Of what real value is evolutionary "knowledge"?

Post Reply New Topic

C'mon, you're telling me that atheists and agnostics don't wonder from time to time whether there's a God?
It's just common sense that they do.

Hey, times change. Of course we're not there yet, but things are moving toward that day.

The religious establishment burned people at the stake because they were in great, great power.

Ever hear of the saying, "Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely"?

If evolution's brand of, shall we say, "scientific zealotry" reaches a high peak of power, the scientific community will do similar things to the powerless non-believers.

Ya, and you guys might call it survival of the fittest.

Oh, the forboding malevalence the theory of evolution stirs you up into!

Therefore, I ask you again: Why is impressing that theory upon people like me worth generating all this violent anger inside you?

Answer: It's not. So drop it.

Because it doesn't make sense.

Why do you believe in something that doesn't make sense?

And, again, why with such emotion??? Could it be that you somehow need it to be true, for some personal reasons?

I mean, you sure sound like it's damn important that both you and everyone else believe this rather effectless theory.

Give me a reason to believe it first! (What the hell? I might as well ask you why you don't believe the Earth rests on unlimited tortoises' backs! This is what you sound like: "Well, WHY DON'T YOU BELIEVE THAT?! HUH? Why can't you see that the Earth is obviously resting on tortoises' backs?! It's SCIENCE!") It's just the repeated insisting of a random premise, followed by the demanding interrogation of why I don't believe it.

If you didn't want to provoke exactly that emotion, you wouldn't evade every point of substance, as you did right here. You have nothing to say on why you think Sagan's explanation makes no sense. You merely assert this, and make a personal attack that serves no purpose other than to annoy.

That's the general pattern. You make sweeping claims, you evade any requests to back them up, you add some personal insults. You carry on until you annoy someone, then you tell them evolution turned them into bad people, but as a good Christian you try to love them anyway. It's so consistent, it's reasonable to suspect that's the purpose of the whole exercise for you.

My belief in God is very scientific. He is in a higher dimension to us, which technically necessitates His omni-presence in, omniscience of, and omnipotence over, us and everything else in this lower dimension. It also technically necessitates Him being invisible to us, even when He's right next to us -- since we cannot see into higher dimensions, but higher dimensions include ours, and can therefore easily see into ours. This concept is roughly equivalent to a two-way mirror.
All of that is regular physics.
So, I believe that the "supernatural" and the "spiritual" are merely the super-dimensional.
1.) God, if He were in a higher dimension, would automatically "occupy" every point in our dimension simultaneously.
2.) Also, every action He took in the third dimension would be automatically inviolate -- by virtue of His relative dimensional position. The dimensional hierarchy is such that things in lower dimensions cannot physically effect things in higher dimensions, but things in higher dimensions omnipotently effect things in lower dimensions. The ant on the table is at your mercy, because, for all intents and purposes, his domain is only two dimensions. Therefore, he is well within reach of you, and whatever you want to do to him, but you are entirely out of reach of him while he remains on the table.
3.) As are the previous two mentioned biblical traits of God, the omniscience of a being in a higher dimension is obvious from a physics standpoint alone. For, our three-dimension universe is like the head of pin to a being in a higher dimension.

So, like most Aspies, I logically and scientifically think out my beliefs. It's a mistake to assume that I don't.

Last edited by Ragtime on 12 May 2008, 10:05 am, edited 3 times in total.

Invalid.

Oh dear, I suggest you rethink your science.

But, to put it perhaps better, every point in our universe would automatically be instantly accessable to Him.
He would be "next to" every point in our universe, all the time.
(And, of course, He would also exist out of time's limits if He were in a higher dimension,
which in itself provides instant accessability.
All these attributes of God I've mentioned in this and my previous post are quite biblical, aren't they?)

I suggest you think through yours in the fist place. Such a claim requires more than just a statement of its veracity to constitute a decent argument.

I'm not constituting an argument, I'm stating a basic principle of dimensional physics.
Heck, even the dimensional principles in simple math back it up!

Therefore, it's your "Invalid" denial that requires explanation.

Um.... yeah, of course. That is what evolution is all about, power, oppression, and demeaning people by saying they are like monkeys. Look, seriously, that is hardly an argument but an appeal conspiracy that is mainly supported by your disapproval of evolutionary findings. Like I said, I have seen people do this before to other ideas, and I study a field where people dismiss it based upon calls of conspiracy and bias all of the time.


Says you. Really, the issue is that the rejection of the theory takes on a level of insult, as legally our theory is accepted, by the scientific community it is accepted, and according to logic it seems that our theory is correct as well. It is like you casting aspersions on whether or not 2 + 2 = 4 and blaming a math community for this conclusion.

No, it is internally consistent, and it makes sense of facts like fossil records. Should we disregard these things as trickeries of the devil?
http://simulatedcomicproduct.com/2005/1 ... -specimen/


Because it does make sense.


No, it is because we are right, you are wrong, and there are few situations more obvious than this one.

Well, people dedicate their lives to this theory, and it is easily proven a valid theory. Like I would say, it is like saying 2 + 2 = 4, if you kept on asserting 5, it would be rather frustrating.


There is no evidence for that theory, there are no predictions made by that theory. Frankly, I think we have done a better job with evidence than you do. Heck, your proof of God is saying that "PROOF is all AROUND YOU!! !", and our proof of evolution could so easily be exactly the same, but we have bothered going through the theory. Frankly, the issue is not accepting that evolution is correct, but accepting that it is a valid scientific theory. If you said, "I believe that evolution is the best scientific theory mankind has for explaining diversity in life, but I believe, for personal reasons, that macroevolution has not occurred" then I don't think that people would mind so much. A few of the ardent atheists might care, but the bulk of the matter is an issue of science.


Umm.... no. Your belief in God does not show much science to it at all. You may throw science terms onto it, but beyond that it seems just like an assertion, and a pseudo-scientific one at that.


No, you really aren't. Does an apple exist everywhere on a 2 dimensional plane? No, it does not, it exists on a small portion of it. What about if we imagine a being who has time, in a timeless universe? Does he necessarily exist in all parts of that timeless universe? Not likely. So, really, you will need to back it up.

Nowadays, that's largely true.



Not all calls of "conspiracy" are false alarms. Remember, the boy who cried "Wolf!", though ignored for his misleading repetition, was eventually eaten by a wolf.
To clarify a point of that analogy, I am not one of the misleading repeaters, but a final caller:
Evolution has become a conspiracy to silence opposing views in the name of science, while it's actual scientific validity remains in high doubt. It's more a consensus among a certain society than it is supported by evidence. (There is no stark evidence of evolution -- just pieces which the highly-dedicated can force and mangle into a sort-of puzzle.)

Last edited by Ragtime on 12 May 2008, 11:28 am, edited 1 time in total.

Oh nos! I guess I've been infected by atheist higher math!

How fascistic can you sound?

You aren't actually having a hard time imagining what I'm saying, are you?
I don't assume God to be merely one dimension above us.
I thought your imagination was greater than that.
I assume God to be several dimensions higher, in the highest dimension of all. (Last I checked, scientists had theorized 11; others say 10.)
He in fact may be that dimension -- not in the sense of true identity, but in the sense of filling it entirely.

Therefore, He would be supreme in every possible physical sense of the word.