Evolution is a False Religion not Proven Science.

[alang1216]

The odds of randomly forming compounds which are themselves made of subsidiary compounds might as well be infinite!

Evolution is NOT a random process so your logic is flawed. The key is natural selection a non-random process.

Do you agree that you have put forward a strawman that has nothing to do with thevolution or can you show where the theory of evolution says there are only random processes involved?

 

[Steven_R]

The odds of randomly forming compounds which are themselves made of subsidiary compounds might as well be infinite!

Evolution is NOT a random process so your logic is flawed. The key is natural selection a non-random process.

Do you agree that you have put forward a strawman that has nothing to do with thevolution or can you show where the theory of evolution says there are only random processes involved?

Not to mention that compounds don't randomly form, but are held to the various physical laws. Chemical reactions are very predictable because we understand what's going on. It isn't like stuff just happens and we shrug our shoulders.

 

[PostmodernProph]

so where does that leave you?

????....same place I started, with a faith choice.....however, you're left without a scientific basis that you've claimed all your life......

 

[PostmodernProph]

I'm not complaining, I just want to understand what it was based on. If there is no theory behind the prediction how is anyone else supposed to make predictions. That's what it would take to turn it into a science.

I think you have just succeeded in showing why your claims of "fulfilling expectations" is not really science........you just look at what you find, then "predict" that something similar to both will eventually show up.....then, you find something and argue its 1) similar to both and 2) proof its transitional......the problem is, it might just be something that has the characteristic (see previous example of butterflies, bats and meadowlarks)........

But butterflies, bats, and meadowlarks all have completely different wing structures.

and every claimed transitional fossil is different from the species you claim it links......so?.....

 

[PostmodernProph]

The odds of randomly forming compounds which are themselves made of subsidiary compounds might as well be infinite!

Evolution is NOT a random process so your logic is flawed. The key is natural selection a non-random process.

Do you agree that you have put forward a strawman that has nothing to do with thevolution or can you show where the theory of evolution says there are only random processes involved?

then identify the non random event that forces a single celled organism to change into a multicellular organism......

 

[alang1216]

so where does that leave you?

????....same place I started, with a faith choice.....however, you're left without a scientific basis that you've claimed all your life......

I agree your choice is one of faith and that is the choice of most people, if they think about it at all. I'm quite happy and content thinking my choice is based on the evidence. If there is a God I'm convinced he'll give me a pat on the head and say "I gave you that for a reason, well done".

 

[Steven_R]

If there is a God I'm convinced he'll give me a pat on the head and say "I gave you that for a reason, well done".

Enjoy your eternity of fiery torment, you heretic! You earned it by thinking for yourself !

 

[LuckyDuck01!]

Sad that GISMYS still clings to that creationist crap. Actually believing that a great, "invisible", all-powerful, all-knowing, wise being that created everything, exists. Clearly, the illogical, is the belief in such things. One just has to read the Old Testament from cover to cover, to see that the deity was clearly a creation of man, not man a creation from it.
I had that nonsense shoved down my throat throughout my childhood and teen years. I knew it was crap then and is still crap.

 

[Derideo_Te]

The odds of randomly forming compounds which are themselves made of subsidiary compounds might as well be infinite!

Evolution is NOT a random process so your logic is flawed. The key is natural selection a non-random process.

Do you agree that you have put forward a strawman that has nothing to do with thevolution or can you show where the theory of evolution says there are only random processes involved?

Technically we were discussing the origin of life rather than evolution. CF believes that DNA is "evidence" of a "creator". The concept that a couple of billion years worth of chemical interactions coming up with amino acids seems to be beyond his grasp.

 

[Derideo_Te]

The odds of randomly forming compounds which are themselves made of subsidiary compounds might as well be infinite!

Evolution is NOT a random process so your logic is flawed. The key is natural selection a non-random process.

Do you agree that you have put forward a strawman that has nothing to do with thevolution or can you show where the theory of evolution says there are only random processes involved?

then identify the non random event that forces a single celled organism to change into a multicellular organism......

Cell division as a means to procreate fails to completely divide and instead you now have a multicellular organism. It then passes that on to the next generation and so it goes.

 

[BillyP]

so where does that leave you?

????....same place I started, with a faith choice.....however, you're left without a scientific basis that you've claimed all your life......

Faith means having to reject science. Plainly delusional.

 

[jillian]

so where does that leave you?

????....same place I started, with a faith choice.....however, you're left without a scientific basis that you've claimed all your life......

Faith means having to reject science. Plainly delusional.

faith doesn't require one reject science. fundamentalism does.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Only problem I see is a failure to comprehend how the process actually works. I am sure that the odds of finding a fully formed electric toothbrush on the surface is Mars are astronomical.

A protein is not a single structure. It consists of amino acids which are chemical compounds. Amino acids combining to form a peptide which then evolves into a protein is how it works.

Right!

Right!

Now you're getting it!

The odds of randomly forming compounds which are themselves made of subsidiary compounds might as well be infinite!

You aren't getting it.

Chemicals naturally form chemical compounds all the time.
Simple structures are formed from chemical compounds.
Complex structures are formed from simple structures.

That is how it works.

You are making the erroneous assumption that complex structures suddenly form all by themselves.

Hilarious.

You're stating PRECISELY why it can't happen by chance.

The ODDS of molecules randomly forming amino acids and then having them line up perfectly in the only one useful combination are beyond astronomical

 

[CrusaderFrank]

So now you have to "cloak" your mythical "creator" in mumbo jumbo because it fails all logic and reason. Hardly surprising since omnipotence is a logical paradox.

That you are forced to twist your position into a pretzel tells me that it has no basis in reality.

I'm not cloaking anything. Humans simply lack the perceptual ability to grasp it, but our ego keeps whispering in our ears, "You're the greatest!!"

When you attempt to invoke the ineffability argument you are admitting that you have zero evidence for your mythical "creator".

Your "ego" deflection is further proof that your position is hopeless.

You're the greatest.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Right!

Right!

Now you're getting it!

The odds of randomly forming compounds which are themselves made of subsidiary compounds might as well be infinite!

You aren't getting it.

Chemicals naturally form chemical compounds all the time.
Simple structures are formed from chemical compounds.
Complex structures are formed from simple structures.

That is how it works.

You are making the erroneous assumption that complex structures suddenly form all by themselves.

Hilarious.

You're stating PRECISELY why it can't happen by chance.

The ODDS of molecules randomly forming amino acids and then having them line up perfectly in the only one useful combination are beyond astronomical

Molecules naturally form acids. Acids tends to form from a single source. You won't find a random molecule of sulphuric acid forming out of nowhere. Instead you will find lots of sulphuric acid where rain falls on volcanic vents.

When you have lots of acid forming in the same place having them recombine in different ways to form peptides is ceetainly feasible in a couple of billion years and then it is a baby step to proteins.

Straightforward chemical reactions performed in enough random permutations over a long enough period and it happens. The mathematical odds substantiate that it is feasible given how easily chemicals combine and the end result is life as we know it.

 

[BillyP]

????....same place I started, with a faith choice.....however, you're left without a scientific basis that you've claimed all your life......

Faith means having to reject science. Plainly delusional.

faith doesn't require one reject science. fundamentalism does.

Faith by definition is the belief in something without proof, which would require one to reject science.

 

[PostmodernProph]

so where does that leave you?

????....same place I started, with a faith choice.....however, you're left without a scientific basis that you've claimed all your life......

Faith means having to reject science. Plainly delusional.

lol....then obviously secular means having to reject intelligence....

 

[PostmodernProph]

Faith means having to reject science. Plainly delusional.

faith doesn't require one reject science. fundamentalism does.

Faith by definition is the belief in something without proof, which would require one to reject science.

gosh, that's a really stupid conclusion.....can you give me an example of something I would have to reject because I have faith?.....

 

[sealybobo]

faith doesn't require one reject science. fundamentalism does.

Faith by definition is the belief in something without proof, which would require one to reject science.

gosh, that's a really stupid conclusion.....can you give me an example of something I would have to reject because I have faith?.....

Logic and rational thought. You are believing wild impossible stories that, based on facts, science and logic, couldn't possibly be true. If you believe in god, that's an irrational thought.

And if you don't really believe the Adam and Eve story is factual, and don't really believe the Noah story happened, then why would you believe Jesus was born by a virgin, performed miracles and rose from the dead after a few days of being dead?

And if all those stories are just made up to teach you right and wrong, then so was god. Sorry to break it to you.

 

[sealybobo]

Faith means having to reject science. Plainly delusional.

faith doesn't require one reject science. fundamentalism does.

Faith by definition is the belief in something without proof, which would require one to reject science.

You know what's funny about these people? They all realize that all the other religions are bullshit. Christians know that the muslim faith is bullshit. Most Christians know the Mormon story is just crazy. Muslims think their way is the only real way.

So if it weren't for their own personal little religions, they'd agree with us that religions are bullshit. They just can't admit it about their own. Brainwashed.

In fact, that's what the Mormon faith is founded on. Joseph Smith asked god what church he should join, the catholics, luterans, presbyterians, protestants, baptists and god himself told him they were all corrupt and to start his own.