Debating a creationist

Previous page 1 2 3« Previous thread | Next thread »
- Tlaloc
- Aperture Science Test Subject
- Pub Regular
- offline
Re: Debating a creationist - help!
Reply #60 - April 26, 2011, 05:02 PM

Quote from: guidance on April 25, 2011, 09:07 PM
I think i explained twice using the race analogy.

That was not a good explanation, since the analogy is kinda off.
And even if it were not off, your conclusion in such analogy is still wrong.

In fact I could come up with a simple counter-example in which an infinite amount of entities is moving, and each of them had to wait a little (but greater than zero) amount of time after another entity has moved.
All of that within a LIMITED amount of time.

Let's name our moving entities in sequence, like E0, E1, E2, E3, etc...
Let's say that E0 in order to move had to wait 1 second after E1 has moved.
And E1 had to wait 1/2 seconds after E2.
And E2 had to wait 1/4 seconds after E3... and so on.

That is a very simple geometric series.
A bit of knowledge in calculus will tell you that if time is non-discrete and if E0 is moving, then an INFINITE amount of Es has moved since 2 seconds ago.

And, as far as we know, time might as well be non-discrete or even continuous.
There is no proof that time is discrete.

Do not look directly at the operational end of the device.
- Ishina
- Militant Atheist
- Ex-Muslim
- No Fate But What We Make
- offline
Re: Debating a creationist - help!
Reply #61 - April 26, 2011, 09:45 PM

Quote from: guidance on April 26, 2011, 02:37 AM
And I guess when I make the next rational argument, you'll insult in a different way:

If all things happen by the Power of God as he is the necessary cause, and He knows everything, it is most stupid to say that the course of creation went on without his directions and design. Evolution is course to perfection of attributes, which matches with the wisdom of an all-knowing and powerful creator. Hence evolution could be merely the mean for which the course of creation could be directed by God. This comes from the implication that all acts and forces are coordinated by the power and knowledge of the necessary cause.

This isn't a rational argument. You start with a conclusion rather than arrive at one. That's why you're having trouble getting people to agree with you.

Present it as a step by step logical argument.

Too fucking busy, and vice versa.
- crazyislam
- Rubber Dinghy Rapids, bro.
- Member
- offline
Re: Debating a creationist - help!
Reply #62 - April 27, 2011, 10:35 AM

Hi,

Another issue. The guy presents Endogenous Adaptive mutagenesis as an alternative theory to Natural selection. Just to confirm, does this have any scientific backing?

Youtube
- Kenan
- Cultist
- Pub Regular
- Hwee cap-toored eet fohr kay-ohss !!!
- offline
Re: Debating a creationist - help!
Reply #63 - April 27, 2011, 12:02 PM

What exactly is Endogenous Adaptive mutagenesis? Is that a fancy name for (Un)Intelligent Design?
- serrated_colon
- Ex-Muslim
- offline
Re: Debating a creationist - help!
Reply #64 - April 27, 2011, 12:57 PM

http://www.iscid.org/encyclopedia/Endogenous_Adaptive_Mutagenesis

as far as i can tell, it's merely a hypothesis and not in any way shape or form a theory.

http://www.iscid.org/boards/ubb-get_topic-f-6-t-000090.html

that's a list of the evidence that would be needed to support the hypothesis.

an interesting one to note(and rather pivotal) is:

Quote
6. Evidence of cellular intelligence and communication – or evidence of any conscious or non-conscious intelligent behavior occurring in a biological system.
- Kenan
- Cultist
- Pub Regular
- Hwee cap-toored eet fohr kay-ohss !!!
- offline
Re: Debating a creationist - help!
Reply #65 - April 27, 2011, 01:04 PM

thx serrated

Quote from: crazyislam on April 27, 2011, 10:35 AM
"The guy presents Endogenous Adaptive mutagenesis as an alternative theory to Natural selection.

Endogenous Adaptive Mutagenesis refers to an approach to evolutionary theory which finds its mechanism, (that is, the causal explanation for biological evolution), within the organism itself, not in any external agent. Both Nature, as the agent for Darwin's "Natural Selection", and God, as the agent for "Special Creation", are not necessary to an understanding of origins, according to "EAM", but neither of these hypothetical mechanisms is necessarily antithetical to EAM, either."

@crazyislam

This friend of yours is a Muslim, right? Imo EAM is very much haram.
- Stefan Udrea
- Member
- ex - ortodox christian
- offline
Re: Debating a creationist - help!
Reply #66 - April 27, 2011, 02:48 PM

Quote from: serrated_colon on April 27, 2011, 12:57 PM
http://www.iscid.org/encyclopedia/Endogenous_Adaptive_Mutagenesis

as far as i can tell, it's merely a hypothesis and not in any way shape or form a theory.

http://www.iscid.org/boards/ubb-get_topic-f-6-t-000090.html

that's a list of the evidence that would be needed to support the hypothesis.

an interesting one to note(and rather pivotal) is:

ISCID is (was?) not concerned with science.
"The International Society for Complexity, Information, and Design (ISCID) was a non-profit professional society that promoted intelligent design and rejected evolution.[1] It sought to alter the scientific method to eliminate what it saw as its materialistic, naturalistic, reductionistic and hence atheistic underpinnings. The goal of the intelligent design movement the Society supports is to "reverse the stifling materialist world view and replace it with a science consonant with Christian and theistic convictions"[2] and to "affirm the reality of God."[3] The ISCID sought to undermine the teaching of evolution and replace it with intelligent design."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Society_for_Complexity,_Information,_and_Design
- Stefan Udrea
- Member
- ex - ortodox christian
- offline
Re: Debating a creationist - help!
Reply #67 - April 27, 2011, 03:01 PM

But if I was to take this EAM thing seriously, how would it explain bacteria adaptation to antibiotics? An antibiotic is used, and most of the bacteria die, and only a handful of them survive.So why does EAM always functions only for (let's say) 1% of the bacterias in a population ?You'd think God wouldn't make such a poorly designed EAM system, right? Or maybe, since ISCID talks about cellular intelligence, only the bacterias which accept Jesus as their savior are saved, and all the others fall prey to Satan's mischievous antibiotic ?
- crazyislam
- Rubber Dinghy Rapids, bro.
- Member
- offline
Re: Debating a creationist - help!
Reply #68 - April 27, 2011, 03:21 PM

Thanks guys, keep em' coming.

Quote from: Kenan on April 27, 2011, 01:04 PM

@crazyislam

This friend of yours is a Muslim, right? Imo EAM is very much haram.

Isn't that obvious by now?

Now that's interesting. How so?

Youtube
- Kenan
- Cultist
- Pub Regular
- Hwee cap-toored eet fohr kay-ohss !!!
- offline
Re: Debating a creationist - help!
Reply #69 - April 27, 2011, 03:32 PM

Quote from: crazyislam on April 27, 2011, 03:21 PM
Now that's interesting. How so?

According to the website serrated posted EAM is ...
... a theory which finds its mechanism, (that is, the causal explanation for biological evolution), within the organism itself and not in any external agent (such as god).

Check my previous post.
- Sherif-ET
- "You know how to cut to the core of me Baxter"
- Member
- offline
Re: Debating a creationist - help!
Reply #70 - April 27, 2011, 03:35 PM

crazyislam...I love your picture...It's hilarious

http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1402050406

Add me on facebook, just send me a message with your COEM username.
- crazyislam
- Rubber Dinghy Rapids, bro.
- Member
- offline
Re: Debating a creationist - help!
Reply #71 - April 27, 2011, 07:29 PM

Quote from: Kenan on April 27, 2011, 03:32 PM
According to the website serrated posted EAM is ...
... a theory which finds its mechanism, (that is, the causal explanation for biological evolution), within the organism itself and not in any external agent (such as god).

Check my previous post.

Ahh, yeah. That'll do

Quote from: Sherif-ET on April 27, 2011, 03:35 PM
crazyislam...I love your picture...It's hilarious

Masha'llah brother

Youtube
- TheLastKnight
- Member
- Atheist
- offline
Re: Debating a creationist - help!
Reply #72 - May 09, 2011, 12:28 AM

I happened to find this thread. It seems 'guidance' is long gone, but what the hell, I'll still post my little post.

Quote from: guidance on April 25, 2011, 02:28 PM
1.Simple 1-2-3 reason tells you that for every creations there must be a creator.

This is the fallacy of composition. Even if everything within the Universe requires a cause, this does not necessarily apply to the Universe itself. It may be an intuitive thought, but one cannot logically make that assumption. One like you who seems to dabble in philosophy should know that!

The fallacy of composition:
An atom has neither color nor smell. A cat is made of atoms, hence the cat has neither color nor smell.
-or-
You like vanilla and you like chocolate, hence you like vanilla and chocolate. (This is true, but it is not a logical necessity as seen in the next example)
You like chocolate and you like shrimps, hence you like chocolate and shrimps.
-or-
Everything in the Universe must have a cause, hence the Universe must have a cause.

Guidance made a false assertion, so the following arguments that build on it are also false.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacy_of_composition

Also this:
Quote from: guidance on April 25, 2011, 03:58 PM
1. I explained before the impossibility of self creation. It means an effect being the cause of itself, which is impossible by definition.

Actually, apparent creation from nothing is something observed in quantum physics. They are called virtual particles and they pop into existence for a short time and disappear again. If this is possible on a very small scale, then why not on a very large scale over a larger time period?
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=are-virtual-particles-rea

Bukhari 62:142 - Narrated Anas bin Malik:
The Prophet used to pass by (have sexual relation with) all his wives in one night, and at that time he had nine wives.
Previous page 1 2 3« Previous thread | Next thread »