Purpose of Mosquitos and other pests

Status
Not open for further replies.

SelfSim

A non "-ist"
Jun 23, 2014
6,154
1,955
✟174,720.00
Faith
Humanist
Marital Status
Private
It is really amazing that you have read all this into two fictional characters in a story that I made up on the spur of the moment.
Your made up story vs my testably evidenced based hypotheticals. Meh .. your parable missed its mark for good reasons.
 
Upvote 0

Estrid

Well-Known Member
Feb 10, 2021
9,545
3,179
39
Hong Kong
✟147,404.00
Country
Hong Kong
Faith
Skeptic
Marital Status
In Relationship
I agree that it doesnt explain the precise origin of life. But its a critical part of explaining what came after.
Auto mechanics does not explain the origin of steel or petrol.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Astrophile
Upvote 0

SelfSim

A non "-ist"
Jun 23, 2014
6,154
1,955
✟174,720.00
Faith
Humanist
Marital Status
Private
Unifoitatianidm.

A word 150 years out of date
... about a disagreement that had both sides partly wrong and partly right, long long since sorted out.
Glad you clarified that one .. I can't even say the word out aloud! :)

Estrid said:
Unlike creationosm that is all wrong all the time
Perhaps.
 
Upvote 0

durangodawood

Dis Member
Aug 28, 2007
23,412
15,559
Colorado
✟428,018.00
Country
United States
Faith
Seeker
Marital Status
Single
I understand where you are coming from.
There is the story of a person admiring the different works of art in an art gallery. He was so caught up with the brilliance and colour of a particular painting, that he said to the person standing beside him, "Aren't the colours of the painting so magnificent, and the scene and people in the painting so realistic. The person said, "I wouldn't know. I'm blind."
Amazement at reality can happen for a creationist and a scientist.

I do think the scientist is primed to look deeper though, and see deeper structures to be amazed by. The creationist has no need to probe the how and why of reality. It's spoon fed him in a few hundred lines of canonical text.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,850,672
51,419
Guam
✟4,896,791.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
I do think the scientist is primed to look deeper though, and see deeper structures to be amazed by.
No argument there.

titanic-deep-atlantic.jpg
 
Upvote 0

Estrid

Well-Known Member
Feb 10, 2021
9,545
3,179
39
Hong Kong
✟147,404.00
Country
Hong Kong
Faith
Skeptic
Marital Status
In Relationship
Glad you clarified that one .. I can't even say the word out aloud! :)

Perhaps.
Oh?
Creactionist got some science correct?.
Their score to date is.. .Zero.

Unless you are aware of something I
( And the world scientific community)
have not heard of, some sort of data?

Quick, out with it!
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Estrid

Well-Known Member
Feb 10, 2021
9,545
3,179
39
Hong Kong
✟147,404.00
Country
Hong Kong
Faith
Skeptic
Marital Status
In Relationship
Amazement at reality can happen for a creationist and a scientist.

I do think the scientist is primed to look deeper though, and see deeper structures to be amazed by. The creationist has no need to probe the how and why of reality. It's spoon fed him in a few hundred lines of canonical text.

Yecs are ill advised to look too deep.
There is no way ever discovered to be an informed,
and intellectually honest yec.
 
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

Kylie

Defeater of Illogic
Nov 23, 2013
14,664
5,233
✟293,810.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
There's a serpentine reason I believe that, but I don't think you'll fully understand.

For those I do think will understand it, here it is:

Genesis 3:1 Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden?
2 And the woman said unto the serpent, We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden:
3 But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die.
4 And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die:

You do know there's a pretty big flaw in the idea of using a source to prove that the same source is infallible, right?
 
  • Haha
Reactions: SelfSim
Upvote 0

Kylie

Defeater of Illogic
Nov 23, 2013
14,664
5,233
✟293,810.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Sure, and I've read quite a bit, though not much of the actual science —just the reports on it from mainline sources and science magazines. Always, the 'may have', 'indicative of', 'suggests' and never even a full outline of the theory. I've never seen a logic map of the theory, and, believe it or not, I have looked.

You admit that you haven't read much of the actual science, and you also say you've never seen a full outline of the theory.

Maybe if you went and read the actual science, you'd find what you've been missing.

All you're doing right is saying, "I haven't had a very good look, but I know it must be wrong because I haven't found what I think should be there."
 
Upvote 0

SelfSim

A non "-ist"
Jun 23, 2014
6,154
1,955
✟174,720.00
Faith
Humanist
Marital Status
Private
Oh?
Creactionist got some science correct?.
Their score to date is.. .Zero.

Unless you are aware of something I
( And the world scientific community)
have not heard of, some sort of data?

Quick, out with it!
My 'perhaps' was in response to this bit of your post:
Estrid said:
Unlike creationosm that is all wrong all the time
'All the time' may include a time where humans can't make any claims on 'existence', (ie: the concept has no meaning anymore), so it can't be demonstrated as being 'wrong' (or ruled out) 'all the time'.

There wouldn't be anyone observing the passing of time there either, come to think of it, therefore 'time; would have no meaning there either. The best we can say in the present is: 'Perhaps' .. (it may still be possible .. but who would know that also I guess?) Meaninglessness ..
 
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,850,672
51,419
Guam
✟4,896,791.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
You do know there's a pretty big flaw in the idea of using a source to prove that the same source is infallible, right?
Unless I get supernatural input from the Author, while using It.

You know? goosebumps and stuff?
 
Upvote 0

durangodawood

Dis Member
Aug 28, 2007
23,412
15,559
Colorado
✟428,018.00
Country
United States
Faith
Seeker
Marital Status
Single
Just wondering:

In the past, how many YECs made great strides in science?
People are terrifically good at compartmentalizing. Theres probably some great yec scientists from the earlier days of modern science.
 
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

Kylie

Defeater of Illogic
Nov 23, 2013
14,664
5,233
✟293,810.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Unless I get supernatural input from the Author, while using It.

You know? goosebumps and stuff?

I got goosebumps the first time that I saw the Star Trek Voyager episode The Thaw.

Does that mean that God is a grey-clad clown who looks like Michael McKean? Of course not.

If you're reduced to "argument from goosebumps" then your position is weaker than ever.
 
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,850,672
51,419
Guam
✟4,896,791.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
People are terrifically good at compartmentalizing. Theres probably some great yec scientists from the earlier days of modern science.
Then Post 229 can take a hike, can't it?
 
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,850,672
51,419
Guam
✟4,896,791.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
So things not going to plan is a mark of fundamental inadequacy?

If so, Id have to inquire about the story of God's almost total do-over at the great flood.
You'd have a point, if God's almost total do-over was His fault.

It wasn't though.

It was a massive pruning job to rid a tree of the vines that were killing it.
 
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

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,850,672
51,419
Guam
✟4,896,791.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
I got goosebumps the first time that I saw the Star Trek Voyager episode The Thaw.

Does that mean that God is a grey-clad clown who looks like Michael McKean? Of course not.

If you're reduced to "argument from goosebumps" then your position is weaker than ever.
Which came first? Star Trek Voyager? or your goosebumps watching Star Trek Voyager?
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.