• 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.

The question Evolutionsists can't answer

Jump to latest Follow Reply
Sort by date Sort by votes
I

Intrepid99

Senior Member
Jun 25, 2004
882
55
38
✟23,921.00
Faith
Christian
Jet Black said:
I think Colossions needs to learn a bit more about instincts and neurochemistry.
Click to expand...
There is nothing to learn about that if you say that it explains how [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse] or desire for [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse] came into existence.
 
Upvote 0

Freodin

Devout believer in a theologically different God
Mar 9, 2002
15,713
3,762
Germany, Bavaria, Middle Franconia
Visit site
✟260,281.00
Faith
Atheist

Sorry, but how am I to interprete that?

"There is no explanation for the existence [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse] beyond my explanation, so if you offer a different explanation it must be false".

This is what it sounds to me - but that would be a wierd position to hold in a debate, wouldn´t it?
 
Upvote 0
C

Cassandra

Guest

I knew the answer would be frighteningly simple XP Actually, I figured this out as I was writing the question, but kept it anyway incase it brought on further discussion.


And enjoyable it is. A perfect incentive to reproduce as often as possible.
Click to expand...

I think for this to be true, [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse] would have to only occur during intercourse. Of course, the incentive to have sex (and reproduce) doesn't solely rest on the ability to have a pleasurable [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse]


DJ Ghost said:
What an odd thing for an Agnostic to say. I would have expected it from a theistic evolutionist such as myself. (Not criticising just observing).
Click to expand...

Sopharos said:
He/she (I don't make assumptions) IS a theistic evolutionist (looked at the profile). I think maybe Cassandra is one of those Christians I've seen before who believe the cross is a "Pagan" symbol and assume the Agnostic icon to avoid such "Paganism."
Click to expand...

Well, you're half right. I'm a theistic agnostic who uses the term 'God' to include all possible....er...possibilities of supernatural being/s or forces. But hey-I could be wrong.

Does that make sense?


btw-Ghost- Yes, that is a picture of Mana from Malice Mizer ^^
 
Upvote 0
I

Intrepid99

Senior Member
Jun 25, 2004
882
55
38
✟23,921.00
Faith
Christian
Now, Look at your another post,
More wordplay. "Know" is irrelevant. Subjects of the evolutionary process do not have ANY conscience as to what they are evolving into.
Click to expand...

In the first post, you said that there is something called incentive in animals that would motivate for [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse].

In the next post, you say that they dont have any conscience of what they are evolving into. Which also means that they lack the instinct for [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse] when they are in a process of evolving. Or why they are evolving.

You contradict yourself.
 
Upvote 0
I

Intrepid99

Senior Member
Jun 25, 2004
882
55
38
✟23,921.00
Faith
Christian
If you have something that you would explain from the subject that explains the evolution of [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse] or desire for [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse], lemme know.
 
Upvote 0

Arikay

HI
Jan 23, 2003
12,674
207
42
Visit site
✟36,317.00
Faith
Taoist
Well, natural selection selects based on procreation. Thus a desire to have more kids would be a beneficial desire and thus would stick around.


 
Upvote 0

Aggie

Soldier of Knowledge
Jan 18, 2004
1,903
204
41
United States
Visit site
✟25,497.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Deist
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
US-Libertarian
I can't believe this thread has already grown to 17 pages.

I'm having a hard time deciding what's worse: their PRATT lists, or when they post a single PRATT and then ignore any refutations of it for the next 17 pages.

At least with PRATT lists, they're sometimes willing to admit that a couple of the arguments on it aren't any good, since they've still got plenty of others.
 
Upvote 0

Inside Edge

Senior Member
Aug 3, 2004
789
80
Vancouver, BC
✟23,865.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
This is what I would say is a classic example of misunderstanding one of the basic concepts of natural selection or evolution. When I was 12, I heard the example of a creature evolving a long neck to reach food higher up being explained. My big question: "How could evolution or 'nature' have known to suddenly mutate a gene and give the successive generations of creatures longr necks in order to reach the food?"

My confusion lasted about 10 minutes. In a very simple example: "Evolution," "nature," or even a given member of this species didn't "know to do anything." The creatures with longer necks were able to reach the food, so they ate and lived to pass on their gene to their offspring. Long-neck genes and all. Meanwhile, the ones with the shorter necks died off, not being able to feed themselves. "Nature" didn't need to "know" or "desire" anything at all. The "long-neck" gene continued to be passed on and evolve because that trait allowed them to reach food.

So, sex being the act of reproduction, the creatures that have more sex will reproduce more successfully. Animals (in general or those within a given species) that enjoy sex more will inevitably have more sex and reproduce more. Those that enjoy it less will have it less, and reproduce less.

Now specific to the [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse]: the [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse] is just a pleasurable reaction to a specific type of stimulation. It's not as if some generation of humans (or whatever) suddenly said, "if only we could enjoy sex even more..." and bam, the [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse] evolves. Rather, as those organisms who enjoyed sex more, had more sex and reproduced more, the successive generations were made up increasingly of creatures/animals that enjoyed sex moreso than their evolutionary ancestors. As the "sex results in pleasureable nerve response" genes get passed on and evolve, the [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse] evolves as a logical extension of this process - this process being natural selection. Those creatures that experience [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse] more, have more sex due to a heightened enjoyment of sex.

As for desire, it has little to do with evolution, near as I can tell. In fact, the question: Which came first, the desire for [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse] or the [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse]? doesn't even make much sense to me, because desire isn't really a part of the evolutionary process (not at the biological level, anyway).
 
Upvote 0
I

Intrepid99

Senior Member
Jun 25, 2004
882
55
38
✟23,921.00
Faith
Christian
It is important know the fact that evolution and natural selection are not the same. But, they are contrary to each other.

Evolution says that animals with long neck evolved from animals from short necks. But you say that they both existed together. If thats your point, you and I are on the same page that say that God created different animals. But if thats not your point, you got to prove how animals with longer necks evolved.

I agree. (Dosent say anything about evolution of [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse] or desire yet)

Whats the need to have sex when they did not have pleasure at the time they were not having any pleasure? Their needs to be some desire for sex that would motivate them to have sex. And that motivation is nothing but [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse] and pleasure. If that did not exist when having sex, no animal would have sex.

Answered in the answer for previous comment.
 
Upvote 0

Arikay

HI
Jan 23, 2003
12,674
207
42
Visit site
✟36,317.00
Faith
Taoist
If you think that evolution and natural selection are contrary to each other, then I do have to say, You don't understand the theory of evolution at all.


An example:
If I were to say "Christians think jesus was just some guy, and that he taught lessons that were contrary to christianity."
Would you say that,
A) I knew about and understood christianity.
or
B) I have no clue what christianity is or what it believes.
 
Upvote 0
I

Ishmael Borg

Guest
Do you have any idea how other organisms reproduce sexually? Are egg-depositing female fish, and sperm-spreading male fish motivated by [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse] and pleasure? You should also look into insect reproduction before making general claims for all animals.
 
Reactions: RoboMastodon
Upvote 0

Inside Edge

Senior Member
Aug 3, 2004
789
80
Vancouver, BC
✟23,865.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
Not necessarily. So long as sexual reproduction isn't self-destructive, pleasure and [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse] do not need to be present to provide motivation. However, for those creatures (in general or specific sets within a given species) that do experience pleasure will have it more often and reproduce more often (and passing on the 'pleasurable sex gene'). While those within the species who did not experience as much pleasure will not have as much sex, and will not pass on their genes to the same degree. What you will be left with is successive generations in which a greater proportion of that species have the "pleasurable sex" genes.

If a creature gets absolutely ZERO pleasure from sex, but knows that sex is necessary for procreation (survival of the species), then it will likely have sex regardless of pleasure. It just won't be as efficient at procreation as others who do experience pleasure.
 
Upvote 0

Mechanical Bliss

Secrecy and accountability cannot co-exist.
Nov 3, 2002
4,897
242
44
A^2
Visit site
✟28,875.00
Faith
Atheist
Politics
US-Democrat
Intrepid99 said:
It is important know the fact that evolution and natural selection are not the same. But, they are contrary to each other.
Click to expand...
Educate yourself. Making statements like this only indicates that you have no idea what you're talking about, and if you expect people to take you seriously when you make dogmatic statements despite a blatant misunderstanding of what evolution and natural selection are, you are mistaken. People would probably be more understanding if you weren't making arrogant statements from a position of ignorance and rather asking for clarification.
 
Upvote 0
I

Intrepid99

Senior Member
Jun 25, 2004
882
55
38
✟23,921.00
Faith
Christian
Just answer, where did they get the thought that they need to have sex for their continuity of species.
 
Upvote 0

Inside Edge

Senior Member
Aug 3, 2004
789
80
Vancouver, BC
✟23,865.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
It is proved that what INSIDE EDGE dosent hold water. Now, let us not depart from our present topic on the thread.
Click to expand...
Where is it proved? How can you make statements like this without any explanation? What I had to say addressed precisely the topic on hand. I did so honestly, and in expectation of some clarification if what I said is erroneous.

Instead, I get offensive comments that what I said is "proven" to be wrong, with no explanation, and that it's off-topic to boot.
 
Upvote 0
I

Intrepid99

Senior Member
Jun 25, 2004
882
55
38
✟23,921.00
Faith
Christian
Calm down and think about the question I asked you in previous post.
 
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Z
Long Distance Funeral Plans
Replies
5
Views
427
Requests for Christian Advice
Sir Joseph
Celibacy and Sexual Deviancy: Mystical Theology Has the Answer
Replies
0
Views
63
One Bread, One Body - Catholic
Michie
Be Polite but not Friendly to Bishops; be Good to all Poor Parish Priests.
Replies
0
Views
92
One Bread, One Body - Catholic
Michie
Energy chief suggests Trump administration is altering previously published climate reports; staff for next iteration all fired already
Replies
75
Views
3K
American Politics
DaisyDay
Hegseth to Return Memorial Biden Tore Down in Arlington National Cemetery
Replies
212
Views
5K
American Politics
DaisyDay
Menu
Log in
Register