RRS: sapient-theres a few problems your 'blasphemy challenge' [Trollville]

rugerac556
Theist
rugerac556's picture
Posts: 37
Joined: 2007-10-05
User is offlineOffline
RRS: sapient-theres a few problems your 'blasphemy challenge' [Trollville]

if you are right there is no God, you will have spent your whole life on defeating something that was defeated from the get-go.

those people you have hepled will pass on into non-existance and this topic will have waisted their as well. however if you are wrong , how shocked will you be if bacteria cannot make a human over time and you are now standing before God. will you be teriffied, or confident that you can debate the '40 year gap problem' to get a pass on hell? if you go to hell, how confident will you be that you can go on your own terms. 'hell, but nothing too uncomfortable please. ' either way you have placed all your chips on one descision and have yet to find out if you made a wrong bet. however you are pretty bold to do this, but its all risk and no lasting reward. i will have to make a donation though, but how confident are you that your discission will not end horribly wrong if you can't poll the people who have already found out?

 


evil religion
evil religion's picture
Posts: 232
Joined: 2006-10-20
User is offlineOffline
rugerac556 wrote: sapient,

rugerac556 wrote:
sapient, you said life always existed. suppose we evolved from animals, we need those animals to mate and feed in space for years to pass on the mutating dna until we have a earth for it to continue . the problem is in the dna, dna works inside a cell, a cell works inside a body. so we need a body that can live for a while with out a atsmophere. is there such one?

Ultimately we evolved from bacteria. These bacteria didn't require an oxygen rich atmosphere in fact they created the oxygen rich atmosphere on earth of a few billion years of respiration. This then paved the way for other life forms which did need oxygen.  So these early bacteria did require an atmosphere just not the one we know today.

The atmosphere present 4 or so billion years ago on earth formed basically by chance because thats what the earth was made up of and physics dictated how the earth was structured. In this environment very basic life arose. How exactly we don;t know yet. But there where proably some intermediatry steps. There are self replicating chemicals which are not alive BUT could in principle still evolve. Random changes in these self replicating chemicals could make them better at replication (or worse) in which case they will tend to dominate, They will basically replicate more effectivly and spread becoming more common, turning more stuff into them. Through this selective proces more and more complex replicators could form until we get to very basic life. Once life is established evolution as we know its takes off and a few billion years later we end up with you and me discussing all this on the internet.

 

 

 

 


Nero
Rational VIP!
Nero's picture
Posts: 1142
Joined: 2007-05-22
User is offlineOffline
This is called Pascal's

This is called Pascal's wager.  It is a lousy reason to believe in a god.


Magus
High Level DonorModerator
Magus's picture
Posts: 592
Joined: 2007-04-11
User is offlineOffline
SO what if God X, you

SO what if God X, you know the one you don't believe in is the real god? Doesn't that mean you are going to be forever punished for picking the wrong god number in the god lottery? The arguement is a false dicotomy.

This video has some charts that might help you: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XT-mrvrPJIs

Starting at 1:55 to 4:30

 

[edit: Removed the word "also" it wasn't suppose to be there] 

Sounds made up...
Agnostic Atheist
No, I am not angry at your imaginary friends or enemies.


zarathustra
atheist
zarathustra's picture
Posts: 1196
Joined: 2006-11-16
User is offlineOffline
How long before a theist

How long before a theist brings an original idea to the forums?


magilum
Posts: 2410
Joined: 2007-03-07
User is offlineOffline
rugerac556 wrote: if you

rugerac556 wrote:
if you are right there is no God, you will have spent your whole life on defeating something that was defeated from the get-go.

Absolutely true -- the concept of "god" is an abortion. It hints at a people frightened of the dark. Unfortunately, many people still panic when the lights go out. If you get my meaning.
rugerac556 wrote:
those people you have helped will pass on into non-existance and this topic will have waisted their as well.

No, the idea is to convince people not to waste their lives on a dead-end philosophy like a religion.
rugerac556 wrote:
however if you are wrong , how shocked will you be if bacteria cannot make a human over time  and you are now standing before God. will you be teriffied, or confident that you can debate the '40 year gap problem' to get a pass on hell? if you go to hell, how confident will you be that you can go on your own  terms. 'hell, but nothing too uncomfortable please. ' either way you have placed all your chips on one descision and have yet to find out if you made a wrong bet. however you are pretty bold to do this, but its all risk and no lasting reward.  i will have to make a donation though,  but how confident are you that your discission will not end horribly wrong if you can't poll the people who have already found out?

Everyone gets something different from the "objective" philosophy provided by religion. Here, it's schadenfreude.


magilum
Posts: 2410
Joined: 2007-03-07
User is offlineOffline
zarathustra wrote: How long

zarathustra wrote:
How long before a theist brings an original idea to the forums?

When one of the fantastic things that supposedly happened to start the religions actually happens for a people not ravaged by ignorance and fear.


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13410
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is onlineOnline
OH MY THOR! AN ORIGINAL

OH MY THOR! AN ORIGINAL ARGUMENT!.........

Oh wait, that was just indigestion. 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


rugerac556
Theist
rugerac556's picture
Posts: 37
Joined: 2007-10-05
User is offlineOffline
sapient: pascal bet that the authors of the bible flat-out lied

just to strike fear for their own sick pleasure. now athiests bet a bacteria can end up a human over time.if it can, the bacteria has to be programed to do that accurately. it cannot do it by accident. accidents end up in disasters, that why their called 'accidents'. when incredible happens, it call 'an act of God'. ie:the moon causes tides that cleanse the shoreline, keep currents circulating, and keep ocean from going stagnant. moon: intelligent elements or 'act of God'. 


magilum
Posts: 2410
Joined: 2007-03-07
User is offlineOffline
I just wanted to respond by

I just wanted to respond by saying your points aren't worth responding to.


rugerac556
Theist
rugerac556's picture
Posts: 37
Joined: 2007-10-05
User is offlineOffline
bacteria

bacteria cant make animals. the best bacteria can make over time is more bacteria


rugerac556
Theist
rugerac556's picture
Posts: 37
Joined: 2007-10-05
User is offlineOffline
incredible

why is the incredible not worth mentioning? 


aiia
Superfan
aiia's picture
Posts: 1923
Joined: 2006-09-12
User is offlineOffline
How old are you?

How old are you?


Nero
Rational VIP!
Nero's picture
Posts: 1142
Joined: 2007-05-22
User is offlineOffline
rugerac556 wrote: why is

rugerac556 wrote:
why is the incredible not worth mentioning? 

The definition alone answers your question.

in·cred·i·ble /ɪnˈkrɛdəbəl/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[in-kred-uh-buhl] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation –adjective not credible; hard to believe; unbelievable:

"Tis better to rule in Hell than to serve in Heaven." -Lucifer


Fish
Posts: 315
Joined: 2007-05-31
User is offlineOffline
rugerac556 wrote: just to

rugerac556 wrote:
just to strike fear for their own sick pleasure. now athiests bet a bacteria can end up a human over time.if it can, the bacteria has to be programed to do that accurately. it cannot do it by accident. accidents end up in disasters, that why their called 'accidents'. when incredible happens, it call 'an act of God'. ie:the moon causes tides that cleanse the shoreline, keep currents circulating, and keep ocean from going stagnant. moon: intelligent elements or 'act of God'.

It's frustrating when theists argue everthing backwards. "Oh! Isn't it amazing that everything in the world is just right to support human life??" Not really. If things weren't just right, humans wouldn't exist.

Bacteria don't need to know what a human looks like. Evolution is not a process driven towards a specific form. When you find a shell on the beach, do you think "what a coincidence that there is a beach right where I found this shell!" or "it makes sense to find a shell on the beach, since it probably came from the ocean"?


rugerac556
Theist
rugerac556's picture
Posts: 37
Joined: 2007-10-05
User is offlineOffline
in·cred·i·ble /ɪnˈkrɛdəbəl/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pro

"the defintion alone answers your question" a bacteria can make humans & animals in time-not credible; hard to believe; unbelievable -the sun made itself accidentily to grow crops and help you tan-not credible; hard to believe; unbelievable;-salmon swim upstream, cause a bacteria gave them the sence to 'hold the bloodline at all cost'-not credible; hard to believe; unbelievable. 'theres only one way to handle these things. nip it in the bud. nip it. nip it. nip it!'-barney fife 


Archeopteryx
Superfan
Archeopteryx's picture
Posts: 1037
Joined: 2007-09-09
User is offlineOffline
rugerac556 wrote: just to

rugerac556 wrote:
just to strike fear for their own sick pleasure. now athiests bet a bacteria can end up a human over time.if it can, the bacteria has to be programed to do that accurately. it cannot do it by accident. accidents end up in disasters, that why their called 'accidents'.
 I'm in a charitable mood, so I'll elaborate:  The understanding that "evolution happens by a series of accidents" or comparable to a single hugely unlikely event is religious propoganda and is a huge misconception about how evolution actually works. The reason your post was labeled "not worth responding to" is because it demonstrates a misunderstanding of the most basic ideas of evolution. You don't know about evolution, so you attacked a version of evolution that isn't even the real thing. Therefore, what you said in the quote above merits no response. 
Quote:
  when incredible happens, it call 'an act of God'. ie:the moon causes tides that cleanse the shoreline, keep currents circulating, and keep ocean from going stagnant. moon: intelligent elements or 'act of God'.

 

You're just perceiving design where there is none. If I'm not mistaken on this, the current explanation offered by astronomers is that the moon was formed during earth's formative stages at the time of the heavy bombardment. This was a time when there were so man asteroids in the solar system that the earth was bombarded with them quite literally 24/7. Earth's orbital path has been cleared out since that time, though, so we don't see nearly as many collisions to day (thankfully). The most accepted explanation at the present time is that the moon was originally a part of earth, but it broke away during an especially massive collision. The fact that it has an effect on the tides of our oceans is a matter of gravitational attraction between earth and moon and is completely incidental. Don't make the mistake of looking at the relationship in the reverse order. The moon did not come into existence to make the oceans what they are; the oceans became what they are due to the moon being the way it is.

 And since you're apparently interested in evolution (though apparently have read enough about it), the earth was not crafted to suit the life that lives on it. The life that lives on it must conform to the conditions present or leave the party. (hence, extinction). 

A place common to all will be maintained by none. A religion common to all is perhaps not much different.


Archeopteryx
Superfan
Archeopteryx's picture
Posts: 1037
Joined: 2007-09-09
User is offlineOffline
rugerac556 wrote: "the

rugerac556 wrote:
"the defintion alone answers your question" a bacteria can make humans & animals in time-not credible; hard to believe; unbelievable -the sun made itself accidentily to grow crops and help you tan-not credible; hard to believe; unbelievable;-salmon swim upstream, cause a bacteria gave them the sence to 'hold the bloodline at all cost'-not credible; hard to believe; unbelievable. 'theres only one way to handle these things. nip it in the bud. nip it. nip it. nip it!'-barney fife
 Firstly, I reiterate: life conformed to the conditions present. You're looking at the relationship between the earth and its life in the wrong direction.This means that the sun was not made specifically to grow crops for us. As a matter of fact, those crops were not always our crops! The entire idea of "crops" didn't even exist until humans discovered agriculture. We didn't always have that, you know. The crops found a way to live by using the sun's energy. The sun didn't come into existence to help some already existing crops.Also, the sun didn't make itself accidentally. It was formed from a spinning gas cloud that collapsed on itself and exploded. You know, exactly the way that other stars form. =) These are not new arguments you're making. Hell, I'm new and I've heard these arguments so many times it makes me yawn. I can only imagine how the vets must feel. Those are probably the ones ignoring this thread. 

A place common to all will be maintained by none. A religion common to all is perhaps not much different.


Sapient
High Level DonorRRS CO-FOUNDERRRS Core MemberWebsite Admin
Sapient's picture
Posts: 7522
Joined: 2006-04-18
User is offlineOffline
rugerac556 wrote:

rugerac556 wrote:
"the defintion alone answers your question" a bacteria can make humans & animals in time-not credible; hard to believe; unbelievable -the sun made itself accidentily to grow crops and help you tan-not credible; hard to believe; unbelievable;-salmon swim upstream, cause a bacteria gave them the sence to 'hold the bloodline at all cost'-not credible; hard to believe; unbelievable. 'theres only one way to handle these things. nip it in the bud. nip it. nip it. nip it!'-barney fife

A super being abundantly more powerful and amazing than all of the concepts you just mentioned existed forever and needed no creator (yet everything needs a creator).

Not credible, hard to believe; unbelievable.

- Brian Sapient


Buy popular atheist books and support the Rational Response Squad at the same time on Amazon.


Archeopteryx
Superfan
Archeopteryx's picture
Posts: 1037
Joined: 2007-09-09
User is offlineOffline
This video argues design

This video argues design like you! Watch it and see where it gets them!

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yArPNtiQDcM

 

Arguments for design are all rooted in ignorance of some kind. Sorry, buddy.

A place common to all will be maintained by none. A religion common to all is perhaps not much different.


Archeopteryx
Superfan
Archeopteryx's picture
Posts: 1037
Joined: 2007-09-09
User is offlineOffline
rugerac556 wrote: bacteria

rugerac556 wrote:
bacteria cant make animals. the best bacteria can make over time is more bacteria

 

haha, you continue to make the most weak arguments against evolution in existence.

Be honest... do you listen to Ray Comfort? Eric Hovind? Don't be that guy.

 *sigh*

Evolution doesn't indicate that new species arise spontaneously. It doesn't say that a bird egg hatches and a crocodile crawls out. It doesn't say that a bee pollinates a flower and then that flower turns into a kangaroo. YOU ARE ARGUING AGAINST A THEORY THAT DOES NOT EXIST.

 Yes! Bacteria producing more bacteria is true! And that's exactly what evolution says!

TRY LEARNING ABOUT IT.

 

Once you actually learn something about evolution, you may try again. 

A place common to all will be maintained by none. A religion common to all is perhaps not much different.


Gauche
atheist
Gauche's picture
Posts: 1565
Joined: 2007-01-18
User is offlineOffline
where did you get your

where did you get your information? and why do you think that even if this was accurate it would discredit atheism or the rrs or bolster the case for theism?

There are twists of time and space, of vision and reality, which only a dreamer can divine
H.P. Lovecraft


magilum
Posts: 2410
Joined: 2007-03-07
User is offlineOffline
You don't need to keep

You don't need to keep making new threads for this.


Gauche
atheist
Gauche's picture
Posts: 1565
Joined: 2007-01-18
User is offlineOffline
Graham Henry: "C’est la

Graham Henry: "C’est la meilleure équipe française que j’ai vue depuis plusieurs années. Bravo à eux. "

Allez les BLEU! 

There are twists of time and space, of vision and reality, which only a dreamer can divine
H.P. Lovecraft


rugerac556
Theist
rugerac556's picture
Posts: 37
Joined: 2007-10-05
User is offlineOffline
sapient: is this a athesits

sapient: is this a athesits only board? will will not make any new post here if it is. 


Fish
Posts: 315
Joined: 2007-05-31
User is offlineOffline
rugerac556 wrote: sapient:

rugerac556 wrote:
sapient: is this a athesits only board? will will not make any new post here if it is.

This is not an athiest only board.

However, it is customary to post only one thread for any given topic, and also to respond to people who have commented on your post. 


rugerac556
Theist
rugerac556's picture
Posts: 37
Joined: 2007-10-05
User is offlineOffline
will do -thank you 

will do -thank you 


latincanuck
atheist
latincanuck's picture
Posts: 2036
Joined: 2007-06-01
User is offlineOffline
ok, lets answer this one,

ok, lets answer this one, the ONLY way this could ever happen as you describe, is that if in 15 billion years (the universe is what between 13.5 and 14.5 billion years old, and earth only 4.3 billion years old) if NOTHING and i MEAN nothing changed, no enviormental change, no random mutations at the genetic level, etc etc etc. If you don't understand evolution, that's ok, but admit you have NO clue about evolution, that the first step to learning, then go and learn about it, and not at church or some preacher or believer, but from an education centre, like a university or college, or hell even on the on the net you can find educational material regarding evolution (try wikipedia). If you know a biologist in your area talk to them. But please don't go down the road of ignorance to the point of looking completely uneducated.


Archeopteryx
Superfan
Archeopteryx's picture
Posts: 1037
Joined: 2007-09-09
User is offlineOffline
latincanuck wrote:

latincanuck wrote:
If you don't understand evolution, that's ok, but admit you have NO clue about evolution, that the first step to learning, then go and learn about it, and not at church or some preacher or believer, but from an education centre, like a university or college, or hell even on the on the net you can find educational material regarding evolution (try wikipedia).

 

Or better yet: http://www.talkorigins.org

 

Wikipedia is good for quick reference, but I'm still not inclined to call it an educational source. I don't think it's all bad either, but it's toward the bottom of my list. 

A place common to all will be maintained by none. A religion common to all is perhaps not much different.


Gauche
atheist
Gauche's picture
Posts: 1565
Joined: 2007-01-18
User is offlineOffline
Fish wrote: rugerac556

Fish wrote:

rugerac556 wrote:
sapient: is this a athesits only board? will will not make any new post here if it is.

This is not an athiest only board.

However, it is customary to post only one thread for any given topic, and also to respond to people who have commented on your post.

yes, respond to my second post for it is as true today as when it was first spoken (which was actually today)  

There are twists of time and space, of vision and reality, which only a dreamer can divine
H.P. Lovecraft


Teresa Nichols
SuperfanBronze Member
Posts: 97
Joined: 2007-03-23
User is offlineOffline
does anyone have an example where non-life produced something li

"does anyone have an example where non-life produced something living?"

Craig Venter probably does. 


rugerac556
Theist
rugerac556's picture
Posts: 37
Joined: 2007-10-05
User is offlineOffline
latincanuck wrote:

latincanuck wrote:
ok, lets answer this one, the ONLY way this could ever happen as you describe, is that if in 15 billion years (the universe is what between 13.5 and 14.5 billion years old, and earth only 4.3 billion years old) if NOTHING and i MEAN nothing changed, no enviormental change, no random mutations at the genetic level, etc etc etc. If you don't understand evolution, that's ok, but admit you have NO clue about evolution, that the first step to learning, then go and learn about it, and not at church or some preacher or believer, but from an education centre, like a university or college, or hell even on the on the net you can find educational material regarding evolution (try wikipedia). If you know a biologist in your area talk to them. But please don't go down the road of ignorance to the point of looking completely uneducated.
-i am not arguing exact earth dates or spicific species.i am arguing dna. dna is not a theory. you can not say any species changed, evolved, or became without the inclusion of dna. darwin didnt know about dna. is this accurate?


D-cubed
Rational VIP!
D-cubed's picture
Posts: 715
Joined: 2007-01-04
User is offlineOffline
rugerac556 wrote: horses

rugerac556 wrote:
horses make horses over a 15 bil yr span. dogs make dogs over a 15 bil yr span. fish make fish over a 15 bil yr span. humans can make other humans over a 15 bil yr span. bacteria make more bacteria over 15 bil yr span. you may end up with some ugly crossbreads, but you end up 15 bl yrs later: horse, dog, fish, human, bacteria. would you even go so far as to call this a 'rational responce' why we see these things walking & living on the earth today?(bacteria makes exactly that-bacteria. can make nothing more & nothing less)

If you study up on the concept of genetic drift among populations then the confusion will be cleared up for you.  Have you noticed how  clydesdales and different than zebras?  It's because a common species broke off into two separate populations and no longer mixed their genetic material together.  So the two populations drifted apart genetically and formed to genetically different species.

That's why you'll find completely unique species in an isolated landmass like Australia or Indonesia that aren't found anywhere else in the world. 


Archeopteryx
Superfan
Archeopteryx's picture
Posts: 1037
Joined: 2007-09-09
User is offlineOffline
rugerac556 wrote: -i am

rugerac556 wrote:
-i am not arguing exact earth dates or spicific species.i am arguing dna. dna is not a theory. you can not say any species changed, evolved, or became without the inclusion of dna. darwin didnt know about dna. is this accurate?

 

Darwin did not know about DNA, but he didn't need to. He simply came up with the model for evolution (along with some help from others). His theory only became more sophisticated with the help of Mendelian inheritence and the discovery of DNA.

Copernicus was the first to propose a heliocentric solar system. It remains true today that the solar system is heliocentric, but our understanding of the solar system has only become more sophisticated.

The point is that evolution DOES take DNA into consideration, and some of our most contemporary evidence is genetic evidence.

 Allow me to say again: LEARN ABOUT EVOLUTION, THEN COME BACK.

Thanks. 

A place common to all will be maintained by none. A religion common to all is perhaps not much different.


Archeopteryx
Superfan
Archeopteryx's picture
Posts: 1037
Joined: 2007-09-09
User is offlineOffline
Teresa Nichols

Teresa Nichols wrote:

"does anyone have an example where non-life produced something living?"

Craig Venter probably does.

 

Haha, I was thinking about saying the same thing, but I'm waiting for the information first. Skeptical until I get the goods! 

A place common to all will be maintained by none. A religion common to all is perhaps not much different.


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13410
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is onlineOnline
rugerac556 wrote: "the

rugerac556 wrote:
"the defintion alone answers your question" a bacteria can make humans & animals in time-not credible; hard to believe; unbelievable -the sun made itself accidentily to grow crops and help you tan-not credible; hard to believe; unbelievable;-salmon swim upstream, cause a bacteria gave them the sence to 'hold the bloodline at all cost'-not credible; hard to believe; unbelievable. 'theres only one way to handle these things. nip it in the bud. nip it. nip it. nip it!'-barney fife

Why is it we can trace DNA to prior biological life then?

What is incredible is claiming that disimbodied beings knock up 9-14 year old girls. Incredible is claiming that a human deprived of oxygen and blood to vital organs and the brain can magically survive rigor mortis and get up 3 days later as if nothing happened.

It is bull hocky. You want to believe in superman vs kriptonite claims? That is what you want to base your life on? It is not our fault that you buy a superstitious fictional sky daddy. We cant help you out of that delusion unless you want help. 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


rugerac556
Theist
rugerac556's picture
Posts: 37
Joined: 2007-10-05
User is offlineOffline
RRS: sapient:-a rational responce

horses make horses over a 15 bil yr span. dogs make dogs over a 15 bil yr span. fish make fish over a 15 bil yr span. humans can make other humans over a 15 bil yr span. bacteria make more bacteria over 15 bil yr span. you may end up with some ugly crossbreads, but you end up 15 bl yrs later: horse, dog, fish, human, bacteria. would you even go so far as to call this a 'rational responce' why we see these things walking & living on the earth today?(bacteria makes exactly that-bacteria. can make nothing more & nothing less)


rugerac556
Theist
rugerac556's picture
Posts: 37
Joined: 2007-10-05
User is offlineOffline
RSS: only life can produce life, does anyone have an example whe

sapient, you said life always existed. suppose we evolved from animals, we need those animals to mate and feed in space for years to pass on the mutating dna until we have a earth for it to continue . the problem is in the dna, dna works inside a cell, a cell works inside a body. so we need a body that can live for a while with out a atsmophere. is there such one?


Thomathy
SuperfanBronze Member
Thomathy's picture
Posts: 1861
Joined: 2007-08-20
User is offlineOffline
rugerac556 wrote: horses

rugerac556 wrote:
horses make horses over a 15 bil yr span. dogs make dogs over a 15 bil yr span. fish make fish over a 15 bil yr span. humans can make other humans over a 15 bil yr span. bacteria make more bacteria over 15 bil yr span. you may end up with some ugly crossbreads, but you end up 15 bl yrs later: horse, dog, fish, human, bacteria. would you even go so far as to call this a 'rational responce' why we see these things walking & living on the earth today?(bacteria makes exactly that-bacteria. can make nothing more & nothing less)

This is stupid.  You're suggesting not only that life has existed since the approximate start of the universe but that what life exists presently has always existed.  This is mind-numbingly stupid. 

To start, life has only existed on Earth for less than the age of the Earth - perhaps some four billion years.  In that time life has evolved into the forms of life that exist today.  It is purely inane to suggest that dogs have existed for the past four billion years (let alone fifteen billion years).  There are no dogs in the fossil record before about fifteen thousand years ago.  Since then dogs of a huge variety have been bread.  Dogs can cross breed with each other and with wolves.  Incidentally, dogs are a subspecies of wolf.  How, without evolutionary process could humans have isolated and domesticated wolves, breed dogs and then further breed hundreds of breeds of dogs by selectively breeding dogs that exhibit particular traits?  Well, god-did-it is not an appropriate answer and not only because there's evidence for what I've written and no evidence for god-did-it.  In enough time and with enough separation, dogs will evolve into a species distinct from wolves and cross breeding will either no longer be possible or will no longer produce viable offspring.

In the case of bacteria evolving into higher forms of life it is true that no bacteria today evolved into higher forms of life.  This is self evident and necessary due to the contradictory nature of using the present tense in conjunction with a past event (bacteria today + evolved).  It just doesn't make sense.  Ancient forms of life, however, did exist that evolved over hundreds of millions of years to eventually become today's myriad of extant life.  Simply because you cannot understand how the process of evolution works is not justification for god-did-it.  I'm in no position to explain evolutionary processes of this kind and magnitude to you (there are people better suited to that on these forums), but I can tell you that your ignorance should be overcome and that placing god-did-it where your ignorance is particularly expansive is intellectual dishonesty and reprehensible behaviour from a thinking creature.

rugerac556 wrote:
sapient, you said life always existed. suppose we evolved from animals, we need those animals to mate and feed in space for years to pass on the mutating dna until we have a earth for it to continue . the problem is in the dna, dna works inside a cell, a cell works inside a body. so we need a body that can live for a while with out a atsmophere. is there such one?

Sapient didn't say that.  This is immeasurably more stupid than what you posted before and no response beyond that is necessary.

BigUniverse wrote,

"Well the things that happen less often are more likely to be the result of the supper natural. A thing like loosing my keys in the morning is not likely supper natural, but finding a thousand dollars or meeting a celebrity might be."


jcgadfly
SuperfanBronze Member
Posts: 6789
Joined: 2006-07-18
User is offlineOffline
zarathustra wrote: How long

zarathustra wrote:
How long before a theist brings an original idea to the forums?

Don't conserve any oxygen in anticipation. 

"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin


Sapient
High Level DonorRRS CO-FOUNDERRRS Core MemberWebsite Admin
Sapient's picture
Posts: 7522
Joined: 2006-04-18
User is offlineOffline
rugerac556 wrote: sapient,

rugerac556 wrote:
sapient, you said life always existed.

Stop doing that.  I don't say stupid shit like that. 

- Brian Sapient


Buy popular atheist books and support the Rational Response Squad at the same time on Amazon.


Voided
Posts: 1195
Joined: 2006-02-20
User is offlineOffline
I read through that and I'm

I read through that and I'm not really sure what a pacal's wager with a hint of 'ignorace of evolution' has to do with the blasphemy challenge, but I guess its more creative then 'that doesn't count'.

rugerac556 have you read/hear on any of the reasons people did it? You do also realize evolution isn't an atheist only idea, right?


rugerac556
Theist
rugerac556's picture
Posts: 37
Joined: 2007-10-05
User is offlineOffline
let me understand this

Sapient wrote:

rugerac556 wrote:
sapient, you said life always existed.

Stop doing that. I don't say stupid shit like that.

 

let me understang this. a perfect habitat came together. becasuse it was so perfect, cells entered, evolved from eliments, im starting  back at zero: to the formation of the first cell and where the thing came from,since it always wasnt around. do you understand this query?


aiia
Superfan
aiia's picture
Posts: 1923
Joined: 2006-09-12
User is offlineOffline
rugerac556 wrote:

rugerac556 wrote:
Sapient wrote:


rugerac556 wrote:
sapient, you said life always existed.


Stop doing that. I don't say stupid shit like that.





let me understang this. a perfect habitat came together. becasuse it was so perfect, cells entered, evolved from eliments, im starting back at zero: to the formation of the first cell and where the thing came from,since it always wasnt around. do you understand this query?
You are talking about the origin of life. No one knows how life began.
What does this have to do with the blasphemy challenge?
If you claim god created life you have to prove there is a god. Do you have proof?

People who think there is something they refer to as god don't ask enough questions.


Archeopteryx
Superfan
Archeopteryx's picture
Posts: 1037
Joined: 2007-09-09
User is offlineOffline
rugerac556 wrote: let me

rugerac556 wrote:

let me understang this. a perfect habitat came together. becasuse it was so perfect, cells entered, evolved from eliments, im starting back at zero: to the formation of the first cell and where the thing came from,since it always wasnt around. do you understand this query?

 

First off, you should know that you're now talking about abiogenesis and not evolution, so if you're trying to disprove evolution, you've already taken a wrong turn. 

There are only some educated guesses about abiogenesis at this point, from what I understand. But the components of life forming naturally from elements in primordial earth has been found to be perfectly plausible. 

 

rugerac556 wrote:

let me understang this. a perfect habitat came together.

A perfect habitat? I don't think I know of any "perfect" habitats.

You are a puddle of water in a pothole claiming that the pothole perfectly formed to your shape.

The earth is a "pefect habitat" for the life that lives on it? Then why has 99% of all life that has ever existed died out? Was the habitat too perfect for them?

Try thinking about that one again.


 

 

 

 

 

A place common to all will be maintained by none. A religion common to all is perhaps not much different.


Watcher
atheist
Posts: 2326
Joined: 2007-07-10
User is offlineOffline
rugerac556 wrote: [ let me

rugerac556 wrote:
[

let me understang this. a perfect habitat came together. becasuse it was so perfect, cells entered, evolved from eliments, im starting  back at zero: to the formation of the first cell and where the thing came from,since it always wasnt around. do you understand this query?

Ruger, there is a very vital perspective you are missing.  I say this not in a mean fashion, I say this with all care for your mental health.  What I am saying here is meant as kindness.

Even very intelligent people fall into the trap you are in, so it's not a problem of how smart you are.  It's a simple thing that makes all the difference in the world.

When people think that this, this world, this body, all of THIS makes just as much sense as a bomb erecting a building they are making a horrible mistake in logic.

Look at the entire universe.  Really.  Look at it.  What do you see?

Chaos.  The galaxys are flying away at tremendous speeds.  Planets are crashing into each other.  Meteors are slamming into planets.  Solar systems are being sucked into black holes.  Stars are exploding and dying.  Utter unmitigated destruction.  Just like a bomb.

Pull back and look at what the Big Bang caused.  Don't stare at a flower and call it bullshit, look at the WHOLE picture.

This is not a perfect habitat.  Do you read the news?  Tsunamies killing 100s of thousands of people, tornados, hurricanes, volcanoes, we're dying in droves.

But this is the best place we have so far.  Life is a fight.  A struggle that we ALL lose.  We aren't sitting in a perfect world.  We get to briefly live IN SPITE of how dangerous the universe is.  We are sitting on a tiny grain of sand that is the only place we have a chance, a CHANCE, to live.  And even this tiny little place is killing us.

Look.  Open your eyes and look.

"I am an atheist, thank God." -Oriana Fallaci


Soslan
Posts: 1
Joined: 2007-11-28
User is offlineOffline
Bravo, Watcher!

Watcher wrote:
rugerac556 wrote:
[

let me understang this. a perfect habitat came together. becasuse it was so perfect, cells entered, evolved from eliments, im starting  back at zero: to the formation of the first cell and where the thing came from,since it always wasnt around. do you understand this query?

Ruger, there is a very vital perspective you are missing.  I say this not in a mean fashion, I say this with all care for your mental health.  What I am saying here is meant as kindness.

Even very intelligent people fall into the trap you are in, so it's not a problem of how smart you are.  It's a simple thing that makes all the difference in the world.

When people think that this, this world, this body, all of THIS makes just as much sense as a bomb erecting a building they are making a horrible mistake in logic.

Look at the entire universe.  Really.  Look at it.  What do you see?

Chaos.  The galaxys are flying away at tremendous speeds.  Planets are crashing into each other.  Meteors are slamming into planets.  Solar systems are being sucked into black holes.  Stars are exploding and dying.  Utter unmitigated destruction.  Just like a bomb.

Pull back and look at what the Big Bang caused.  Don't stare at a flower and call it bullshit, look at the WHOLE picture.

This is not a perfect habitat.  Do you read the news?  Tsunamies killing 100s of thousands of people, tornados, hurricanes, volcanoes, we're dying in droves.

But this is the best place we have so far.  Life is a fight.  A struggle that we ALL lose.  We aren't sitting in a perfect world.  We get to briefly live IN SPITE of how dangerous the universe is.  We are sitting on a tiny grain of sand that is the only place we have a chance, a CHANCE, to live.  And even this tiny little place is killing us.

Look.  Open your eyes and look.

 Beautiful. Just... beautiful, IN SPITE of the imperfect punctuation. I've got to write it down somewhere.

Fiberglass, insulated. Disguised as cotton candy.