it already. Stop talking about things you have no idea about.

- F

[Matthew Faithfull]

Oakman wrote:

So there are errors?

No there are not, none that I can spot, or those much cleverer and more knowledgable than myself. Anyway it would be better to discuss what's in the book than if the number of queryable translations is 4 or 5 or things no one understands is 10 or 11. How much have you read?

"The secret of happiness is freedom, and the secret of freedom, courage." Thucydides (B.C. 460-400)

[Matthew Faithfull]

Would be slightly confusing considering Darwin changed his mind and admitted his theory was wrong during his lifetime. Perhaps a future Pope could apologise to Darwin for all the bad science done since with his name attached to it but I can't quite see why it would be the Pope doing the apologising?

"The secret of happiness is freedom, and the secret of freedom, courage." Thucydides (B.C. 460-400)

[Paul Watson]

Matthew Faithfull wrote:

You precisely and definitively do need God to be good. All good proceeds from God and without him there is no good.

Horribly arrogant. How do you expect to do good amongst the people when you think so little of the people?

Matthew Faithfull wrote:

Fortunately he has made that possible.

Through?

regards, Paul Watson Ireland & South Africa

Fernando A. Gomez F. wrote:

At least he achieved immortality for a few years.

[Ilion]

:zzz:

[Lost User]

Ravel H. Joyce wrote:

What is this 'de-evolution' thing you keep talking about?

The process that gave rise to Henize I suspect.

Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription

[Matthew Faithfull]

The Church is and always will be full of fallable human beings. The difference that is hard to get accross to non-believers is that the Church is not the human institution which owns buildings and elects Popes and collects riches and pays taxes and the rest. The Roman Catholic church, centered in the Vatican is an example of one such institution but that is not the Church. The Church is defined as the people of God, those he has redeemed from every tribe and tounge and nation. Only God gets to say who is in the Church and who is not and its mapping onto and relation to human organisations is a complex and tricky affair. Their are many churches but only one Church. Sometimes you get a church that doesn't contain very much of the Church at all and bad things tend to result, from Waco to the Spanish Inquisition. The Church does not do such things though some genuine believers may get mixed up in them.

"The secret of happiness is freedom, and the secret of freedom, courage." Thucydides (B.C. 460-400)

[Matthew Faithfull]

Fisticuffs wrote:

Stop talking about things you have no idea about.

I suggest you follow your own advice, at least until you can handle basic addition and percentages. :rolleyes:

"The secret of happiness is freedom, and the secret of freedom, courage." Thucydides (B.C. 460-400)

[Lost User]

There is only one way to discredit any scientific theory. Do research, and publish findings in a reputed journal. I think that acceptance of broader scientific community is essential. Garnering public opinion has no bearing on this.

Matthew Faithfull wrote:

how can a false, failed, discredited theory be a threat to the Church?

If the broad scientific community does not accept that, it is neither failed nor discredited from a scientific view point. I see this current bout of "evolution versus creation" as a war to get them young. The whole issue stems from the fact that those supporting creation want it (or at least Intelligent Design) to be taught as science. There is a lot of insecurity in religion these days. Things like the Da Vinci Code has attracted too much negative attention from the Church. Harry Potter also was considered a problem. You would also accept that none of these had any potential to challenge the mass following of Christianity, and did not deserve the attention showered on it.

Matthew Faithfull wrote:

It was power and politics plain and simple and nothing to do with the the Church, only a political organisation set up by and filled with fallable men, i.e. the Vatican.

which is the primary problem. True religious belief can only be personal, not organized. The current issues are also about power and politics, at least in my eyes.

[Al Beback]

Matthew Faithfull wrote:

Yes, God, who's standard is perfection, examined what he had made and declared that it was good.

Yeah, good. Mosquitoes are great. Diseases are wonderful. Tornadoes are cool. Adam and Eve's children having incest is neat. But people's ability to be coerced into believing in magic tops them all.

- Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is impotent. - Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. - Is he both able and willing? Whence then is evil? - Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God? Epicurus