An atheists world (3)

Status
Not open for further replies.

toolmanjantzi

Veteran
Supporter
Feb 1, 2013
2,505
28
Sundridge, Ontario
✟49,722.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Conservatives
Davian said:
There is also the benefit of providing nourishment to the mother of your offspring just at the time that she needs it. She's obviously hungry.

I'm ok with that, but what you don't know is Loudmouth and Cabvet have issue with 8 people, 4 men 4 women reproducing the general population we have now. Yet somehow one male and one female praying mantis reproduced the population we have today. But that isn't the only issue. The probability of offspring being two sexes, ability to reproduce, and so on.
 
Upvote 0

toolmanjantzi

Veteran
Supporter
Feb 1, 2013
2,505
28
Sundridge, Ontario
✟49,722.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Conservatives
Davian said:
I would not say that.

Do you think there are any errors made by scientists in the past 100 years big enough to pull a god through? How big of a hole do you need?

How about your Black Worm Hole, since science knows all there is to them.
 
Upvote 0

toolmanjantzi

Veteran
Supporter
Feb 1, 2013
2,505
28
Sundridge, Ontario
✟49,722.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Conservatives
Davian said:
But it was equivocation in how he used it. Do you think word games will poof your favourite deity into existence?

Would you say you are being totally honest with yourself?

Where did you come from? (Mommy and Daddy)
Did they form you? (No). Then how did mommy and daddy make you? If both the egg and sperm died then how did you live? If it wasn't poof, then we wouldn't need a sperm or a egg then would we? Since all we would need is what a monkey and billions of years.
 
Upvote 0

Davian

fallible
May 30, 2011
14,100
1,181
West Coast of Canada
✟31,103.00
Faith
Ignostic
Marital Status
Married
I'm ok with that, but what you don't know is Loudmouth and Cabvet have issue with 8 people, 4 men 4 women reproducing the general population we have now. Yet somehow one male and one female praying mantis reproduced the population we have today. But that isn't the only issue. The probability of offspring being two sexes, ability to reproduce, and so on.
So, what *is* the probability of four men and four women populating the earth to the point we have now, while keeping consistent with all the knowledge we have about DNA, recessive disorders and genetic mutations? Have you worked all of that out?
 
Upvote 0

Davian

fallible
May 30, 2011
14,100
1,181
West Coast of Canada
✟31,103.00
Faith
Ignostic
Marital Status
Married
How about your Black Worm Hole, since science knows all there is to them.

The "Black Worm Hole"? How precious. ^_^

Let me guess. You got your knowledge of astrophysics from this movie:

Disney-The-Black-Hole.jpg




Amirite?
 
Upvote 0

toolmanjantzi

Veteran
Supporter
Feb 1, 2013
2,505
28
Sundridge, Ontario
✟49,722.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Conservatives
Davian said:
So, what *is* the probability of four men and four women populating the earth to the point we have now, while keeping consistent with all the knowledge we have about DNA, recessive disorders and genetic mutations? Have you worked all of that out?

I have no need for that. Since you do not have the weather, the food, and oxygen levels of that time, I would say there is no reason it could not work. See if I believe that the Noah story is true, I also believe the creator can allow anything to happen.

Since there is no creator in your story, tell me how a sperm knows how to swim, and look for an egg? What came first the sperm or the ball, since bacteria have neither. No need to talk about sex pilli's either.
 
Upvote 0

toolmanjantzi

Veteran
Supporter
Feb 1, 2013
2,505
28
Sundridge, Ontario
✟49,722.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Conservatives
Davian said:
"Poof" is a word often associated with magical disappearances and appearances.

We are talking about gods and the supernatural, are we not?

Do you think it's supernatural when God does it Or supernatural because you don't understand God?
 
Upvote 0

Davian

fallible
May 30, 2011
14,100
1,181
West Coast of Canada
✟31,103.00
Faith
Ignostic
Marital Status
Married
You can't argue "what about those other feel good religions" when your religion is based on you feeling good.
Is that what you base your choice of religion on?
That would mean what makes your beliefs of more value then the other feel good atheists.
You have misrepresented what I said. I referring specifically how one is to evaluate the validity of a religion.

As I don't have religion, your point is irrelevant. Atheism is not a set of beliefs, it is a theological position.

Any more word games?
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

OllieFranz

Senior Member
Jul 2, 2007
5,328
351
✟23,548.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
science is definitately not perfect. Many scientific theories are superceded...

Top 10 Most Famous Scientific Theories (That Turned out to be Wrong) - Toptenz.net

There is nothing wrong with correcting previous theories. Most of the theories were properly constructed, but critical parts could not be tested for with the equipment available at the time. Many of the phlogiston equations, for example, could still be used today if we just subtract the phlogiston from one side of the equation and add a corresponding amount of oxygen to the other side. Becher had to make a guess about what changed when substances burned. His guess was wrong, mainly because he didnt capture the gasses released during the burning, so he thought the fuel lost weight, and therfore lost an element. When Priestly first isolated oxygen, he called it "dephlogistonated air," until he realized that it was pure "anti-phlogiston."

The thing is Benjamin Franklin made exactly the same kind of wrong guess when he was experimenting with electricity. And we still use his backward equations, today. That is why electrons carry the negative charge, and the current is said to flow in the opposite direction to the electrons that carry it.

Theories are models, and no model can properly model every aspect of the reality. Scale models of machines and houses have square/cube ratio problems. Flat maps of the world are always distorted in one way or another, etc. But as long as you know the model's limitations, and the thing you are interested in either does not involve those limitations, or those limitations can be compensated for, even an obsolete model is as competently useful as the latest model.
 
Upvote 0

toolmanjantzi

Veteran
Supporter
Feb 1, 2013
2,505
28
Sundridge, Ontario
✟49,722.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Conservatives
Davian said:
Is that what you base your choice of religion on?

You have misrepresented what I said. I referring specifically how one is to evaluate the validity of a religion.

As I don't have religion, your point is irrelevant. Atheism is not a set of beliefs, it is a theological position.

Any more word games?

Let me challenge that.

Do you believe there is no God?
 
Upvote 0

toolmanjantzi

Veteran
Supporter
Feb 1, 2013
2,505
28
Sundridge, Ontario
✟49,722.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Conservatives
OllieFranz said:
There is nothing wrong with correcting previous theories. Most of the theories were properly constructed, but critical parts could not be tested for with the equipment available at the time. Many of the phlogiston equations, for example, could still be used today if we just subtract the phlogiston from one side of the equation and add a corresponding amount of oxygen to the other side. Becher had to make a guess about what changed when substances burned. His guess was wrong, mainly because he didnt capture the gasses released during the burning, so he thought the fuel lost weight, and therfore lost an element. When Priestly first isolated oxygen, he called it "dephlogistonated air," until he realized that it was pure "anti-phlogiston."

The thing is Benjamin Franklin made exactly the same kind of wrong guess when he was experimenting with electricity. And we still use his backward equations, today. That is why electrons carry the negative charge, and the current is said to flow in the opposite direction to the electrons that carry it.

Theories are models, and no model can properly model every aspect of the reality. Scale models of machines and houses have square/cube ratio problems. Flat maps of the world are always distorted in one way or another, etc. But as long as you know the model's limitations, and the thing you are interested in either does not involve those limitations, or those limitations can be compensated for, even an obsolete model is as competently useful as the latest model.

How is any of that any different then the bible and its 100 translations with a 100 revisions and bad biased scholars interpreting the Hebrew, Greek, Armaic, and Latin into English?

I still use those translations to come to the truth when required.
 
Upvote 0

Davian

fallible
May 30, 2011
14,100
1,181
West Coast of Canada
✟31,103.00
Faith
Ignostic
Marital Status
Married
Upvote 0

CarlosTomy

Well-Known Member
Aug 31, 2013
473
20
✟725.00
Faith
Atheist
why after you accused me of changing the bars 2-3 times.

I can't help you if you can't follow up your own points.

Ihave successfully moved on to another topic.

Probably because you recognized that you ran into someone with actual CHEMICAL KNOWLEDGE so it was safest to run away to something else.

However if you want to talk chemistry you are talking to the wrong crowd here.

But you thought you'd give it a shot right? What with your reference to an early oxidizing atmosphere. Then you found someone who can talk chemistry.

I suspect this happens a lot.

Try to explain how the early atmosphere for life would in fact be inhabitable.

I believe I already outlined for you the cyanobacterial role in the early atmosphere that is hypothesized.

-Ch.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

toolmanjantzi

Veteran
Supporter
Feb 1, 2013
2,505
28
Sundridge, Ontario
✟49,722.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Conservatives
StormanNorman said:
Has any religion actually "turned out" to be wrong? Who is to say that any given religion whether it be Christianity, Islam, Polytheism, etc. is wrong?

You would need a moral absolute to prove any were wrong.
 
Upvote 0

OllieFranz

Senior Member
Jul 2, 2007
5,328
351
✟23,548.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
How is any of that any different then the bible and its 100 translations with a 100 revisions and bad biased scholars interpreting the Hebrew, Greek, Armaic, and Latin into English?

I still use those translations to come to the truth when required.

The difference is that there is no claim that science is the unchanging absolute truth. So there are no scientists who confidently assume that they have the absolute unchanging truth, despite any evidence.

My answer in not a criticism of you. You asked me a question, I'm just answering it.

I have not read enough of your posts to know if you are one of those who are so arrogantly smug. Based on your statement about using several translations to better understand the scriptures, I suspect you are not. At least, that's why I study many different versions.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Davian

fallible
May 30, 2011
14,100
1,181
West Coast of Canada
✟31,103.00
Faith
Ignostic
Marital Status
Married
I have no need for that.
Well, the people you are trying to convince have a big need for that, and they are still waiting for it. Stop the hand-waving and get your homework done! (As a dad, I get to say that :))
Since you do not have the weather, the food, and oxygen levels of that time, I would say there is no reason it could not work.
What exactly were the weather, the food, and oxygen levels of that time, that would compensate for the known issues with human inbreeding?
See if I believe that the Noah story is true, I also believe the creator can allow anything to happen.
So, why was there even need for an ark? Was that just a make-work project for Noah? Why did not God bring back a big ocean-going freighter from the future, and save him all that work? As you say, anything can happen.
Since there is no creator in your story, tell me how a sperm knows how to swim, and look for an egg? What came first the sperm or the ball, since bacteria have neither. No need to talk about sex pilli's either.
A sperm looks for an egg, like, it has a sense of direction? Can you cite the biology book where you got that idea?

That reminds me of a funny story. The guy that sat in the cubical next to me back when I worked for corporate america approached me one day, and quietly asked me, so, how does the rooster fertilize the egg in the chicken... how does the sperm get through the shell?

Priceless.
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.