Some random discussion on evolution...

[OldWiseGuy]

What education do you have in anatomy? Written any papers? Any degrees?

I can read and comprehend what I'm reading, with the exception of evolution. If you wish I can demonstrate why by pasting a paper on evolution. I don't think Einstein could understand it.

 

[Shemjaza]

You apparently don't study anatomy.

Also not an argument.

Please present a detailed anatomical analysis that demonstrates design and I will endeavor to learn more to understand it.

I am convinced that you are completely incapable of doing so for two reasons. One evidence for design doesn't exist, two you only need and only have wishful feelings to support your intuition that life and the universe was designed.

 

[Ophiolite]

Elitist, yes. You guys tout the widespread and growing belief in evolution and joyfully observe the decline in belief of creation, but your 'believers' are wholly ignorant of the theory itself. It's a hollow victory, I'd say.

I'm largely ignorant of the Lambda-CDM model, which is a parametrization of the Big Bang cosmological model, but that has zero impact on its legitimacy. Indeed the fact that I dislike any variant of BB theory and don't really "believe" in it, does absolutely nothing to reduce the vast amount of evidence for the theory, nor alter the quite appropriate acceptance of the theory by the vast majority of physicists and cosmologists who have the background and intellect to understand it.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

I'm largely ignorant of the Lambda-CDM model, which is a parametrization of the Big Bang cosmological model, but that has zero impact on its legitimacy. Indeed the fact that I dislike any variant of BB theory and don't really "believe" in it, does absolutely nothing to reduce the vast amount of evidence for the theory, nor alter the quite appropriate acceptance of the theory by the vast majority of physicists and cosmologists who have the background and intellect to understand it.

Do you have numbers? Of those who believe how many understand?

 

[OldWiseGuy]

One evidence for design doesn't exist,...

Only if you reinterpret design.

 

[VirOptimus]

I can read and comprehend what I'm reading, with the exception of evolution. If you wish I can demonstrate why by pasting a paper on evolution. I don't think Einstein could understand it.

So, none, you have read a few books.

That is not "study anatomy".

And from what I can gather you really cant understand what you read when it come to any science .

 

[Shemjaza]

Only if you reinterpret design.

All the come backs and distractions won't make your wishful thinking either critical thinking or anatomy.

You don't present any evidence and your vague responses make it seem very clear that you have none.

 

[Ophiolite]

Do you have numbers? Of those who believe how many understand?

No idea. I thought I had made it clear they don't really matter. The vast majority of those who have studied it sufficiently to understand it accept it as the best current explanation of the observations.

 

[VirOptimus]

No idea. I thought I had made it clear they don't really matter. The vast majority of those who have studied it sufficiently to understand it accept it as the best current explanation of the observations.

He really really dont understand how science operates.

 

[pitabread]

Reading anatomy books.

Sure.

Last time I asked you to describe the evidence for design, it seemed to be little more than an internal reaction (e.g. emotional) to reading about anatomy. You've yet to otherwise articulate why you think that life forms show design.

If it really is based on a critical analysis of anatomy then you should be able to articulate what that critical analysis was.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Sure.

Last time I asked you to describe the evidence for design, it seemed to be little more than an internal reaction (e.g. emotional) to reading about anatomy. You've yet to otherwise articulate why you think that life forms show design.

If it really is based on a critical analysis of anatomy then you should be able to articulate what that critical analysis was.

Some things are obvious without critical analysis.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

He really really dont understand how science operates.

Can science explain why so many believe in creation...if we are the product of evolution?

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Sure.

Last time I asked you to describe the evidence for design, it seemed to be little more than an internal reaction (e.g. emotional) to reading about anatomy. You've yet to otherwise articulate why you think that life forms show design.

If it really is based on a critical analysis of anatomy then you should be able to articulate what that critical analysis was.

You are caught between a rock and a hard place. How does a process that excludes design end up with organisms that demonstrate design?

 

[VirOptimus]

Can science explain why so many believe in creation...if we are the product of evolution?

Q.e.d.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Q.e.d.

How?

 

[pitabread]

Some things are obvious without critical analysis.

Previously you said this:

Observation and critical thinking.

Shall I assume the above statement is untrue then?

Second, appeals to "obviousness" is just a core appeal to intuition which is really just an emotional reaction to something. We're circling back to what we've covered previously: that you believe what you believe for emotional and not analytical reasons.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Previously you said this:



Shall I assume the above statement is untrue then?

Second, appeals to "obviousness" is just a core appeal to intuition which is really just an emotional reaction to something. We're circling back to what we've covered previously: that you believe what you believe for emotional and not analytical reasons.

I just don't analyze organisms through the prism of evolution. I prefer to view anatomy as it is, not a theory of how it came to be.

 

[pitabread]

I just don't analyze organisms through the prism of evolution.

I didn't say you analyzed things through the "prism of evolution".

I'm trying to understand how you arrived at your views, and you're providing contradictory answers.

I prefer to view anatomy as it is, not a theory of how it came to be.

How can you conclude it was deliberately designed if you're not trying to understand its origin?

 

[pitabread]

How does a process that excludes design end up with organisms that demonstrate design?

What do you mean by "demonstrate design"? If you're talking about deliberate design, I don't believe that organisms demonstrate deliberate design.

To me they bear the hallmarks of an evolutionary process.

 

[Kylie]

Observation and critical thinking.

If you're basing your conclusions on anecdote and a sample size of one, I'd say you're wrong about that.