Dad on Youtube

[JacksBratt]

Interesting but how did you come to this conclusion? Do you expect to have a major shift in intelligence in this short of time?

Dizredux

There is no shift in intelligence. Do you think that we are more intelligent now than 4000 years ago? Or do we have more knowledge, technology and arrogance that clouds our perception of men and women of history.

Do you not think that Leonardo Davinci could have produced a flying machine if given the knowledge and materials we have today? Maybe even a better one?

 

[Split Rock]

I think you misunderstood me. I was simply saying there is a science and a falsely so called science. We both know evolution is a falsely so called science.

No, we don't. The theory of evolution is used all the time by scientists doing science for a living. That makes it science.

 

[dad]

No, we don't. The theory of evolution is used all the time by scientists doing science for a living. That makes it science.

The created trait of being able to evolve is used, not 'the theory of evolution', which includes common ancestors for man and beast. Not ever..anywhere. As a matter of fact.

 

[dad]

Why do you continue to misrepresent what I am posting? Do you think you are fooling anyone here? Or is this all just for your own consumption and that of your bloated Neptune-sized ego?

Telling people to live in a cave if they use a computer..as if it were related to godless evilution...is misrepresenting reality.

I think the godless should live in caves, the world would be a safer place.

 

[JacksBratt]

Sorry I will rephrase that.
Do you think a God will give you a better insight into how the DNA molecule of even the simplest organism came to exist?
or should we stick to the scientific method as a way of finding out?

God IS the insight. There is no such thing as "magic". That is for stories, movies and TV specials.

I cannot give you any more proof of God than the fact that we exist, that this universe exists and the way that this universe is put together.

Human's are intelligent beings, some more than others. Humans are far more intelligent than any animal. We are made in God's image. We are intelligent and thus developed devices such as airplanes, submarines and computers with this intelligence.

Now ask yourself how the complex enzymes and proteins came together randomly along with the components of a cell that, for some unforeseen reason, can replicate. What are those odds? HUGE.

Now, toss in the fact that if you had all these in place, against insurmountable odds, they still are not alive.

To get life, we need to multiply the insurmountable odds already required by even more insurmountable odds that are required for life to show up SOMEHOW.

Like I said, I cannot give you a fact or item that proves God exists. It is by faith and experience after exercising that faith...

However, your theory takes even far more faith than mine....and leaves you with no hope for anything after your death.

God is not magic. God is all powerful and controls all the laws of science as He created and manages them.

 

[PsychoSarah]

When Split Rock said "godless science"...he actually meant pseudo science. The bible says we can see God's handywork just by observing and empirical science. The bible warns against "falsely so called science"...that means there are 2 types of science (one is truth and one is lie).

Not exactly. One of the greatest ways to preserve a belief is to discredit all that could disagree with it.

 

[dad]

Not exactly. One of the greatest ways to preserve a belief is to discredit all that could disagree with it.

Ah, so Split Rock tells us to live in a cave if we do not tack on so called science to real science, and science has attempted to discredit Jesus by claiming another cause for creation, and to discredit all but the physical only/temporal state method. (scientific method).


Your belief system does try to discredit the good guys.

 

[TLK Valentine]

God IS the insight. There is no such thing as "magic". That is for stories, movies and TV specials.

And Bibles.

I cannot give you any more proof of God than the fact that we exist, that this universe exists and the way that this universe is put together.

I appreciate your honesty, and at some point in our history, such "proof" was sufficient, due to lack of alternatives.

That is no longer the case.

Human's are intelligent beings, some more than others. Humans are far more intelligent than any animal. We are made in God's image. We are intelligent and thus developed devices such as airplanes, submarines and computers with this intelligence.

We also developed theories such as the Big Bang and evolution.

Now ask yourself how the complex enzymes and proteins came together randomly along with the components of a cell that, for some unforeseen reason, can replicate. What are those odds? HUGE.

And yet, it happened.

Now, toss in the fact that if you had all these in place, against insurmountable odds, they still are not alive.[/QOUOTE]

Who said the odds were insurmountable?

To get life, we need to multiply the insurmountable odds already required by even more insurmountable odds that are required for life to show up SOMEHOW.

See above.

Like I said, I cannot give you a fact or item that proves God exists. It is by faith and experience after exercising that faith...

However, your theory takes even far more faith than mine....and leaves you with no hope for anything after your death.

Our "faith" is based on observation -- you've already admitted that yours is not.

As for "hope," hope may make something more believable, but cannot make it true.

God is not magic. God is all powerful and controls all the laws of science as He created and manages them.

Which would include the science behind evolution -- so perhaps it wasn't so random after all...

 

[JacksBratt]

Who said the odds were insurmountable?

Fred Hoyle and N. Chandra Wickramasinghe, calculated that there is less than 1 chance in 10 to the 40,000power that life could have originated by random trials.

"...life cannot have had a random beginning...The trouble is that there are about two thousand enzymes, and the chance of obtaining them all in a random trial is only one part in 10 to the 40,000power, an outrageously small probability that could not be faced even if the whole universe consisted of organic soup. If one is not prejudiced either by social beliefs or by a scientific training into the conviction that life originated on the Earth, this simple calculation wipes the idea entirely out of court....The enormous information content of even the simplest living systems...cannot in our view be generated by what are often called "natural" processes...For life to have originated on the Earth it would be necessary that quite explicit instruction should have been provided for its assembly...There is no way in which we can expect to avoid the need for information, no way in which we can simply get by with a bigger and better organic soup, as we ourselves hoped might be possible a year or two ago."

Fred Hoyle and N. Chandra Wickramasinghe,
Evolution from Space [Aldine House, 33 Welbeck Street, London W1M 8LX:
J.M. Dent & Sons, 1981), p. 148, 24,150,30,31).



Obviously "it happened". We are here, plants are here, microbes are here, all life is here. HOW it happened is not explained by stating some hypothesis and then when that hypothesis is shown to be outside the odds of probability, backing your hypothesis by stating "and yet it happened".

In fact your statement is as hollow that it could be used by anyone to back their "theory" as for the existence of anything.

 

[Split Rock]

The created trait of being able to evolve is used, not 'the theory of evolution', which includes common ancestors for man and beast. Not ever..anywhere. As a matter of fact.

How exactly is this trait created? What mechanism does it entail?

Please don't tell me, a biologist, what is and is not used by scientists doing actual scientific research. I know, you don't. As a "matter of fact."

Telling people to live in a cave if they use a computer..as if it were related to godless evilution...is misrepresenting reality.

No, you are the one misrepresenting reality. Scientists try to explain reality. You sell candy-coated fantasies you make up and claim it is "what the bible/God tells us."

I think the godless should live in caves, the world would be a safer place.

But it is you I am concerned about, dad. Science is evilness and you should protect yourself from it and its evil works (technology). You shouldn't even be using a computer, dad... it is threatening your place in heaven. The cave is much safer for you.

 

[Dizredux]

Jack

Have you noticed that intelligence has not changed in any animal, species or, even, man. All animals and man have the same capacity for understanding today as they did 100, 200 or 1000 years ago.

Dizredux

Interesting but how did you come to this conclusion? Do you expect to have a major shift in intelligence in this short of time?

There is no shift in intelligence. Do you think that we are more intelligent now than 4000 years ago? Or do we have more knowledge, technology and arrogance that clouds our perception of men and women of history.

Do you not think that Leonardo Davinci could have produced a flying machine if given the knowledge and materials we have today? Maybe even a better one?

I was trying to understand your point and stated it badly.

You are unlikely to see any significant increase in intelligence in any species in this short of time but it is not impossible so I was interested in where you got your information

I did not understand the point you were trying to make so could you clarify a little, what is the significance of not seeing an increase in intelligence in the last 1000 years?


Dizredux

 

[PsychoSarah]

Ah, so Split Rock tells us to live in a cave if we do not tack on so called science to real science, and science has attempted to discredit Jesus by claiming another cause for creation, and to discredit all but the physical only/temporal state method. (scientific method).


Your belief system does try to discredit the good guys.

Good and bad are irrelavnt in this topic, what matters is what is accurate.

 

[Split Rock]

Ah, so Split Rock tells us to live in a cave if we do not tack on so called science to real science, and science has attempted to discredit Jesus by claiming another cause for creation, and to discredit all but the physical only/temporal state method. (scientific method).

1. You are in NO position to tell scientists what is "so-called' science and what is "real" science.
2. the only one discrediting Jesus here is you, because you make Christianity look foolish.

Your belief system does try to discredit the good guys.

You're not one of the "good guys," dad. Hmmmm... doesn't Satan claim to be a "good guy?" Do I detect a similarity between you two?

Good and bad are irrelavnt in this topic, what matters is what is accurate.

What matters to dad and other fundie creationists is what is "right" according to their religious dogma. Whatever is "right" is so, because it is.

 

[JacksBratt]

JackDizredux


I was trying to understand your point and stated it badly.

You are unlikely to see any significant increase in intelligence in any species in this short of time but it is not impossible so I was interested in where you got your information

I did not understand the point you were trying to make so could you clarify a little, what is the significance of not seeing an increase in intelligence in the last 1000 years?


Dizredux

What I was trying to state is that humans are different than animals. We have intelligence and over the years, as knowledge is gained and technology advances, we do more and more spectacular things and develop more and more spectacular machines. Animals, do not. They have, if evolution is a fact, stagnated at a place thousands of years old.

If all animals and man have the same intelligence now as 1000, 2000 or 6000 years old, why is man the only one to make use of and continue to gain knowledge and apply it while animals have not.

I believe, it is due to the fact that we are made in God's image, with a desire to advance and the cognitive ability to do so. We are not an evolved product of earlier forms of life.

Also, to answer the post of another member here, as they were asking something along the line of where computers came from, they are the result of years of gaining of knowledge and application of this knowledge due to the abilities we have that set us apart from animals. All of which were created by God.

 

[PsychoSarah]

What I was trying to state is that humans are different than animals. We have intelligence and over the years, as knowledge is gained and technology advances, we do more and more spectacular things and develop more and more spectacular machines. Animals, do not. They have, if evolution is a fact, stagnated at a place thousands of years old.

If all animals and man have the same intelligence now as 1000, 2000 or 6000 years old, why is man the only one to make use of and continue to gain knowledge and apply it while animals have not.

I believe, it is due to the fact that we are made in God's image, with a desire to advance and the cognitive ability to do so. We are not an evolved product of earlier forms of life.

Also, to answer the post of another member here, as they were asking something along the line of where computers came from, they are the result of years of gaining of knowledge and application of this knowledge due to the abilities we have that set us apart from animals. All of which were created by God.

No one is claiming other animals are equally intelligent to humans. Just because humans have this intelligence doesn't make us better than other animals, after all, most animals beat us with many other skills.

 

[JacksBratt]

What matters to dad and other fundie creationists is what is "right" according to their religious dogma. Whatever is "right" is so, because it is.

How do you determine what is right and wrong?

 

[JacksBratt]

No one is claiming other animals are equally intelligent to humans. Just because humans have this intelligence doesn't make us better than other animals, after all, most animals beat us with many other skills.

I don't believe that I implied that we are equally intelligent. I stated that neither has gained in intelligence and, yet, man has applied and advanced with the intelligence they have while animals, on the other hand, have not changed at all in the application of their intelligence.

 

[Dizredux]

How do you determine what is right and wrong?

There are many moral codes in the world that do not have to do with Christianity or any faith for that matter.

It is, as it always is, down to the individual whether they follow a moral code. I have not really found Christians to be any more moral that other faiths or no faith. I might wish it were otherwise but that is not what I have found.

Dizredux

 

[Dizredux]

What I was trying to state is that humans are different than animals. We have intelligence and over the years, as knowledge is gained and technology advances, we do more and more spectacular things and develop more and more spectacular machines. Animals, do not. They have, if evolution is a fact, stagnated at a place thousands of years old.

If all animals and man have the same intelligence now as 1000, 2000 or 6000 years old, why is man the only one to make use of and continue to gain knowledge and apply it while animals have not.

I believe, it is due to the fact that we are made in God's image, with a desire to advance and the cognitive ability to do so. We are not an evolved product of earlier forms of life.

Also, to answer the post of another member here, as they were asking something along the line of where computers came from, they are the result of years of gaining of knowledge and application of this knowledge due to the abilities we have that set us apart from animals. All of which were created by God.

Thanks, now I see what you are saying.

The thing is that a very good case could be made for human's intelligence being a difference in degree but not kind as far as intelligence goes. We are smarter and can do more thing with our tool making but we are not the only species that uses tools it is just that no others do it as well as we do.

The uniqueness of humans is always an interesting question but one with some very complex answers.

Dizredux

 

[JacksBratt]

There are many moral codes in the world that do not have to do with Christianity or any faith for that matter.

It is, as it always is, down to the individual whether they follow a moral code. I have not really found Christians to be any more moral that other faiths or no faith. I might wish it were otherwise but that is not what I have found.

Dizredux

I agree, Christians aren't any more moral than other faiths or those who are without a faith. That is not the point. In actuality, on a tangent, Christians are immoral people who know it and have humbly admitted it and are, or should be, actively trying to change. They will all have varying stages and rates of success in this pursuit.

The point is, everyone has to decide what they use as a meter to measure right and wrong.

How is it that one of the oldest and most well read books of all time is founded on the moral code, or should I say professes to be the originator of the moral code that all races and creeds seem to be based on?

Does it not seem odd that a planet occupied by beings that originated by chance and have arrived at the present state of evolution, with morals and codes of ethics that are so humane, sympathetic, fair and strive for integrity all the while there is a counter force that bends these evolved beings to continually fail and act opposite to their goals?

If I was not a theist I would be questioning "why" anyone or thing would be able to tell me what is right or wrong. After all, we have heard it said many times on this forum,"just because the majority say it is right doesn't make it so."

I was really hoping to hear from "SplitRock" on this as they made the comment on "right" based on religion.