Jump to content

The Evolution Computer Simulator


Recommended Posts

My only point was to try to show the overall view I have that complexity of our bodies doesn't lend itself to the possibility of an evolutionary explanation.Even in posts where you try to throw yourself at the mercy of the board, you still say that your view is complexity does not have an evolutionary explanation... but... you just said you don't understand evolution, so how can you hold that view?Why not just say "i don't know" instead of holding to a view based on incomplete information.This is dishonest man, and i'm reasonably sure you know this.You then say that evolution has 'gaps in the line' but you haven't researched anything, so how could you possibly know this.Not to mention the fact that from what I can see Crow is extremley well versed on the subject and, has answered specific questions in this form in the past... why not ask him directly? I know that he has explained evolutionary theory pretty in depth on this forum.....im sure he would again... if you were honestly searching for knowledge.come at us straight... this still sounds like blabbering.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 397
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

HB, don't fall into his trap... What he's asking you here is akin to a holes like kirk Cameron asking for the Crock-a duck....with every post he displays his ignorance.... so why even bother trying to reason with himBG, you have already admitted in the case for Christ thread that you don't have a full (or from what I can see any) knowledge of the theory of evolution.Do you not see how dishonest it is to argue for something when you admit you don't have all the facts?
Kirk Cameron seems like a nice enough dude.
Link to post
Share on other sites
My only point was to try to show the overall view I have that complexity of our bodies doesn't lend itself to the possibility of an evolutionary explanation.Even in posts where you try to throw yourself at the mercy of the board, you still say that your view is complexity does not have an evolutionary explanation... but... you just said you don't understand evolution, so how can you hold that view?Why not just say "i don't know" instead of holding to a view based on incomplete information.This is dishonest man, and i'm reasonably sure you know this.You then say that evolution has 'gaps in the line' but you haven't researched anything, so how could you possibly know this.Not to mention the fact that from what I can see Crow is extremley well versed on the subject and, has answered specific questions in this form in the past... why not ask him directly? I know that he has explained evolutionary theory pretty in depth on this forum.....im sure he would again... if you were honestly searching for knowledge.come at us straight... this still sounds like blabbering.
You are largely trapped in your worldview that you are right and anyone who disagrees disagrees from ignorance.Because of your stubborn inability to understand anything but what you 'know' you assume I am completely lacking in an understanding of evolution. I don't believe in evolution, for many reasons, not the least of which is the complexity of life being too complex to have happened by accident. as such I try to draw you guys into seeing the difficulty I see.You cannot see that there are people who disagree with evolution from a logical standpoint, so you assume that all people who disagree with evolution do so from an illogical standpoint.What's funny is that the very logic you think supports you actually causes you the problems I am pointing out.
Link to post
Share on other sites

So I was reading something ( Gasp! I know) about carbon dating and I have some questions for you evolutionists.I've always known that carbon dating was limited to about 25,000 years max because it gets to be too small to accurately measure, with it's half life of a little over 5,000 years, and after 100,000 years it is basically gone.And I know there have been a few times that the dating method resulted in really bad dates, living trees being over 1,000 years old etc.But I was reading about how C-12 is sometimes found in diamonds and things well over a million years old, and I wonder why this doesn't make the carbon dating method too problematic to be a seriously considered dating method?Is it because it 'seems to be right' most of the time?

Link to post
Share on other sites
So I was reading something ( Gasp! I know) about carbon dating and I have some questions for you evolutionists.I've always known that carbon dating was limited to about 25,000 years max because it gets to be too small to accurately measure, with it's half life of a little over 5,000 years, and after 100,000 years it is basically gone.And I know there have been a few times that the dating method resulted in really bad dates, living trees being over 1,000 years old etc.But I was reading about how C-12 is sometimes found in diamonds and things well over a million years old, and I wonder why this doesn't make the carbon dating method too problematic to be a seriously considered dating method?Is it because it 'seems to be right' most of the time?
radiocarbon dating uses C-14, not C-12
Link to post
Share on other sites
radiocarbon dating uses C-14, not C-12
So I was reading something ( Gasp! I know) about carbon dating and I have some questions for you evolutionists.I've always known that carbon dating was limited to about 25,000 years max because it gets to be too small to accurately measure, with it's half life of a little over 5,000 years, and after 100,000 years it is basically gone.And I know there have been a few times that the dating method resulted in really bad dates, living trees being over 1,000 years old etc.But I was reading about how C-14 is sometimes found in diamonds and things well over a million years old, and I wonder why this doesn't make the carbon dating method too problematic to be a seriously considered dating method?Is it because it 'seems to be right' most of the time?
Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone who even understands the broadstrokes of evolution can take one look at your posts and deduce that you haven't the first clue about what you speak.You were asking to see an animal that was "in between" in regards to transitional creatures...this is more than enough to deduce that you are lost...In regards to using logic... this is fine. But you have to understand that there are lots of things that are true which run counter to our inductive reasoning..Also, how come you never seem to answer points I make in your reply posts?Some may see this as dishonest... maybe.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Anyone who even understands the broadstrokes of evolution can take one look at your posts and deduce that you haven't the first clue about what you speak.You were asking to see an animal that was "in between" in regards to transitional creatures...this is more than enough to deduce that you are lost...In regards to using logic... this is fine. But you have to understand that there are lots of things that are true which run counter to our inductive reasoning..Also, how come you never seem to answer points I make in your reply posts?Some may see this as dishonest... maybe.
Not all your questions are worthy of responding too because you poison the debate with you accusing tone of my knowledge of evolution.If I asked you, why since we know that creationism is true, do you not admit that you are wrong? You would be a fool to allow me to frame the arguement.Hence your 'questions' are not really questions, they are statements.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Because of your stubborn inability to understand anything but what you 'know' you assume I am completely lacking in an understanding of evolution. I don't believe in evolution, for many reasons, not the least of which is the complexity of life being too complex to have happened by accident. as such I try to draw you guys into seeing the difficulty I see.
your continual use of the word accident demonstrates by itself that you lack understanding.
What's funny is that the very logic you think supports you actually causes you the problems I am pointing out.
actually some scientists agree that what you are referring to (mutation rates/time available vs. complexity) is a potential problem. but you aren't graspingthat the problem (if it really is one) would only be with conventional natural selection as a complete explanation for evolution, not with evolution itself.again, in this thread you are not really even challenging evolution - only our understanding of the mechanism that drives it.
Link to post
Share on other sites
your continual use of the word accident demonstrates by itself that you lack understanding.actually some scientists agree that what you are referring to (mutation rates/time available vs. complexity) is a potential problem. but you aren't graspingthat the problem (if it really is one) would only be with conventional natural selection as a complete explanation for evolution, not with evolution itself.again, in this thread you are not really even challenging evolution - only our understanding of the mechanism that drives it.
so you admit that your understanding of the mechanisms of evolution are largely unknown, but since you know evolution is true, you can infer that one day you will know these mechanisms, and it will support your current beliefs?Me too, only God in Heaven after we die...
Link to post
Share on other sites
you might be the best spinster I know... you should see if Fox News is hiring....
Just do what crow does, pretend that you know what everyone in the world thinks all the time and then you can pigeon hole me into a nice little make-believe caricature that you can then win the debate against.
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm curious BG, if i pointed you in the direction of a lecture by christian biologist Ken Miller in which he explains the finer points of evolution, would you watch it and give me an honest review of what you think?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just do what crow does, pretend that you know what everyone in the world thinks all the time and then you can pigeon hole me into a nice little make-believe caricature that you can then win the debate against.
dude, what do you expect? That clearly isn't what crow was trying to say, hence... spin.
Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm curious BG, if i pointed you in the direction of a lecture by christian biologist Ken Miller in which he explains the finer points of evolution, would you watch it and give me an honest review of what you think?
very doubtful, but not for the reasons you would think.
Link to post
Share on other sites
dude, what do you expect? That clearly isn't what crow was trying to say, hence... spin.
Actually this is a good example of your lack of data giving you a false understanding of what I am saying.crow Has consistently made broad quotes where he tells me about what most Christians think, what most atheist think, and even on more than one occasion, he told me that I was wrong for saying I never meant something.Had you been privy to the whole story you would understand why the word 'spin' is being applied to the wrong person.
Link to post
Share on other sites
care to explain?
I don't care all that much about this whole debate, and as such I have a hard time focusing on long videos etc on the subject matter.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Actually this is a good example of your lack of data giving you a false understanding of what I am saying.crow Has consistently made broad quotes where he tells me about what most Christians think, what most atheist think, and even on more than one occasion, he told me that I was wrong for saying I never meant something.Had you been privy to the whole story you would understand why the word 'spin' is being applied to the wrong person.
But I am not talking about what went on in the past. All i'm referring to is Crow's statement about what you are actually questioning, and you turning that into an admission that he dosen't understand the mechanisms which drive evolution..
Link to post
Share on other sites
But I am not talking about what went on in the past. All i'm referring to is Crow's statement about what you are actually questioning, and you turning that into an admission that he dosen't understand the mechanisms which drive evolution..
And you don't judge all my posts by what you've read in the past?
Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't care all that much about this whole debate, and as such I have a hard time focusing on long videos etc on the subject matter.
If that's the case, then why do you continue to argue against evolution? If you don't know about it, and won't learn about it, how can you argue for or against it?
Link to post
Share on other sites
And you don't judge all my posts by what you've read in the past?
NoThe only thing I deduce from your past posts is that you have incomplete knowledge of the theory of evolution... and I do so because this is evident.Also that you are a creationist... this is also evident.
Link to post
Share on other sites
so you admit that your understanding of the mechanisms of evolution are largely unknown
possibly incomplete, not largely unknown.
but since you know evolution is true, you can infer that one day you will know these mechanisms, and it will support your current beliefs?
even if an intelligence is found underlying evolution it would not in any way be evidence that the bible is historical, or that christianity is true. unrelated subjects.
Link to post
Share on other sites
crow Has consistently made broad quotes where he tells me about what most Christians think
only when referring to polls. otherwise that's a lie.
what most atheist think
you mean you like to mischaracterize what most atheists think to create straw men and i won't let you get away with it.
Link to post
Share on other sites
NoThe only thing I deduce from your past posts is that you have incomplete knowledge of the theory of evolution... and I do so because this is evident.
I actually have a pretty decent understanding of evolution, just because I challenge it doesn't mean I don't know what you think.How hard is it to understand evolution? It was invented by a couple guys who thought that the cell was the smallest building block of all life, that washing your hands wouldn't stop the spread of disease, and that the processes of inner species changes could be applied to cross species change.At one time something happened ( what we do not know ) and whammy tons of stuff like energy etc floating around the vastness of space.Then one day after the energy cooled whammy, gas clouds collapsed and became planets that luckily found orbits around stars.Then on one planet, vast amounts of the 44 thingies needed for life to begin were mixed together and whammy, they made life out of non-life.Then this life changed, ( we are not sure how ) slowly, ( and luckily in step with it's food sources ) and the changes that were beneficial were 'allowed' to continue by a hostile environment.Luckily some of these changes in life forms coincided with the need for multiple parasitic reliance on other life forms, all while being grown inside life forms that had complex systems of lungs hearts and livers that also are unable alone to survive.Then after observing 1/1,0000,000000,0000000,00000th of this action, we decided that we understood it and could finally throw off the shackles of religion teaching us to love one another.Nazis, Eugenics, Communism and Jerry Springer later...we have you telling us that you know there is no God, without the simple knowledge of the planet you live on, let alone of the existence of all life forms in the universe.
Also that you are a creationist... this is also evident.
And the root of your problem comes out. you have a circular reasoning problem with your logic that makes you unable to debate. While you hold that your side is the only side, you will never be able to convince me that you have thought at all about the subject.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Announcements


×
×
  • Create New...