I issue a formal challenge.

[freespiritchurch]

According to the CF formal debating rules, the challenge should be issued in the Commentary and Invitations Thread before the debate is formally begun. This debate thread would then be open only to WhiteMageGirl and her chosen opponent.

Since the invitation was not properly issued, this thread is being moved out of the Formal Debate area and into the general Creation/Evolution forum. WhiteMageGirl (and everyone else) is welcome to issue a challenge in the invitation forum so that the debate can be carried out according to the formal debate rules.

 

[Elduran]

You should repost this as an invitation in the correct area, then ignore all responses that aren't an acceptance of your terms.

 

[Myk101]

Sorry to butt in, but here's a silly question: Just because there are similarities between different species of animals does that automatically prove evolution? I haven't seen any "proof" of evolution other than similarities, which could also be explained by a Creator who made them with similar traits.

 

[Psudopod]

Assuming a creator does explain the pattern of nested hierachies we see, nor does it explain why a creator used poor design, or gave some creatures better parts than others.

 

[Myk101]

How can you say "poor design"? Can you do better? Please give me an example! Let's take the male testes for example. Improve on them so that they are not a "poor design". Or choose your own example.

Here's an analogy: You want a laptop, you want it to be the most powerful, biggest screen, biggest battery, lightest in weight, most portable, and cheap. The problem you run into is obvious. The laws of this world limit you. You can't have the fastest laptop with the biggest screen and be lightweight and the most portable. or the battery for that matter. But overall, you can optimize that laptop. you can come to a balance that serves the purpose and the intent.

Back to the original question, just because there are similar traits between species does it automatically point to evolution and nothing else? (what if aliens created us, or made us evolve, or there was an atom bomb that went off every so many millions of years...)

 

[WhiteMageGirl]

Sorry to butt in, but here's a silly question: Just because there are similarities between different species of animals does that automatically prove evolution? I haven't seen any "proof" of evolution other than similarities, which could also be explained by a Creator who made them with similar traits.

Using an entire post to only ask questions is switching the burden of proof. Read the rules.

Don't try to switch the burden of proof, Evolution has ample evidence, and is agreed upon by virtually every Christian, Muslim, Hindu, Atheist, and Agnostic Biologists(experts) in the world. Thus it is Creationism, that needs to present evidence for it's case.

This is not a question and answer thread, this thread is reserved for people who debate like expert chess players play chess.

 

[WhiteMageGirl]

Assuming a creator does explain the pattern of nested hierachies we see, nor does it explain why a creator used poor design, or gave some creatures better parts than others.

Please do not answer post which do not meet the thread requirements.

 

[Dannager]

How can you say "poor design"? Can you do better? Please give me an example! Let's take the male testes for example. Improve on them so that they are not a "poor design". Or choose your own example.

Here's an analogy: You want a laptop, you want it to be the most powerful, biggest screen, biggest battery, lightest in weight, most portable, and cheap. The problem you run into is obvious. The laws of this world limit you. You can't have the fastest laptop with the biggest screen and be lightweight and the most portable. or the battery for that matter. But overall, you can optimize that laptop. you can come to a balance that serves the purpose and the intent.

Back to the original question, just because there are similar traits between species does it automatically point to evolution and nothing else? (what if aliens created us, or made us evolve, or there was an atom bomb that went off every so many millions of years...)

Myk101, WhiteMageGirl doesn't want her thread sidetracked with other discussions. In order to respond to your post, I've started a new thread located here.

 

[WhiteMageGirl]

Still accepting takers!

 

[Dysnomia]

But I don't think we ever said it was. If you plug in m=7 to the
formula n = 2^(m-1) * (2^m - 1), you don't get 8192, you get 8128.
Is this what happened?

Math is axiomic--logic driven but not necessarily linear. While the formula you proposed fails to equal 8192 when you plug in 7 for m, I disagree with your assertion that 8192 is not perfect.

You just plugged in the wrong number for m.

Try m=13 and you get a perfect solution--no decimals, no fractions, no remainders. Just a whole and perfect number. The math is perfect, your calculations were not.

 

[WhiteMageGirl]

Will no one ever rise to my Challenge?

 

[anunbeliever]

"Yes, putting an object in motion is what those things do, but that doesn't mean an arm is in motion, so it doesn't apply to an arm always. Even when it does it doesn't apply in the way you are thinking."

Sorry for the interruption? Is English your first language? WMGs posts have been succinct and rigorous. Your replies seem to be to completely different subjects. Its as if you dont understand what is being said. I'm not belittling your intelligence. You just seem to be on a different page.

 

[WhiteMageGirl]

Sorry for the interruption? Is English your first language? WMGs posts have been succinct and rigorous. Your replies seem to be to completely different subjects. Its as if you dont understand what is being said. I'm not belittling your intelligence. You just seem to be on a different page.

He is no longer responding to this thread it seems. However, English may be his first language, but the language of science is certainly not and that's his biggest problem.

 

[Loudmouth]

a thread very worthy of a bump

 

[atomweaver]

The road of a thousand miles... You would think 5 pieces of posative evidence would be a first step.

 

[jwu]

well here is an imperfect number ie. imperfect mathmatics

8192 is not a perfect number.

But I don't think we ever said it was. If you plug in m=7 to the
formula n = 2^(m-1) * (2^m - 1), you don't get 8192, you get 8128.
Is this what happened?

You asked for the numbers "and so on."

Here are the first few perfect numbers:

It's quite old, but i found this quite ironic.
First off, from "imperfect numbers" to mathematics being imperfect is a non-sequitur.
Moreover, the mathematical definition of "perfect" numbers is completely arbitrary - and it's math itself that defines most numbers as imperfect.

However, the biggest problem is that by making that argument, one implicitly has to accept that definition of perfection, else the argument is invalid from the start if one doesn't accept one's own premises. And the goal was to show something perfect - the argument itself provided this then: Those few perfect numbers.
Hence that argument is instantly self-defeating for the purpose of this thread.

 

[harpcat]

Perhaps it is an either or to all present within this debate. To me it is not.

I believe in a Timeless eternal God. A "Necessary" being. The Prime Mover that started time and space, from timelessness and Nothingness.
I believe that in mans meager idea of time that was 14 Billion years ago and that it is denial of plain and simple facts that lead us to think anything otherwise.

I believe that this is not at all at odds with scripture as originally written, but very much at odds with many peoples translation or understanding thereof.

Science grasped as it is does not negate the existence of God. The more complex the mechanisms show themselves to be, the more desperately in need they are of a designer. Evolution is no different.

For a beautiful elicitation of this as ageneral idea, please see Francis Collins' "The Voice of God" The head of the Human Genome project and a devout brother in the Christian faith!

Thats my measly two cents!

Love y'all

 

[harpcat]

Definitions....
Theory - [SIZE=-1]a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world; an organized system of accepted knowledge that applies in a variety of circumstances to explain a specific set of phenomena; "theories can incorporate facts and laws and tested hypotheses"; "true in fact and theory" (Think of Music Theory for an example too.)

This is what science means when it says "The Theory of evolution."

Somehow in the context of this debate, too many of us Chrstians think that calling something a theory means that it is inherently unprovable. That has never been the scientific application of the term with regard to evolution.

Just for clarity.
[/SIZE]

 

[Loudmouth]

Perhaps it is an either or to all present within this debate. To me it is not.

I believe in a Timeless eternal God. A "Necessary" being. The Prime Mover that started time and space, from timelessness and Nothingness.

Do you have any evidence that supports this claim? Or is it a personal belief supported by faith?

I believe that this is not at all at odds with scripture as originally written, but very much at odds with many peoples translation or understanding thereof.

I fully agree, even as an atheist.

The more complex the mechanisms show themselves to be, the more desperately in need they are of a designer.

Why?

For a beautiful elicitation of this as ageneral idea, please see Francis Collins' "The Voice of God" The head of the Human Genome project and a devout brother in the Christian faith!

Thats my measly two cents!

Love y'all

I intend to read Collin's books in the near future. I really enjoy his writing (again, even as an atheist). The scientific community is not afraid of religion or religious people. In fact, there are many people of faith throughout the scientific community. What the scientific community is afraid of is religion under the guise of pseudoscience, and pseudoscience trying to act like science. Since you have already mentioned Francis Collins, I would also suggest reading his very well written essay Faith and the Human Genome (in .pdf format).

Do you have any evidence for God or the necessity of God in nature that would fit the criteria in the opening post?

 

[Skaloop]

The more complex the mechanisms show themselves to be, the more desperately in need they are of a designer.

Wouldn't God be the most complex thing of all? Who or what designed him?