Evolution debunked in 1 paragraph.

Discussion in 'Politics' started by peilthetraveler, Jun 19, 2011.

  1. Ricter

    Ricter

    Aye. I do a lot of business in both countries, but of my choices of where to sleep, Pennsylvania, Texas, Wyoming, or Alberta, I enjoy Canada's ambiance best.
     
    #471     Jul 8, 2011
  2. No, not at all... With all due respect, you're barking up the wrong tree here.

    I am not suggesting that wanting "insurance" is a good reason to have faith. I just find the argument interesting, even though I am not at all a man of faith myself.
     
    #472     Jul 8, 2011
  3. Betapeg

    Betapeg

    I'm sure you are atheist when it comes to a pink elephant orbiting the sun. Speaking of irrational beliefs, your certainty of no pink elephant orbiting the sun, ranks right up there too.
     
    #473     Jul 8, 2011
  4. pascals wager fails because it only allows for belief in the christian god. when pascal devised the wager the options were catholic god or nothing.

    there have been thousands of gods believed in through history. what are the odds of picking the right god?
     
    #474     Jul 8, 2011
  5. Betapeg

    Betapeg

    I find it amusing that science can agree on one theory of evolution, one theory of the big bang, one quantum mechanics, one general relatively. But when it comes to god, there are thousands of religions, which can't agree on the same thing!! But of course, they have all the answers. :p
     
    #475     Jul 8, 2011
  6. Specious comparison because it ignores the content of the beliefs.
     
    #476     Jul 8, 2011
  7. Wrong. Like STUpid, you need to understand the wager before making a fool of yourself. Pascal's wager was specifically devised to apply to a Christian God. So it's not the wager that fails, it's your understanding and application that fail.
     
    #477     Jul 8, 2011
  8. jem

    jem

    you keep asserting illogical crap.
    you are being a clown.
    These are nobel prize winners... some atheist... trying to explain current science to you... and you refuse to listen.


    So once again... I ask you to explain how your chaos theory explains the origin of the universe and how it exists today..
    and you give me sound bites about randomness. That is the same thing I read in books in the early 90s when I was researching the markets. You are living in the 80s... learn some current science.

    What you are not getting is that most if not all scientists now accept that given our current understandings there is no chance random processes could have created this universe if there is only one. No matter how many coin flips you got there was no way this universe would have happened.

    I have even presented quotes which say that that random chance did not have enough time to have non life turn into life on earth.


    Get it... not enough time for Chaos to create order.


    When you actually do the research... you will find out about string theory and the multiverse argument to explain the existence of the fine tunings.
     
    #478     Jul 8, 2011
  9. as678

    as678

    This is a matter of biology, not physics.

    Given the size of the universe and the tiny amount of matter that is within, it may seem impossible for life to form. Gravity, however, allows matter to form clusters thereby allowing for self replicating molecules. Self replicating molecules by nature their very nature will begin to mutate and very slowly, over hundreds of thousands of generations you get complex self replicating organisms.

    Humans are only the product of the giant chemical reaction that is the universe that began X billion years ago.
     
    #479     Jul 8, 2011
  10. I've spent a lot of time in Canada myself and, believe it or not, have many Canadian friends :p
     
    #480     Jul 8, 2011