My Tilt-a-Whirl Challenge

[AV1611VET]

Why are you asking non-Christians to explain things about your god?

Given that non-Christians like to point out they know more about god [sic] than we do...

 

[Davian]

Given that non-Christians like to point out they know more about god [sic] than we do...

Not god(s), religion.

 

[Kylie]

Given that non-Christians like to point out they know more about god [sic] than we do...

Bearing in mind that thye think of Christianity as ficticious, AV1611VET.

With that condition, I can answer the question now. God could have done it but didn't because that's the way the story goes. Same reason why Captain Kirk didn't send a shuttle down to rescue the landing party in The Enemy Within.

 

[AV1611VET]

The Tilt-a-Whirl,™ a product of intelligent design, uses chaotic motion to perform its function.

Demonstrate how God could have done the same, but didn't.

* Bumped for Quatona *

 

[dmmesdale]

So you consider Theistic Evolution believers an Enemy?

Collaborators. So do you really believe you are distant a cousin to a turnip?

 

[dmmesdale]

Well, duh! TE means THEISITIC evolution. So that kinda makes it impossible to be ATHEISTIC evolution.

No it does not. Quote.

It’s a lot easier to define theism than to define evolution. It’s been called the ultimate weasel word. In an illuminating article called “The Meanings of Evolution,” Stephen Meyer and Michael Keas attempt to catch the weasel by distinguishing six different ways in which “evolution” is commonly used.

1. Change over time; history of nature; any sequence of events in nature.
2. Changes in the frequencies of alleles in the gene pool of a population.
3. Limited common descent: the idea that particular groups of organisms have descended from a common ancestor.
4. The mechanisms responsible for the change required to produce limited descent with modification, chiefly natural selection acting on random variations or mutations.
5. Universal common descent: the idea that all organisms have descended from a single common ancestor.
6. “Blind watchmaker” thesis: the idea that all organisms have descended from common ancestors solely through unguided, unintelligent, purposeless, material processes such as natural selection acting on random variations or mutations; that the mechanisms of natural selection, random variation and mutation, and perhaps other similarly naturalistic mechanisms, are completely sufficient to account for the appearance of design in living organisms.1

Blind watchmaker is incompatible with Theism. Is totally atheistic.

As for them being your brothers and sisters in Christ, well that's awful ecumenical of you.

Now you are making it about him and not the issue.

And probably pretty accurate...unless you are of the type of creationist who feels that anyone who disavows literal 6 day Creation is disavowing Jesus himself (which some Creationists DO think that very thing).

If you believe you have a common ancestor with a rutabaga then i don't know what problem you would have with 6 day creation.

This is why Creationism is so uncertain and useless.

And how exactly is common ancestry with a turnip certain and useful?

Since Creationists are at each others throats over how many angels can dance on the head of a pin-type questions it cannot move forward with anything useful to add to our understanding of the ACTUAL earth.

Your assumes actual understanding is of value in the first place. Food is of actual value if your belly is empty and understanding Earth is of no value if starving.

Theistic evolution, IMHO, is what people believe who want to have BOTH God in their lives AND an appreciation for what REALITY says about things.

Fish bowl reality. Reality relative to what?

I think of Theistic Evolution as the same as "Unicorn Quantum Mechanics". A Unicorn Quantum Mechanics person wants to believe in Unicorns AND QM. So they can operate as a chemist or physicist and it won't impact their performance at all that at some part of their head contains a desire to believe that Unicorns MIGHT EXIST somewhere.

And a common ancestor of humans and apes might have existed sometime. Do you have problems with unicorns existing? Why? How bout Godzilla? At least Godzilla has a name.

Unrelated, maybe linked through some "imagination" game, but in the end not standing in the way of using QM to do actual science.

There is a large gap between QM and imaginary history so don't conflate the two. Or don't leech onto QM to smuggle in Blind watchmaker evolution since the two are not in the same ballpark science wise.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Collaborators. So do you really believe you are distant a cousin to a turnip?

Actually we know it. You are the one that has only weak belief. Knowledge trumps belief.

 

[Heissonear]

Actually we know it. You are the one that has only weak belief. Knowledge trumps belief.

You hide the information that Evolution is a faith. A mark of extremism in debate.

 

[HitchSlap]

You hide the information that Evolution is a faith. A mark of extremism in debate.

Knowledge is demonstrable - no faith needed.

 

[Heissonear]

Chaotic motion is seen only as brief timespans and events, controlled back to equalibriums through regulators or repetitive natural processes.

 

[Heissonear]

Knowledge is demonstrable - no faith needed.

You wish.

You forget that I was an educated Evolutionist, and trained in the Faith. One who for a period of time over looked the weaknesses of the theory. One who walked by assuptions as givens. One who ignored the possibility and signs of Higher Life and an extremely Powerful Creator.

Lack of transition fossil sequences is a reality that should not exist if no faith is require in Evolution. Some debaters continuously march right pass this reality. And act like it means nothing. You are one.

Once one sees their foundation of faith is Naturalism then they may become open to other faiths in what is reality in this realm we are in.

Freewill exists for a reason.

 

[Subduction Zone]

You hide the information that Evolution is a faith. A mark of extremism in debate.

Nope, please don't make up stories about others. When one says that one knows something it means that they can demonstrate it. You just have belief. You never support any of your bogus claims, you merely run and hide.

 

[essentialsaltes]

Lack of transition fossil sequences is a reality

The existence of transitional fossil sequences is also a reality.

Why do you focus on lacks due to the incompleteness of the fossil record, when we have knowledge where the record is more complete?

 

[Subduction Zone]

You wish.

You forget that I was an educated Evolutionist, and trained in the Faith. One who for a period of time over looked the weaknesses of the theory. One who walked by assuptions as givens. One who ignored the possibility and signs of Higher Life and an extremely Powerful Creator.

Lack of transition fossil sequences is a reality that should not exist if no faith is require in Evolution. Some debaters continuously march right pass this reality. And act like it means nothing. You are one.

Once one sees their foundation of faith is Naturalism then they may become open to other faiths in what is reality in this realm we are in.

Freewill exists for a reason.

You continually make this claim of an education, but your own posts continually show that you do not have such an education. For example your claim about a lack of transitional fossils. You either do not know what a transitional fossil is, which would refute your education claim, or you are totally ignorant of the fossil record, which would also refute your education claim. Or you are lying. Which would make your posts worthless. I am going with a combination of one and two and giving you a break on the third possibility right now.

People that have been educated can see your basic errors and do not take your claims about your education seriously.

 

[Subduction Zone]

The existence of transitional fossil sequences is also a reality.

Why do you focus on lacks due to the incompleteness of the fossil record, when we have knowledge where the record is more complete?

For some reason many creationists seem to think that the fossil record was frozen since Darwin's time.

 

[HitchSlap]

You wish.

You forget that I was an educated Evolutionist, and trained in the Faith. One who for a period of time over looked the weaknesses of the theory. One who walked by assuptions as givens. One who ignored the possibility and signs of Higher Life and an extremely Powerful Creator.

Lack of transition fossil sequences is a reality that should not exist if no faith is require in Evolution. Some debaters continuously march right pass this reality. And act like it means nothing. You are one.

Once one sees their foundation of faith is Naturalism then they may become open to other faiths in what is reality in this realm we are in.

Freewill exists for a reason.

More power to ya'.

 

[quatona]

* Bumped for Quatona *

Demonstrate how God could have done the same, but didn't.

You are the theist. It´s upon you to provide all the proofs you demand regarding the God of your concept. I´m not sure why you ask me to do your work for you.

Last time I checked there was the Judeo-Christian claim "With God everything is possible.". I guess that settles that no demonstration is needed for any claim regarding God and what He did and could have done, from your pov.

 

[AV1611VET]

You are the theist.

Aren't you a seeker?

How long do you plan to seek?

 

[quatona]

Aren't you a seeker?

How long do you plan to seek?

You lost interest in your own topic which you even bumped in order to get a response to me? Ok.
Or is it just an inability to stay focussed? Would a reminder to stay on topic help?

But since you asked:

Aren't you a seeker?

No, I wouldn´t label myself "seeker", particularly not in metaphysical matters. CF did that.
"Seeking" seems to have a ring of anticipating the result.
I guess I am more of a wanderer, enjoying the trip.

How long do you plan to seek?

Like, when I am seeking to find my keys, I am not setting a time for that task but usually plan to seek as long as it takes to find them. At some unpredictable point, though, it becomes obvious that they are lost. That´s when I stop seeking and start looking for other solutions.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

Like, when I am seeking to find my keys, I am not setting a time for that task but usually plan to seek as long as it takes to find them. At some unpredictable point, though, it becomes obvious that they are lost. That´s when I stop seeking and start looking for other solutions.

Just incidentally, I find it interesting that the point at which we decide to change tack or stop vacillating over a choice is regulated by the periodicity of biological clocks such as heart rate, and weighted according to urgency (and other factors), so our deliberation time varies according to the rate of those clocks; it's also influenced by our general arousal level. If you want to curtail someone's decision-making, get them agitated or stimulated.

This partly explains why we tend to be more impatient in busy, noisy environments, or listening to loud or fast music, why the music and ambience of waiting rooms and lifts tries to be soothing, and why drivers who are agitated or listening to loud or fast music tend to make poorer decisions and have more accidents.

Just sayin'.