Atheism FtW - Armor Games Community

662	101462

offline

MageGrayWolf

9,462 posts

Farmer

Posted March 15, '11 9:52pm UTC

I remember it being seven mitochondrial eve's, not three, is that right?

Yeah, though there may even be more. scroll down some on this and it lists the seven and discusses how there could be more.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Seven_Daughters_of_Eve

offline

thisisnotanalt

9,821 posts

Farmer

Posted March 15, '11 9:53pm UTC

Simple Genetics, really. Mitochondrial DNA is spread through the female line. So Mommy gives it too you, not Daddy. There are three main lines of mtDNA. Noah had three daughters. Hmmm...

Doesn't matter. All of those daughters would get the same mitochondrial DNA from their mother, Noah's wife, and pass on the same variant.

offline

MageGrayWolf

9,462 posts

Farmer

Posted March 15, '11 10:11pm UTC

Doesn't matter. All of those daughters would get the same mitochondrial DNA from their mother, Noah's wife, and pass on the same variant.

Just to clear things up in the story Noah had a wife and three sons, who in turn had a wife each. So Noah did not have three daughters but three daughter in laws.

offline

Maverick4

6,800 posts

Peasant

Posted March 15, '11 10:17pm UTC

Are you blind? He posted about 100 videos of evidence.

I respond to them as I read them. In hindsite, I should have read the entire post first. Mea Culpa.

By some one else I'm pretty sure he ment a friend or teacher or maybe some other type of relative.

I beg your pardon for not knowing what he meant.

Why did he have the tree there in the first place, just wondering?

Because God made man with Free Will. I would suggest reading this:

Why did God put the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil in the Garden of Eden?

God made sin as a result of making humans

Read the Genesis Story. The link above is a good place to start.

No divine intervention by him has been made since WWI, minimum.

This is a fairly ignorant statement. Just because you can see no intervention, does not mean there is no intervention.

Witch burnings etc, I can't be bothered going into detail but IF you actually knew about what I'm talking about then don't hide it because that is not honest.

Do we mean the persecution of witches in general? For example, tribal Afrika or Peleponesian persecution? Or may be the Salem Witch Trials, arguably the most infamous of such trials. Or may be just general prosecution in the English Empire? That is, if you know what I'm talking about.

Many people were killed for going down the scientific path, no one sheds light on that, and yet if a Christian / Muslim / w/e was killed for his or her beliefs, it suddenly makes a difference.

I can't see how this is relevant.

And if a good parent has done their job right the child has the tools to make good decisions for them self, they don't try and perpetually keep the child living at home the rest of their life not allowing them to grow up.

Yes, but aren't children constantly learning from their parents? My grand parents are in their 80's, and I still take advice from them on various topics. While it is important to give the child the tools he or she needs, we must also keep the role of the parent in the childs life, because it continues to be of an important use throughout the child's life.

(common sense) Something your God appear to rob people of.

So anybody who doesn't subscribe to the Theory of Evolution has no common sense?

If we go back to your playing in the street example it's like getting hit by a car then your parents withholding the medical attention that could fix you up and on top of this throwing in there own punishment just so you can learn your lesson. But what happens in this Eden story is even worse as it's all about withholding the gaining of knowledge.

First, Its not the Tree of Knowledge, but the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil, IE, Morality and Ethics.

Yes, lets go back to my example. I agree with this much of it:

It's like getting hit by a car.

And then your parents (God) give you the life saving medical treatment that you need (Jesus Christ). You may still play in the street (Sin [verb]), and in the rare occasiion you are hit by a car, the medical treatment is always there.

This is like saying we should jail a baby born addicted to crack because of what the mother did.

But Jesus Christ is the ultimate sacrifice. To recieve the 'cure', all you have to do is ask.

How is it God required a human sacrifice just to say "your forgiven"?

Before the Ascension of Jesus Christ, Israel was requried to sacrifice a perfect ram every year to atone for the sins of the nation. (The origin of the word 'scapegoat'. With the Ascension of Jesus Christ, the Son of God, we have the eternal sacrifice. All our sins are forgiven, without the need for any more sacrifices.

Yes I can easily call a religion that worships a monster like Yahweh sick.

That would be the Jews... I'm a Christian.

Especially one that requires placing blame on those who didn't commit the action in the first place,

This should help to answer your questions.

Link

Okay now what does all this have to do with the original statement made?

"1) There will be genetic variation within a population."

BTW there's more then three. And we can actually trace them back, and it doesn't lead back to three ladies.

Mitochondrial Eve Theory

This is why we need to make a new flu shot every year, or change the formula of pesticides.

Like the Lizard, you seem to be mistaking simple adaption for evolution.

No two individuals can't account for the diversity we see today

I'm gonna assume you didn't mean for the double negative to occur in this sentence.

Actually, it can. Breeders do it all the time today. Make a simple Gene Square (I forgot the name I supposedly learned this morning >&gt, and let a large A be, say, dark skin, and a little a be light skin. I'll let you work it out for yourself.

In fact there are things we see today that if we started with such a small population we wouldn't have, such as tissue rejections from transplants.

This actually helps to proove my point. Man has fallen, and so each generation would expereice a corruption in the information it has. Not only does this help to account for genetic diversity, but it also explains many of the the things we see happening today. Like, as you pointed out, rejection of transplanted tissue.

There arguments have been debunked by numerous people (some of which can be found in the links i provided earlier), and they are a bunch of lying deceptive jackwads

I could say the same about your sources, and without the name calling.

[quote]Are you blind? He posted about 100 videos of evidence.[/quote]\r\n\r\nI respond to them as I read them. In hindsite, I should have read the entire post first. Mea Culpa.\r\n\r\n[quote]By some one else I'm pretty sure he ment a friend or teacher or maybe some other type of relative.[/quote]\r\n\r\nI beg your pardon for not knowing what he meant.\r\n\r\n[quote]Why did he have the tree there in the first place, just wondering?[/quote]\r\n\r\nBecause God made man with Free Will. I would suggest reading this:\r\n\r\n[url=http://www.gotquestions.org/tree-knowledge-good-evil.html]Why did God put the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil in the Garden of Eden?[/url]\r\n\r\n[quote]God made sin as a result of making humans[/quote]\r\n\r\nRead the Genesis Story. The link above is a good place to start.\r\n\r\n[quote]No divine intervention by him has been made since WWI, minimum.[/quote]\r\n\r\nThis is a fairly ignorant statement. Just because you can see no intervention, does not mean there is no intervention.\r\n\r\n[quote]Witch burnings etc, I can't be bothered going into detail but IF you actually knew about what I'm talking about then don't hide it because that is not honest.[/quote]\r\n\r\nDo we mean the persecution of witches in general? For example, tribal Afrika or Peleponesian persecution? Or may be the Salem Witch Trials, arguably the most infamous of such trials. Or may be just general prosecution in the English Empire? That is, if you know what I'm talking about.\r\n\r\n[quote]Many people were killed for going down the scientific path, no one sheds light on that, and yet if a Christian / Muslim / w/e was killed for his or her beliefs, it suddenly makes a difference.[/quote]\r\n\r\nI can't see how this is relevant.\r\n\r\n[quote]And if a good parent has done their job right the child has the tools to make good decisions for them self, they don't try and perpetually keep the child living at home the rest of their life not allowing them to grow up.[/quote]\r\n\r\nYes, but aren't children constantly learning from their parents? My grand parents are in their 80's, and I still take advice from them on various topics. While it is important to give the child the tools he or she needs, we must also keep the role of the parent in the childs life, because it continues to be of an important use throughout the child's life.\r\n\r\n[quote](common sense) Something your God appear to rob people of.[/quote]\r\n\r\nSo anybody who doesn't subscribe to the Theory of Evolution has no common sense?\r\n\r\n[quote]If we go back to your playing in the street example it's like getting hit by a car then your parents withholding the medical attention that could fix you up and on top of this throwing in there own punishment just so you can learn your lesson. But what happens in this Eden story is even worse as it's all about withholding the gaining of knowledge.[/quote]\r\n\r\nFirst, Its not the Tree of Knowledge, but the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil, IE, Morality and Ethics. \r\n\r\nYes, lets go back to my example. I agree with this much of it:\r\n\r\n[i]It's like getting hit by a car.[/i]\r\n\r\nAnd then your parents (God) give you the life saving medical treatment that you need (Jesus Christ). You may still play in the street (Sin [verb]), and in the rare occasiion you are hit by a car, the medical treatment is always there.\r\n\r\n[quote]This is like saying we should jail a baby born addicted to crack because of what the mother did.[/quote]\r\n\r\nBut Jesus Christ is the ultimate sacrifice. To recieve the 'cure', all you have to do is ask.\r\n\r\n[quote]How is it God required a human sacrifice just to say "your forgiven"?[/quote]\r\n\r\nBefore the Ascension of Jesus Christ, Israel was requried to sacrifice a perfect ram every year to atone for the sins of the nation. (The origin of the word 'scapegoat'). With the Ascension of Jesus Christ, the Son of God, we have the eternal sacrifice. All our sins are forgiven, without the need for any more sacrifices.\r\n\r\n[quote]Yes I can easily call a religion that worships a monster like Yahweh sick.[/quote]\r\n\r\nThat would be the Jews... I'm a Christian.\r\n\r\n[quote]Especially one that requires placing blame on those who didn't commit the action in the first place,[/quote]\r\n\r\nThis should help to answer your questions.\r\n\r\n[url=http://conversationaltheology.wordpress.com/where/if-god-knew-that-we-would-sin-why-did-he-create-the-world/]Link[/url]\r\n\r\n[quote]Okay now what does all this have to do with the original statement made?\r\n\r\n[i]"1) There will be genetic variation within a population."[/i]\r\n\r\nBTW there's more then three. And we can actually trace them back, and it doesn't lead back to three ladies.[/quote]\r\n\r\n[url=http://www.trueorigin.org/mitochondrialeve01.asp]Mitochondrial Eve Theory[/url]\r\n\r\n[quote]This is why we need to make a new flu shot every year, or change the formula of pesticides.[/quote] \r\n\r\nLike the Lizard, you seem to be mistaking simple adaption for evolution.\r\n\r\n[quote]No two individuals can't account for the diversity we see today[/quote]\r\n\r\nI'm gonna assume you didn't mean for the double negative to occur in this sentence.\r\n\r\nActually, it can. Breeders do it all the time today. Make a simple Gene Square (I forgot the name I supposedly learned this morning >>), and let a large A be, say, dark skin, and a little a be light skin. I'll let you work it out for yourself.\r\n\r\n[quote]In fact there are things we see today that if we started with such a small population we wouldn't have, such as tissue rejections from transplants.[/quote]\r\n\r\nThis actually helps to proove my point. Man has fallen, and so each generation would expereice a corruption in the information it has. Not only does this help to account for genetic diversity, but it also explains many of the the things we see happening today. Like, as you pointed out, rejection of transplanted tissue. \r\n\r\n[quote]There arguments have been debunked by numerous people (some of which can be found in the links i provided earlier), and they are a bunch of lying deceptive jackwads[/quote]\r\n\r\nI could say the same about your sources, and without the name calling.

offline

HahiHa

8,256 posts

Regent

Posted March 15, '11 10:32pm UTC

Like the Lizard, you seem to be mistaking simple adaption for evolution.

Could you explain what difference you personally make between adaptation and evolution?

Considering diversity from two individuals, no, today's diversity can't be explained through Noah's ark. We know for example that cheetah's have a very small diversity because they went through some kind of bottleneck(=only a small part of the population survived and constitutes the actual gene pool). We know that humans also have a small diversity, and specially, that africans have a higher diversity than others, because back when our ancestors were in afrika only a small population part migrated to the arabic countries and then some to europe and some asia.
Why is that effect not visible in most other animals gene pool? If we take into account Noah's ark and a pair per animal, all animals should have an equally low diversity, and humans should have a slightly bigger diversity. This is obviously not the case.

(I think I may have lost my initial line of thoughts, but eh..)

[quote]Like the Lizard, you seem to be mistaking simple adaption for evolution.[/quote]\r\nCould you explain what difference you personally make between adaptation and evolution? \r\n\r\nConsidering diversity from two individuals, no, today's diversity can't be explained through Noah's ark. We know for example that cheetah's have a very small diversity because they went through some kind of bottleneck(=only a small part of the population survived and constitutes the actual gene pool). We know that humans also have a small diversity, and specially, that africans have a higher diversity than others, because back when our ancestors were in afrika only a small population part migrated to the arabic countries and then some to europe and some asia. \r\nWhy is that effect not visible in most other animals gene pool? If we take into account Noah's ark and a pair per animal, all animals should have an equally low diversity, and humans should have a slightly bigger diversity. This is obviously not the case.\r\n\r\n(I think I may have lost my initial line of thoughts, but eh..)

offline

MRWalker82

4,005 posts

Shepherd

Posted March 15, '11 10:52pm UTC

So anybody who doesn't subscribe to the Theory of Evolution has no common sense?

Not necessarily. I would say that it just means that they have either not seen the proof of it, or they refuse to accept facts as facts, often because they have been convinced of something which refuses them to accept a reality which contradicts their beliefs, as in your case.

Evolution doesn't require one to 'subscribe' to it, and it doesn't require that you believe it. It simply is a fact. It happens, it's been seen and recorded happening, and there is so much evidence out there that proves it is a fact that it would take you literally months to read it all.

If you want to disagree with it then that's your choice, but you have to realize that you are going to cause people to wonder about your mental state. Saying that evolution isn't real is akin, imho, to someone who still believes the Earth is flat and is the center of the universe.

That would be the Jews... I'm a Christian.

Except it's the same deity. Jews, Muslims and Christians all worship the exact same deity.

Like the Lizard, you seem to be mistaking simple adaption for evolution.

So you admit that animals adapt? Good, because all evolution is is adaptation over time. That's it. The entire theory of evolution shows us how animals adapt, as well as how these adaptations are passed down and added to (or taken from), but evolution is nothing more than adaptation.

I could say the same about your sources, and without the name calling.

There is a HUGE difference between publications which have been independently verified, observed, tested, and documented by experts in numerous fields and submitted for rigorous examination and claims which have not undergone such scrutiny.

And yes, people who knowingly make claims to be scientists, then do not submit their work for peer review, do not allow for independent verification of their claims, and who continue to pass of such claims as fact ARE lying, deceptive jackwads.

Either your claims are true and you can demonstrate them to be true, even to peers who are skeptical, or you don't make such claims. Anyone who claims as fact such things which CANNOT be falsified, or who refuse to submit their findings for peer review and examination are ostracised from the scientific community.

[quote]So anybody who doesn't subscribe to the Theory of Evolution has no common sense?\r\n[/quote]\r\n\r\nNot necessarily. I would say that it just means that they have either not seen the proof of it, or they refuse to accept facts as facts, often because they have been convinced of something which refuses them to accept a reality which contradicts their beliefs, as in your case. \r\n\r\nEvolution doesn't require one to 'subscribe' to it, and it doesn't require that you believe it. It simply is a fact. It happens, it's been seen and recorded happening, and there is so much evidence out there that proves it is a fact that it would take you literally months to read it all. \r\n\r\nIf you want to disagree with it then that's your choice, but you have to realize that you are going to cause people to wonder about your mental state. Saying that evolution isn't real is akin, imho, to someone who still believes the Earth is flat and is the center of the universe. \r\n\r\n[quote]That would be the Jews... I'm a Christian.[/quote]\r\n\r\nExcept it's the same deity. Jews, Muslims and Christians all worship the exact same deity. \r\n\r\n[quote]Like the Lizard, you seem to be mistaking simple adaption for evolution.[/quote]\r\n\r\nSo you admit that animals adapt? Good, because [b]all evolution is is adaptation over time[/b]. That's it. The entire theory of evolution shows us how animals adapt, as well as how these adaptations are passed down and added to (or taken from), but evolution is nothing more than adaptation. \r\n\r\n[quote]I could say the same about your sources, and without the name calling.[/quote]\r\n\r\nThere is a HUGE difference between publications which have been independently verified, observed, tested, and documented by experts in numerous fields and submitted for rigorous examination and claims which have not undergone such scrutiny. \r\n\r\nAnd yes, people who knowingly make claims to be scientists, then do not submit their work for peer review, do not allow for independent verification of their claims, and who continue to pass of such claims as fact ARE lying, deceptive jackwads. \r\n\r\nEither your claims are true and you can demonstrate them to be true, even to peers who are skeptical, or you don't make such claims. Anyone who claims as fact such things which CANNOT be falsified, or who refuse to submit their findings for peer review and examination are ostracised from the scientific community.

offline

MageGrayWolf

9,462 posts

Farmer

Posted March 15, '11 11:46pm UTC

Unfortunately I don't have time to respond to all of this and I'm quite tempted to stop calling it ignorance and just call this flat out stupidity at this point.

Because God made man with Free Will. I would suggest reading this:

Been over this free will doesn't justify it, nor does it mean he couldn't have hidden the **** thing. he kicked us out of Eden to prevent us from also eating from the tree of life so clearly hindering our access was not an issue for him.
I've read the story before and have even given a sarcastic critique of it around here someplace. (Might just do the whole Bible at some point as Youtube vids)

we must also keep the role of the parent in the childs life, because it continues to be of an important use throughout the child's life.

That doesn't mean remaining the authority figure in our life forever, and as exampled with how God has hindered our growth in these stories God as a &quotarent" I would say is a bad one.

So anybody who doesn't subscribe to the Theory of Evolution has no common sense?

Someone who blindly follows the writings of a an ancient book ignoring there own ability to reason has no common sense or at least very limited.

First, Its not the Tree of Knowledge, but the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil, IE, Morality and Ethics.

Still a form of knowledge and that should make there actions before eating the fruit excusable since they wouldn't have known any better.

And then your parents (God) give you the life saving medical treatment that you need (Jesus Christ).

Jesus 4,000 years later doesn't help Adam and Eve be saved from the "will die that day" Jesus being killed just to say "your forgiven is a pointless gesture coming from an omnipotent being, it would be pointless coming from anyone. If someone did me wrong I would go and kill kill something and say see now that this thing died you can be forgive. It's nothing but barbaric!

All our sins are forgiven, without the need for any more sacrifices.

To paraphrase Captain Kirk yet again "What does God need with a sacrifice?"

That would be the Jews... I'm a Christian.

Pfft!

http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y163/MageGrayWolf/jesus-facepalm.jpg

Your worshiping the same God.

Mitochondrial Eve Theory

Creationist sites are not good sources of information right off the bat I'm seeing quote mines, please try again.

Like the Lizard, you seem to be mistaking simple adaption for evolution.

It was a completely new trait in the species, and adaptation is the result of evolution.

Actually, it can. Breeders do it all the time today. Make a simple Gene Square (I forgot the name I supposedly learned this morning >&gt, and let a large A be, say, dark skin, and a little a be light skin. I'll let you work it out for yourself.

No it can't.
Here's a video explaining how such a small genetic population would be a serious issue.
Noah's Ark and the Cheetah

This actually helps to proove my point. Man has fallen, and so each generation would expereice a corruption in the information it has. Not only does this help to account for genetic diversity, but it also explains many of the the things we see happening today. Like, as you pointed out, rejection of transplanted tissue.

That's not how it works.

I could say the same about your sources, and without the name calling.

All your doing is ignoring facts. Creationists just offer Bible quotes fallacies and and flat out lies. The arguments made by creationists are presented and debunked in the links I provided.

Since your either to **** ignorant or to **** stupid (I can't tell which at this point). I'll point one out to you from your own source.

The Origin of Life: A Problem for Evolution
Spontaneous generation is the belief that living things can arise from non-living material. According to this view, worms, flies or even mice would simply spring forth from decaying meat, grain or other materials.

First why would they start with this unless to be deceptive? abiogenesis is not Spontaneous generations and does not make any such statement. The idea of mice and other such animals just springing forth was debunked ages ago. Even the title of this is deceptive as evolution has nothing to do with the origin of life.
Interestingly enough the list of Bad arguments from your site actually seem to support evolution but pulls back at the last second.

âNo new species have been produced.â This is not trueâ"new species have been observed to form. In fact, rapid speciation is an important part of the creation model. But this speciation is within the âkindâ, and involves no new genetic information.

Kind is a very ambiguous term and has to be, because if they used a term like species we could toss this out. And yes there is new genetic information.

Okay I've already put to much time into this tripe.

Unfortunately I don't have time to respond to all of this and I'm quite tempted to stop calling it ignorance and just call this flat out stupidity at this point.\r\n\r\n[quote]Because God made man with Free Will. I would suggest reading this:[/quote]\r\n\r\nBeen over this free will doesn't justify it, nor does it mean he couldn't have hidden the **** thing. he kicked us out of Eden to prevent us from also eating from the tree of life so clearly hindering our access was not an issue for him.\r\nI've read the story before and have even given a sarcastic critique of it around here someplace. (Might just do the whole Bible at some point as Youtube vids)\r\n\r\n[quote]we must also keep the role of the parent in the childs life, because it continues to be of an important use throughout the child's life. [/quote]\r\n\r\nThat doesn't mean remaining the authority figure in our life forever, and as exampled with how God has hindered our growth in these stories God as a "parent" I would say is a bad one.\r\n\r\n[quote]So anybody who doesn't subscribe to the Theory of Evolution has no common sense?[/quote]\r\n\r\nSomeone who blindly follows the writings of a an ancient book ignoring there own ability to reason has no common sense or at least very limited.\r\n\r\n[quote]\r\nFirst, Its not the Tree of Knowledge, but the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil, IE, Morality and Ethics.[/quote] \r\n\r\nStill a form of knowledge and that should make there actions before eating the fruit excusable since they wouldn't have known any better.\r\n\r\n[quote]\r\nAnd then your parents (God) give you the life saving medical treatment that you need (Jesus Christ).[/quote]\r\n\r\nJesus 4,000 years later doesn't help Adam and Eve be saved from the "will die that day" Jesus being killed just to say "your forgiven is a pointless gesture coming from an omnipotent being, it would be pointless coming from anyone. If someone did me wrong I would go and kill kill something and say see now that this thing died you can be forgive. It's nothing but barbaric!\r\n\r\n[quote]All our sins are forgiven, without the need for any more sacrifices.[/quote]\r\n\r\nTo paraphrase Captain Kirk yet again "What does God need with a sacrifice?"\r\n\r\n[quote]That would be the Jews... I'm a Christian.[/quote]\r\n\r\nPfft!\r\n[img]http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y163/MageGrayWolf/jesus-facepalm.jpg[/img]\r\nYour worshiping the same God. \r\n\r\n[quote]Mitochondrial Eve Theory[/quote]\r\n\r\nCreationist sites are not good sources of information right off the bat I'm seeing quote mines, please try again.\r\n\r\n[quote]Like the Lizard, you seem to be mistaking simple adaption for evolution. [/quote]\r\n\r\nIt was a completely new trait in the species, and adaptation is the result of evolution.\r\n\r\n[quote]Actually, it can. Breeders do it all the time today. Make a simple Gene Square (I forgot the name I supposedly learned this morning >>), and let a large A be, say, dark skin, and a little a be light skin. I'll let you work it out for yourself.[/quote]\r\n\r\nNo it can't.\r\nHere's a video explaining how such a small genetic population would be a serious issue.\r\n[url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rIlWKp44T50]Noah's Ark and the Cheetah[/url] \r\n\r\n[quote]This actually helps to proove my point. Man has fallen, and so each generation would expereice a corruption in the information it has. Not only does this help to account for genetic diversity, but it also explains many of the the things we see happening today. Like, as you pointed out, rejection of transplanted tissue.[/quote]\r\n\r\nThat's not how it works.\r\n \r\n[quote]I could say the same about your sources, and without the name calling.[/quote]\r\n\r\nAll your doing is ignoring facts. Creationists just offer Bible quotes fallacies and and flat out lies. The arguments made by creationists are presented and debunked in the links I provided. \r\n\r\nSince your either to **** ignorant or to **** stupid (I can't tell which at this point). I'll point one out to you from your own source.\r\n\r\n[quote]\r\nThe Origin of Life: A Problem for Evolution\r\nSpontaneous generation is the belief that living things can arise from non-living material. According to this view, worms, flies or even mice would simply spring forth from decaying meat, grain or other materials.[/quote]\r\n\r\nFirst why would they start with this unless to be deceptive? abiogenesis is not Spontaneous generations and does not make any such statement. The idea of mice and other such animals just springing forth was debunked ages ago. Even the title of this is deceptive as evolution has nothing to do with the origin of life.\r\n Interestingly enough the list of Bad arguments from your site actually seem to support evolution but pulls back at the last second.\r\n\r\n[quote]â��No new species have been produced.â�� This is not trueâ�"new species have been observed to form. In fact, rapid speciation is an important part of the creation model. But this speciation is within the â��kindâ��, and involves no new genetic information.[/quote]\r\n\r\nKind is a very ambiguous term and has to be, because if they used a term like species we could toss this out. And yes there is new genetic information. \r\n\r\nOkay I've already put to much time into this tripe.

offline

Einfach

1,448 posts

Nomad

Posted March 16, '11 1:23am UTC

(repost because it was ignored by Maverick)

Evolution proof:

1) There will be genetic variation within a population.
2) There is inheritance within a population, in which the offspring inherit traits from their parents.
3) There will be certain traits that benefit survival and reproduction more than other traits.
4) Over time, we can observe traits that benefit survival and reproduction to be more common than other traits, as these traits directly increase the chance that these traits will be passed on to offspring.

Thus, evolution is true AND independent of God's existence.

OK - so you are fine with 1 and 2, but you deny premises 3 and the conclusion 4. You are saying that there are not traits that benefit the survival of individuals. Hmm...look at lethal disorders, such as cystic fibrosis. Surely this affects the survival of individuals! Also, look at sickle cell anemia. It is beneficial in the presence of malaria. Without malaria, it is an evolutionary disadvantage. Evolution fills in the explanation of "order" that previously, religion could only really offer. It is clear that premise 3 is correct. All I have to do is name just one trait that does confer an evolutionary advantage / disadvantage, and I'm fine.

As for 4, this is a direct result of premise 3, and this encompasses evolution itself. Because of 3, then 4. It is inevitable!!

God's existence is meaningless. He does not dictate morality, even if He does exist, because there is no reason for him to embrace so-called "virtues" and **** so-called "evils" without them already being virtuous and evil in the first place.
God's existence does not preclude the existence of evolution. Evolution must exist whether God exists or not, because it is deductively sound (evolution in the changing of the gene pool over time).

It is God's nature which defines what is good, or to use your own words, moral. Ergo, the opposite of God's nature would be evil.

So without God, morality does not / cannot exist?? It seems as though the existence of morality is independent of God's existence, and thus the problem results...

(repost because it was ignored by Maverick)\r\n\r\nEvolution proof:\r\n\r\n1)    There will be genetic variation within a population.\r\n2)    There is inheritance within a population, in which the offspring inherit traits from their parents.\r\n3)    There will be certain traits that benefit survival and reproduction more than other traits.\r\n4)    Over time, we can observe traits that benefit survival and reproduction to be more common than other traits, as these traits directly increase the chance that these traits will be passed on to offspring.\r\n\r\nThus, evolution is true AND independent of God's existence.\r\n\r\nOK - so you are fine with 1 and 2, but you deny premises 3 and the conclusion 4.  You are saying that there are not traits that benefit the survival of individuals.  Hmm...look at lethal disorders, such as cystic fibrosis.  Surely this affects the survival of individuals!  Also, look at sickle cell anemia.  It is beneficial in the presence of malaria.  Without malaria, it is an evolutionary disadvantage.  Evolution fills in the explanation of "order" that previously, religion could only really offer.  It is clear that premise 3 is correct.  All I have to do is name just one trait that does confer an evolutionary advantage / disadvantage, and I'm fine.\r\n\r\nAs for 4, this is a direct result of premise 3, and this encompasses evolution itself.  Because of 3, then 4.  It is inevitable!!\r\n\r\nGod's existence is meaningless.  He does not dictate morality, even if He does exist, because there is no reason for him to embrace so-called "virtues" and **** so-called "evils" without them already being virtuous and evil in the first place.\r\nGod's existence does not preclude the existence of evolution.  Evolution must exist whether God exists or not, because it is deductively sound (evolution in the changing of the gene pool over time).\r\n\r\n[quote]It is God's nature which defines what is good, or to use your own words, moral. Ergo, the opposite of God's nature would be evil.[/quote]\r\n\r\nSo without God, morality does not / cannot exist??  It seems as though the existence of morality is independent of God's existence, and thus the problem results...

offline

valkery

1,255 posts

Nomad

Posted March 16, '11 1:26am UTC

For all the Christians on AG.

Before you continue to think that evolution is wrong, give a moments thought to this.

You believe that an invisible man from outer space saw this rock floating in space and decided to create life on it. Then he miraculously created Every. Single. Thing on the planet..... IN SEVEN DAYS! Then he came to goatherders in the largest opium route in the world and told them to write books about him, saying that the invisible man from outer space wants you to do what he says, and if you don't then you will burn in a pit and be tortured for all eternity by demons from the abyss. But he loves you.

Thank you, that will be all.

offline

MageGrayWolf

9,462 posts

Farmer

Posted March 16, '11 1:42am UTC

You believe that an invisible man from outer space saw this rock floating in space and decided to create life on it. Then he miraculously created Every. Single. Thing on the planet..... IN SEVEN DAYS! Then he came to goatherders in the largest opium route in the world and told them to write books about him, saying that the invisible man from outer space wants you to do what he says, and if you don't then you will burn in a pit and be tortured for all eternity by demons from the abyss. But he loves you.

Well they do include the space and the rock as well, but pretty much.

offline

PracticalManiac

295 posts

Peasant

Posted March 16, '11 5:06am UTC

I think more and more kids now a days are actually leaning towards atheism. I can only hope for a day when everyone is atheist! But then maybe we would all worship science or something. :/ SP reference intended

offline

MageGrayWolf

9,462 posts

Farmer

Posted March 16, '11 6:14am UTC

I think more and more kids now a days are actually leaning towards atheism. I can only hope for a day when everyone is atheist! But then maybe we would all worship science or something. :/ SP reference intended

Let us all calculate now. 3.141592653589793238mmmmm46264338327950288419mmmmmm

Though sex would never be the same if we did.

http://static.funnyjunk.com/pictures/atheist_sex1.jpg

offline

MageGrayWolf

9,462 posts

Farmer

Posted March 16, '11 7:01am UTC

Let's see if this works as advertised.
How To Shut Up Pesky Creationists

offline

Highfire

3,025 posts

Nomad

Posted March 16, '11 8:04am UTC

I think more and more kids now a days are actually leaning towards atheism.

Most people I know in my class if asked always lean towards Atheism.

Compared to how it must have been 100 or so years ago as well. I think Religion is dying, and I'm happy it is

- H

offline

monkeynuts363

30 posts

Templar

Posted March 16, '11 11:08am UTC

This is quite general: I have to say, first of all what makes your religion the right religion, why didn't the greeks get it right, aztecs, the only thing that defines what religion you become is where your born and who your parents are and whether your religion caught on.

I believe humans created religion becuase we grew more intelligent yet had no explanation to the creation of the universe so this makes logical sense. However we now have a sort of understanding of how the universe is created so surely we no longer need religion especially due to the number of flaws uncovered the scriptures such as the bible, torah etc.

Next the reason why children are more likely to be religious is, ok put yourself into the mind of a child. Children are really curious and may wish to know how we came to be, think of the ease of telling them that a mythical being that looks just like you created you and the world then try and explain the scientific explanation. The child will inevitably go for the exciting story about god and a childs mind is so succeptible so the reason I believe many people are still religious is due to indoctrination as a child so you wouldn't know what else to think.

I know this is a bit long, tried to keep it short have many more points. If you endured through all if it I hope you enjoyed it and give yourselves a pat on the back.

This is quite general: I have to say, first of all what makes your religion the right religion, why didn't the greeks get it right, aztecs, the only thing that defines what religion you become is where your born and who your parents are and whether your religion caught on.\r\n \r\nI believe humans created religion becuase we grew more intelligent yet had no explanation to the creation of the universe so this makes logical sense. However we now have a sort of understanding of how the universe is created so surely we no longer need religion especially due to the number of flaws uncovered the scriptures such as the bible, torah etc.\r\n\r\nNext the reason why children are more likely to be religious is, ok put yourself into the mind of a child. Children are really curious and may wish to know how we came to be, think of the ease of telling them that a mythical being that looks just like you created you and the world then try and explain the scientific explanation. The child will inevitably go for the exciting story about god and a childs mind is so succeptible so the reason I believe many people are still religious is due to indoctrination as a child so you wouldn't know what else to think.\r\n\r\nI know this is a bit long, tried to keep it short have many more points. If you endured through all if it I hope you enjoyed it and give yourselves a pat on the back.

Categories

Quests

Community

Forums → WEPR → Atheism FtW