Login

Join for Free!
118886 members


God vs Evolution

Discussion of everything related to the Theory of Evolution.

Moderator: BioTeam

Postby narrowstaircase » Wed May 16, 2007 6:20 am

James wrote:I have read very few of the posts in this topic. The title said it all to me. However, I really respect the immense biological importance in your discussion on plagiarism, your age and the topic of your own marvellous vocabulary and literary skills.


how did conscience and consciousness come to exist within a biological context? how did ethics and hate come to exist within a single species within a biological context? how did a mass singular thing such as belief come to exist within a biological context?

is that good enough for you or do you want me to ask you while juggling and jumping through fiery hoola-hoops of death?

why must something be important to you to be discussed? dont come here and get owned for being unconstructive then come back to nitpick the words in posts you dont think are rellevant. they are rellevent to me and i like to know such things about people. not to banter in intellectuall dead ends. i like to know the basis of peoples ideas. why is that a problem?

James wrote:Why we have fewer biologists on this site nowadays baffles me.


because you're a twat?
"Oh wearisome Condition of Humanity! Borne under one law, to another bound: Vainley begot, and yet forbidden vanity, Created sicke, commanded to be sound: What meaneth nature by these diverse lawes? Passion and Reason, selfe-division cause."
narrowstaircase
Death Adder
Death Adder
 
Posts: 74
Joined: Sat Oct 28, 2006 9:53 am
Location: gold coast, Australia

Postby James » Wed May 16, 2007 7:24 am

how did conscience and consciousness come to exist within a biological context? how did ethics and hate come to exist within a single species within a biological context? how did a mass singular thing such as belief come to exist within a biological context?
All of which have no relation to Evolution and Darwinism. There are plenty of good philiosophy forums where I'm sure you would be greeted welcomingly.

is that good enough for you
No.

dont come here and get owned
It's all making more sense now.

I like to know such things about people
Why not indulge in your creepy tendencies through a PM?


because you're a twat?

Rule 7. Members should post in a way that is respectful of other users. Flaming or abusing users in any way will not be tolerated and will lead to a warning or straight off ban
User avatar
James
King Cobra
King Cobra
 
Posts: 552
Joined: Wed Feb 23, 2005 11:00 pm
Location: England

Postby narrowstaircase » Wed May 16, 2007 7:47 am

god... its irrelevent where it is.. its on this site. lets lobby for it to be moved to general. i will be the first person to sign if you promise to shut up. why are you so pedantic. you come in here guns blazing because you dont like it? deal with it. if you dont like the topic stay out of it. if you think the topic is bringing disrepute to science it time to get out of james world.

[edit: did you read the name of the topic? **god** in direct relation to **evolution** is being discussed. once again. if you dont like it tuff.]
"Oh wearisome Condition of Humanity! Borne under one law, to another bound: Vainley begot, and yet forbidden vanity, Created sicke, commanded to be sound: What meaneth nature by these diverse lawes? Passion and Reason, selfe-division cause."
narrowstaircase
Death Adder
Death Adder
 
Posts: 74
Joined: Sat Oct 28, 2006 9:53 am
Location: gold coast, Australia


Postby James » Wed May 16, 2007 10:21 am

I just think someone new looking for some real talk on evolution/Darwinism would be put off seeing this as the main thread.
User avatar
James
King Cobra
King Cobra
 
Posts: 552
Joined: Wed Feb 23, 2005 11:00 pm
Location: England

Postby kotoreru » Wed May 16, 2007 11:07 am

I can sympathise with James to an extent here - this topic has become rather exclusive (but that's fine). The yeast thread a while ago had a similar effect on me.

However, since James brought up rules:

8. Members are asked to not act as "back seat moderators". If members note an issue which contravenes something in this policy document, they are welcome to bring it to the attention of a member of the Biology-Online Mod Team. Do not respond to such topics yourself. Members who consistently "act" as moderators may be warned.


And I suppose I've just gone and done the exact same thing myself lol
User avatar
kotoreru
Coral
Coral
 
Posts: 400
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2007 9:25 pm
Location: London

Postby James » Wed May 16, 2007 1:05 pm

My point of view is that of an active member since February 2005, not a mod. O and thanks for the support.
User avatar
James
King Cobra
King Cobra
 
Posts: 552
Joined: Wed Feb 23, 2005 11:00 pm
Location: England

Postby robertkernodle » Wed May 16, 2007 5:09 pm

.
narrowstaircase,

Thanks for considering me worth the time you spend on my responses. Today I don't have time to show you equal courtesy, but tomorrow I'll try to give you equal consideration.

Give me a chance to respond to your last post, before you post again,... okay?

Generally, (as a warm up) I AM coming from a very physical angle. As I have been hinting, grasping "stuff" is how a human knows.
I suggest that the primary concept needs to be stuff, NOT spirit,... all the while knowing that we can never touch (i.e., grasp) a final, basement-level stuff,... all the while knowing that always there will be another stuff to try grasping.

God is the stuff we can never grasp,... IF we so choose to use the term "God", ... which I want to make clear that I do NOT in my usual daily life.

Again, I need time to consider your last post in detail. Thanks.

Robert K.
robertkernodle
Death Adder
Death Adder
 
Posts: 83
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2007 5:14 pm

Postby robertkernodle » Wed May 16, 2007 5:14 pm

.
"Grain of salt",... kotoreru. :)

If we cannot talk about how we talk, then how will we know what to make of what we think we might be saying? (WARNING: Excessive use of emoticons about to happen!!) :) :D

RK
robertkernodle
Death Adder
Death Adder
 
Posts: 83
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2007 5:14 pm

Postby robertkernodle » Thu May 17, 2007 9:46 pm

.
narrowstaircase,

responding to your post of Wed May 16 2007 5:59 AM:

I don't have time to dissect dialectically every single sentence of your reply.

I can do a quick reply on a couple of points, however:

About resonances, peaks and in-betweens: Metaphor? No. More lieteral. Based on ideas of universal PHYSICAL substrate (substance) of varying density. Related to such ideas as zero-point energy field, except energy needs a substance to energize. Related to such ideas as "aether", except NOT the SOLID TRADITIONAL aether,... but superfluid and conceptualized on non-linear modeling.

"Far too physically oriented", you say. I ask, "Why does this raise a discord in you?

About your idea of laws: Just as you believe that I cannot know that laws change, I believe that you cannot know that laws are even laws. You only can surmise this through limited experience, then extrapolate this over an eternity that you will never encompass. This is the only truth that I believe we can determine locally in an indeterminate infinity.

This indeterminate infinity is what enables evolution, which is just another word for motion and change of substantial form. Evolution never stops. Time is never reversable. No seeming repetition is an exact repetition. Substance is the attitude that must guide knowing and meaning. Moving (active) substance beyond human grasp or forever out of reach of human capacity to know... is what I believe inspires the concept of God.

God, thus, might be seen more favorably as eternal evolution, which Darwinists merely localize in specific terms related to specific human circumstances.

Robert K.
robertkernodle
Death Adder
Death Adder
 
Posts: 83
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2007 5:14 pm

Postby David George » Fri May 18, 2007 6:16 am

I just broke into the forum after a long break so I am not ready to read every post but as james said the topic says it all.I don't know why humans are so curious about this topic may be because religion is so close to their lives they would never give up defending it.I told my friend that religion and God is not true but as long as he is happy in believing in God then that is not a problem[as long as he doesn't fight with science].But always these religious guys have a upper hand in attracting people to their side because if you believe in God you belief in you more than ever and hence you can achieve more.Religion is like a drug which a person who has a disease should take.If others take it it is bad.Evolution has better proof than God .I still can't understand how you can deny what you see and believe in something you have never seen.
"Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution"
-Theodosius Dobzhansky
User avatar
David George
Coral
Coral
 
Posts: 317
Joined: Tue Feb 21, 2006 12:48 pm
Location: India [place where religion rules people]

Postby cracked_doc » Fri May 18, 2007 9:33 am

Why is it that all the athiests i have met on this forum are named "David"?? Is this just a coincidence or is there a theory behind this??
User avatar
cracked_doc
Coral
Coral
 
Posts: 108
Joined: Sun Apr 23, 2006 5:21 pm
Location: U.A.E

Postby narrowstaircase » Fri May 18, 2007 9:54 am

cracked_doc wrote:Why is it that all the athiests i have met on this forum are named "David"?? Is this just a coincidence or is there a theory behind this??


there is a theory
"Oh wearisome Condition of Humanity! Borne under one law, to another bound: Vainley begot, and yet forbidden vanity, Created sicke, commanded to be sound: What meaneth nature by these diverse lawes? Passion and Reason, selfe-division cause."
narrowstaircase
Death Adder
Death Adder
 
Posts: 74
Joined: Sat Oct 28, 2006 9:53 am
Location: gold coast, Australia

PreviousNext

Return to Evolution

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests