This is an archive of a previous version of Sodarace.

forum  |  »» sodaplay

»» forums  »» artificial intelligence forum subject: Evo, vs crea, 497 replies on 34 pages. most recent reply: Mon, Aug 27 8:06 PM by cactus2

»» back to topic list

This topic has 497 replies on 34 pages [ « | 1 ... 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 ... 34  | » ]

»» previous topic   »» next topic

frodnonnag »» models »» homepage Re: Evo, vs crea,   posted: 16-Oct-03 14:39   »»  the universe's laws point to order/divinity, the evolution's "laws" point to chaos/random. there are no confusing the two. you are still trying to describe the big picture while only looking at a single detail.

frodnonnag »» models »» homepage Re: Evo, vs crea,   posted: 16-Oct-03 14:44   »»  the bible is not just literal, there are parts of it that are used as narrations(the parables of christ, psalms, songs of solomon) to teach basic moral laws.

frodnonnag »» models »» homepage Re: Evo, vs crea,   posted: 16-Oct-03 15:10   »»  >The sky is not a physical object; the way light >strikes the earth from the sun, the red light is >filtered out, leaving only the blue light to come >down to earth (at sunset, the reverse is true). i was not talking about the physical i was talking about the laws applied to it, random governs evolution and thats it, random cannot create laws and random cannot be the standard. if random was the standard(as evolution needs) then the laws cannot exist

evilgoatfiend »» models Re: Evo, vs crea,   posted: 17-Oct-03 01:14   »»  Order and chaos is completly another issue. Just because something is to complicated for you to accept doesn't mean it is wrong, chaos, in general, is discordination due to ignorance, and science is certainly organized and not ignorant, as evolution was a slow gradual process. Really chaos could be translated into madness of the mind, which could be translated into delusion, which also means wrong. Although my wording makes it seem far fetched, really being wrong in an idea is simply misconception, caused by false conclusions of chaos. So what you're really doin is simpley calling us wrong with no reasoning behind it, and we encourage reason over simply declaring the other as wrong. If your chaos refers to the process of evolution, stretch your Bibically time framed mind to the massive length of time that these changes occured over. After all galapagos finches can change their beak over the course of year, through no mutation or natural selection. But throw in some more variables and the presistance of life to improve itself, the process is easy to imagine Also I wish to introduce the idea of scientific fate into this debate because I feel it may play part. I don't want to bring the entertainment industry into this but it is a lot like the concept in the Matrix Reloaded: any same mind in the same circumstance will do the same thing, thus you have already chosen and predistined all your choices. Granted you can change your mind, but you were never going to do the first choice at all, because your choice was to think about one choice and then move to another. And you weigh choices in your head with thought, effect by instinct, emotion, and psycology in order to make your choices, thus what someone will do could be predicted or destined by an outside force that is all knowing: God. So miracles don't have to be straight, physics defying, divine intervention, but closer to a grand plan created by only a few manipulations (Jesus, The Bible, Apocalypse etc...). This further drives home coexistance of evo. and crea. PS: Frognanag, did you read my last post? Some of your points seem to ignore it! If you only read the last post you won't get anywhere.

frodnonnag »» models »» homepage Re: Evo, vs crea,   posted: 17-Oct-03 14:21   »»  let me ask you this, doesnt evoultions "improvements" happen from random genetic mutation and doesnt the big bang theory use a chaotic blast to explain the origin of order? how then does order actually exist in the universe created by and governed by a mere chance? aparently we have two very different views of what i am trying to say, i do not mean chaos in the sense you are putting it, i mean chaos in the sense of a state of complete random where everything is not governed by laws and nothing is "wrong" adaptation is another thing i would like o point out. how many of you actually read that passage in genesis? it speaks of a action god told him to to that changed the lambs colors in only one geneation. no matter how much a creature changes(beak size, height,weight, color) its still the same kind of animal Variety but theme

rodneymullen »» models »» homepage Re: Evo, vs crea,   posted: 17-Oct-03 14:54   »»  wow what a great conversation. first off before this conversation gets any more heated, i suggest you read up on velikovsky (SP? (i cant find my books)) he proves that many events that occured in the bible and many other religious scripts coincide and have scientific explanaitions.... such as seashells and whale skeletons on mountains. catatastrophes are major causes of extintions and mututations. often massive amouts of radiation are put out by these catastrophes (from volcanoes to huge planetary collisions... everything is mentioned in his books) also (not to switch the subject) but he mentions how the bible was not written figuratively, it was written literally (do you really think simple people back then thought to write very poetic? i think they just wrote what they saw in theyre dialect). this proves thet many stories were possibly made up or have sceintific explanations... even going as far as mars changing orbit, brushing by the earth and coating everthing basically with rust (and this layer of rust does exist in the earsths crust) he even mentions how in (i believe the qua'ran) how i think they mention the sun rising in the west and in the east, which happened due to a polar reversal... if these ideas confuse you or seem impossible... i would really suggest you read up on his books also, just thinking about a "heaven" or "god" existing just seems unrealistic... i mean where is he, or is he a spirit being or something along those lines.. if so prove that he exists... and also, i believe all religions sprung from early mans' confusion on where he came from... truthfully if there was a "right" religion, dont you think everyone would believe in the same one... doesnt it seem like they (thier holy texts) all are written very region specific/ typical to the region's current style of writing... even many religions coming form the same area (middle east) ok that was my two cents... and if there were typos... dont bother pointing them out.... ò¿ó _U________keep the discussion going... maybe it will beocme a book... -atheist -LR

Blueyoshi321 »» models Re: Evo, vs crea,   posted: 17-Oct-03 20:23   »»  Bravo, rodneymullen. I hadn't thought about those, but now that I think about it, I seem to remember reading an article about a scientific explanation for that biblical flood. I agree, if you (talking to theists here) are so sure there is a God, prove he exists. Disproof: Let us assume that God is omnipotent (all-powerful), omniscient (all-knowing), and all-caring (all-caring). He sees suffering, because he is all-knowing. He wants to stop suffering, because he is all-caring. He can stop suffering, because he is all-powerful. Then why do I still have to eat my vegetables?

evilgoatfiend »» models Re: Evo, vs crea,   posted: 18-Oct-03 15:33   »»  That's the one thing that gets most people that doesn't get me. Death is the transition to the afterlife, according to The Bible, not non-existance. And those who suffer and sware to change it all, are in fact, made holy with devotion through their suffering, incorporated in God's design. And rodney, I haven't read that book you talked about, but I sincerly doubt that it can bend the laws of physics, genesis must still be partly metaphorical. And if part of it is metaphorical there's no reason why no more is metaphrical. And evolution is possible! It is not chance it is the tendency for something to improve itself, Once that pattern was created in the first one celled organism, it spiralled out to humans, The first human God gave the ability to think. To comprehend it's tendecy to improve itself and the reason for improving it's worth. So society developed to do so. But with the abilit to think, man was given freedom, so they were given the choice not to serve, and the freedom to choose their belief. It is quite possible that through human error God was mis interpreted and grew to become most of the God in religions today. Which it is is faith and choice and freedom. Just food for thought: Greek mythology also told about a great flood, an underwold, a God of the skys, and of devotion to the temple/church. But we all know how they added their own stories as part of a wierd type of theater and philosophy.

frodnonnag »» models »» homepage Re: Evo, vs crea,   posted: 20-Oct-03 17:18   »»  >And evolution is possible! It is not chance it is >the tendency for something to improve itself, >Once that pattern was created in the first one >celled organism, it spiralled out to humans, how can a body part evolve(i.e. the eyes, ears, arms, nose and such)? they cannot develop over time because an incomplete version of any of it would be harmfull or useless to the animal, therefor eliminating the need to "evolve" it. the bible does have poetic parts to it.the psalms, songs of solomon and several other parts are in themselves poems or different writing styles. moses, the author of genesis, wrote in a very ordered and precise way, being himself a scholar from egypt. the difference being one is a recount of history(genesis) the other poems and songs

evilgoatfiend »» models Re: Evo, vs crea,   posted: 20-Oct-03 20:10   »»  Well evolution didn't build each species seperately like a robot, each became another, until we have what we do now (and given another billion years will become yet more). Each part was created as necessery. Cell to multi celled to plankton to fish to mudskipper to frog to muskrat to rat to monkey to ape to man (forgive me if I messed up a step). Each one of those animals survive today, and have a little relation to the next. There is survival of the transformation of evolution over the very long period of time. And over that period of time, each species has become perfected and specialized, even though we can still trace back their origins. And to you other comment you mean to imply that because of those poetic sections of The Bible that the rest isn't metaphorical, keep in mind what you are argueing for. Because that would simply suggest that the first part of the bible would have to be true or the whole thing is either a lie, a cult, a dilusion, or a conspiracy (and I don't believe it to be that) and I've already said it to be impossible, yet to be challenged by a response. So if you're going to argue that way first tell me how the universe the earth and life could have all been created within days of each other, or your then argueing against The Bible that I thought you were arguing for. Think hard about your response because right now we have a direct contradiction in logic of whether or nit ut us possible, and I would like it to be resolved before either of us move on to another point.

Blueyoshi321 »» models Re: Evo, vs crea,   posted: 20-Oct-03 21:05   »»  Well, you say that since evolution relies on random processes, it cannot happen. Suppose you generate random numbers from 1 to 20. You look at each number, and if it is less than 15, you discard it. What do you have? Why, a bunch of numbers greater than or equal to 15! Now with evolution, you have a random change made. If it is bad, it goes down the genetic drain. If it is good, it stays and spreads to other organisms. In the end, what do you have? Why, a bunch of good changes! So, if you start with an organism, make random changes to it, keeping only the good ones, you will have a better organism.

Blueyoshi321 »» models Re: Evo, vs crea,   posted: 20-Oct-03 21:09   »»  And about the imperfect part thing, let's start with something simple like an amoeba (a real one not a SodaAmoeba). Some amoebas (if not all, I'm not sure) have an light-sensing spot. As amoebas evolved to mulit-celled organisms, certain cells specialized to only sense light. Some mutations gave some individuals better "eyes". Those could see better and could thus escape from predators better, find food better, etc. and thus were able to live better. Thus the mutation was passed on to subsequent generations. Eventually, the eye that we have today came about. Sorry for double post.

frodnonnag »» models »» homepage Re: Evo, vs crea,   posted: 21-Oct-03 15:03   »»  explain how a single photosensitive cell can evolve into a multicelled organ that uses an entirely different concept to gather light, focus it, and differentiate not only between light and dark but also colors, let alone the precise nature of the eye(how one part missing prevents it from working).

frodnonnag »» models »» homepage Re: Evo, vs crea,   posted: 21-Oct-03 15:06   »»  sorry about the double too. that example of random is not random, it is confined by numbers and rules. i mean pure random (no rules or restrictions) aka chaos

frodnonnag »» models »» homepage Re: Evo, vs crea,   posted: 21-Oct-03 15:08   »»  And to you other comment you mean to imply that because of those poetic sections of The Bible that the rest isn't metaphorical, keep in mind what you are argueing for. Because that would simply suggest that the first part of the bible would have to be true or the whole thing is either a lie, a cult, a dilusion, or a conspiracy (and I don't believe it to be that) and I've already said it to be impossible, yet to be challenged by a response can you clarify this?

This topic has 497 replies on 34 pages [ « | 1 ... 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 ... 34  | » ]

»» previous topic   »» next topic   »» back to topic list  »» top of the page

PLEASE READ THE FORUM GUIDELINES AND ALWAYS PREVIEW TO CHECK MESSAGES BEFORE POSTING...
...Help keep our forums creative and constructive. Thank you.

»» forum home