• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

Evolution is mathematically impossible

tas8831

Well-Known Member
May 5, 2017
5,611
3,999
56
Northeast
✟101,040.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Design is a plan from which something is created or fabricated. Just reverse engineer the human hand and you'll see the plan (many such diagrams are available).
Such emotional rhetoric is unbecoming a person with so high an IQ. This is in 'the sky is blue because Jesus made it that way' territory.
I'm only trying to persuade you and others that I believe that we were designed, and not the result of happenstance.

You can believe whatever you want - just don't pretend that what you merely believe (based on your religious brainwashing coupled with your admitted ignorance of biology) is on par with what the actual evidence indicates.
I would think that by now you and others would concede the fact that OldWiseGuy believes in special creation. Of course it is challenging to you and others as I keep imposing this belief into these evolution threads.
Nobody has questioned your simplistic beliefs - we have questioned your competence and honesty when it comes to discussing actual evidence.
 
Upvote 0

OldWiseGuy

Wake me when it's soup.
Site Supporter
Feb 4, 2006
46,773
10,977
Wisconsin
Visit site
✟1,005,242.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
Such emotional rhetoric is unbecoming a person with so high an IQ. This is in 'the sky is blue because Jesus made it that way' territory.

So, you don't think a diagram of the hand, or any other organ, indicates design? How is that possible?
 
Upvote 0

tas8831

Well-Known Member
May 5, 2017
5,611
3,999
56
Northeast
✟101,040.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Take an organ, such as the human hand with all it's connections. I see elegant design from the start, not the end product of a million fortuitous changes over millions of years (details which are impossible to verify). Studying anatomy reveals such design from the smallest detail to the whole organism.
Since you equate looking at a diagram on the interwebs with "studying anatomy" color me unimpressed.

In my exchanges with you on the subject of anatomy, your positions are naive and under-informed, to say the least.

Like here, or here. Or here. Or....
 
Upvote 0

tas8831

Well-Known Member
May 5, 2017
5,611
3,999
56
Northeast
✟101,040.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
So, you don't think a diagram of the hand, or any other organ, appears to have been designed?
Not really.
How is that possible?
Because I went to college and learned about things like anatomy, physiology, genetics, and embryology. Plus, I have never been brainwashed into the religious worldview wherein everything is attributed to a deity. Even when I thought I was a Christian, I never felt that such positions had merit.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: tyke
Upvote 0

OldWiseGuy

Wake me when it's soup.
Site Supporter
Feb 4, 2006
46,773
10,977
Wisconsin
Visit site
✟1,005,242.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
You can believe whatever you want - just don't pretend that what you merely believe (based on your religious brainwashing coupled with your admitted ignorance of biology) is on par with what the actual evidence indicates.

Interesting phrase: "...the actual evidence...indicates". The actual evidence indicates design.
 
Upvote 0

OldWiseGuy

Wake me when it's soup.
Site Supporter
Feb 4, 2006
46,773
10,977
Wisconsin
Visit site
✟1,005,242.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
Since you equate looking at a diagram on the interwebs with "studying anatomy" color me unimpressed.

In my exchanges with you on the subject of anatomy, your positions are naive and under-informed, to say the least.

Like here, or here. Or here. Or....

You're not impressed with Gray's Anatomy studies? You should read it sometime. I think you would be impressed.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: tas8831
Upvote 0

Speedwell

Well-Known Member
May 11, 2016
23,928
17,626
82
St Charles, IL
✟347,280.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Married
Interesting phrase: "...the actual evidence...indicates". The actual evidence indicates design.
The actual evidence indicates functional complexity. Whether that complexity was produced by natural processes or intentional design is another question altogether.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Astrophile
Upvote 0

OldWiseGuy

Wake me when it's soup.
Site Supporter
Feb 4, 2006
46,773
10,977
Wisconsin
Visit site
✟1,005,242.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
The actual evidence indicates functional complexity. Whether that complexity was produced by natural processes or intentional design is another question altogether.

Functional complexity suggests design, imo. What needs to be explored is just how complex.
 
Upvote 0

tas8831

Well-Known Member
May 5, 2017
5,611
3,999
56
Northeast
✟101,040.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Interesting phrase: "...the actual evidence...indicates". The actual evidence indicates design.
Not to those that understand biology.

Other than you belief, and your desire for it to be so, what is the evidence that the hand was designed by Jesus?
 
  • Friendly
Reactions: bhillyard
Upvote 0

Speedwell

Well-Known Member
May 11, 2016
23,928
17,626
82
St Charles, IL
✟347,280.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Married
Functional complexity suggests design, imo. What needs to be explored is just how complex.
No, it doesn't. Complexity is not evidence of design, except for those religious extremists who claim that evolution cannot produce it.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: tas8831
Upvote 0

tas8831

Well-Known Member
May 5, 2017
5,611
3,999
56
Northeast
✟101,040.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Functional complexity suggests design, imo.

Interesting disclaimer - "imo."

Why should the opinion with a track record of making a fool of himself on matters biological be taken seriously?
 
Upvote 0

tas8831

Well-Known Member
May 5, 2017
5,611
3,999
56
Northeast
✟101,040.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
You're not impressed with Gray's Anatomy studies? You should read it sometime. I think you would be impressed.
You're hilarious in your desperation to pretend.

As I informed you when you previously foolishly made this kind of implication -

I purchased my first copy of Gray's Anatomy when I was 19, a young corporal in the army, looking for something to read in my spare time.. It is sitting on a shelf behind me right now.

Next to Moore's Clinically Oriented Anatomy (medical school anatomy text) on the same shelf. Right next to Grant's Atlas of Human Anatomy. Right next to Netter's Atlas of Human Anatomy. Right next to 4 different editions of undergraduate anatomy textbooks. Right next to 3 different embryology textbooks. Above a shelf where I have Nolte's 'The Human Brain' neuroanatomy and physiology text. And so forth.
I took 2 undergrad anatomy courses. An 8-credit human anatomy course in a school of medicine, after which I was required to teach continuing ed anatomy for physicians and to teach remedial anatomy classes to medical students. I've been teaching human and comparative anatomy at the college level for almost 20 years.

And you perused an online version of Gray's to look at a hand, and cannot see when I run circles around you. I do not claim or pretend to be the greatest anatomy expert there is - I lack that egotism gene that so many creationists have - but to think that I don't know MORE on this subject than you do is a fool's mistake.

Such is the hubris and prideful ignorance of the creationist.
 
Upvote 0

OldWiseGuy

Wake me when it's soup.
Site Supporter
Feb 4, 2006
46,773
10,977
Wisconsin
Visit site
✟1,005,242.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
You're hilarious in your desperation to pretend.

As I informed you when you previously foolishly made this kind of implication -

I purchased my first copy of Gray's Anatomy when I was 19, a young corporal in the army, looking for something to read in my spare time.. It is sitting on a shelf behind me right now.

Next to Moore's Clinically Oriented Anatomy (medical school anatomy text) on the same shelf. Right next to Grant's Atlas of Human Anatomy. Right next to Netter's Atlas of Human Anatomy. Right next to 4 different editions of undergraduate anatomy textbooks. Right next to 3 different embryology textbooks. Above a shelf where I have Nolte's 'The Human Brain' neuroanatomy and physicology text. And so forth.
I took 2 undergrad anatomy courses. An 8-credit human anatomy course in a school of medicine, after which I was required to teach continuing ed anatomy for physicians and to teach remedial anatomy classes to medical students. I've been teaching human and comparative anatomy at the college level for almost 20 years.

And you perused an online version of Gray's to look at a hand, and cannot see when I run circles around you.

Such is the hubris and prideful ignorance of the creationist.

So after all your studies you still don't see design in the human hand? Strange.
 
Upvote 0

Speedwell

Well-Known Member
May 11, 2016
23,928
17,626
82
St Charles, IL
✟347,280.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Married
So after all your studies you still don't see design in the human hand? Strange.
Because it isn't to be seen there. All you can see is functional complexity.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Astrophile
Upvote 0

tas8831

Well-Known Member
May 5, 2017
5,611
3,999
56
Northeast
✟101,040.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
So after all your studies you still don't see design in the human hand? Strange.
Why strange? It is strange that I do not belong to a cult that robs me of the ability to grasp reality? Or is it strange that I do not pretend to understand things I do not like most creationists do?

What is strange to me is the notion that one can peruse a diagram on the internet and fancy their biased and admittedly uninformed opinions are on par with people that have actually studied the material in depth.

Who does that?
 
Upvote 0

tas8831

Well-Known Member
May 5, 2017
5,611
3,999
56
Northeast
✟101,040.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
We see that OWG is back to his old tactic of ignoring most of what people write when he is shown to be in error, only to reply with silly one liners. I documented this behavior just about 1 year ago:


Creationists wonder why evolutionists get so frustrated with their antics that we use insults more than they do.

Nice example - I write this lengthy, referenced response in which I explain the creationist's mistakes and explain how his own reference does not support his claims:

**********************************

So there really is no reflexive action not coming from the brain? Can you explain this (from one of my links),


Reflexes
"A reflex is an automatic response to a stimulus. For example, the lower leg jerks when the tendon below the kneecap is gently tapped with a small rubber hammer. The pathway that a reflex follows (reflex arc) does not directly involve the brain. The pathway consists of the sensory nerve to the spinal cord, the nerve connections in the spinal cord, and the motor nerves back to the muscle."

Nothing wrong with that.


But this is not what you wrote:


" This is a visceral reaction (the 'mind' of the body) influencing the function of the throat and voice box without the direction of the brain."

And lets not forget this gem:


"How do you think unconscious vocal signals get to the brain so fast when a person, or a giraffe, is suddenly surprised or frightened? "


I'd probably try to cover up the fact that I had written something so silly, too. If I were you. After having boasted of having a high IQ and all that ego-puffing.

But I am not you. I try not to pontificate on things I can actually understand that I don't know much about. I am not an egotist YEC with a failing religion to prop up at all costs.

What you cannot seem to grasp - due to you obvious ignorance of basic biology - is that the knee-jerk reflex is NOT at all like making sound.

You can do your precious little keyword searches and take things out of context and try to spin and do your historical revisionism all you want, and you will still be wrong, AND in the process of trying to save face, simply provide further evidence of your ignorance of anatomy and physiology. So keep it up!



You might want to google "Gut Feelings" as well. It's the source of my "the body has a mind of it's own" comment.

Gut Feelings–the "Second Brain" in Our Gastrointestinal Systems [Excerpt]

I don't know if you're the one to be representing all there is to know about this subject. You don't seem to be up to date on some of it.

First, I have never claimed or implied that I know all there is to know on any subject - not being a YEC, I tend not to think that way in the first place.
Second, having taken graduate level anatomy and physiology classes, and having taught anatomy and neuroscience (as well as cell biology, immunology, evolution, etc.) at the college level, I think I probably know more about the matter than some retired dude that cannot seem to grasp basic freshman level biology.

For future reference - try this:

The Neural Basis of Speech and Language
http://samples.jbpub.com/9781449652678/74738_CH02_FINAL.pdf

You might actually learn something. Doubt it, but you might.


Anyway, it is absolutely hilarious that you are trying to equate this with your farcical claims about "unconscious vocal signals" getting TO the brain.

From your link:

Our brain and gut are connected by an extensive network of neurons and a highway of chemicals and hormones that constantly provide feedback about how hungry we are, whether or not we’re experiencing stress, or if we’ve ingested a disease-causing microbe. ...

The enteric nervous system is often referred to as our body’s second brain. There are hundreds of million of neurons connecting the brain to the enteric nervous system, the part of the nervous system that is tasked with controlling the gastrointestinal system. This vast web of connections monitors the entire digestive tract from the esophagus to the anus [weird - no mention of controlling the "voice box" when scared!]....

While our “second” brain cannot compose a symphony or paint a masterpiece the way the brain in our skull can, it does perform an important role in managing the workings of our inner tube. ...

Operations of the enteric nervous system are overseen by the brain and central nervous system. The central nervous system is in communication with the gut via the sympathetic and parasympathetic branches of the autonomic nervous system, the involuntary arm of the nervous system that controls heart rate, breathing, and digestion...

This circuitry of neurons, hormones, and chemical neurotransmitters not only sends messages to the brain about the status of our gut, it allows for the brain to directly impact the gut environment....


And so on...


Did you actually read it? Or did you get so geeked out because it had the words 'gut' and 'brain' in it and thought that would be enough to prove that signals for vocalizations come from the gut? Because you just don't know any better and cannot bring yourself to admit it?

So.... This is the downside of someone that is clearly smart, but not as informed on subjects that they have no real education or experience in but feel compelled to pontificate on to protect their outdated religious views - they cannot understand the material, do keyword searches, skim a few sentences of the top returns, then present them as PROOF! of their claims.

VINDICATION! the overconfident yet totally under-informed creationist proclaims.
Only to be hoisted by their own petard yet again due to the very ignorance that got them in the jam in the first place.

AGAIN - why is it so hard for creationists to just admit they were wrong about something?
*********************

And I get this blow-off reply:

"You still don't get it. I didn't say speech, I said sounds, vocalizations. Big difference. "​



Creationists... chasing fence-sitters away from their Faith for 4 decades...
 
  • Like
Reactions: tyke
Upvote 0

Astrophile

Newbie
Aug 30, 2013
2,338
1,559
77
England
✟256,526.00
Country
United Kingdom
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Widowed
Take an organ, such as the human hand with all it's connections. I see elegant design from the start, not the end product of a million fortuitous changes over millions of years (details which are impossible to verify). Studying anatomy reveals such design from the smallest detail to the whole organism.

First, the existence of 'elegant design' in the human (or primate) hand isn't inconsistent with our sharing common ancestors with the apes. Second, as many people have pointed out, an intelligent designer of the human (and indeed mammalian) body should have had more sense than to 'put the playground next door to the sewer'. As medieval monks pointed out, we are born between urine and faeces (how did they know if they were monks?), and our fathers begot us with the same part of their body that they used to discharge urine. This is an unhygienic arrangement, and it leads to unfortunate psychological consequences, but it can be understood as an evolutionary inheritance from our fishy ancestors.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tas8831
Upvote 0

pitabread

Well-Known Member
Jan 29, 2017
12,920
13,373
Frozen North
✟344,333.00
Country
Canada
Gender
Male
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Private
Falsehood alert: Evolution does not reject design. Design is an unfalsifiable proposition which science cannot disprove.

Supernatural design is unfalsifiable. Non supernatural design is within the purview of science.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Astrophile
Upvote 0

OldWiseGuy

Wake me when it's soup.
Site Supporter
Feb 4, 2006
46,773
10,977
Wisconsin
Visit site
✟1,005,242.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others

"....having taken graduate level anatomy and physiology classes, and having taught anatomy and neuroscience (as well as cell biology, immunology, evolution, etc.) at the college (level..."​


Impressive credentials, but lacks the discipline needed to address my theory, which would be the study of the nerve (or other) pathways involved in the brain/emotion cycle. In my reading I haven't found such a study.

You have placed yourself, imo, in the same camp as the one who stated that the only function of the heart is to pump blood. Probably because that is the only function that can be observed.​
 
Upvote 0