jm1234567890
Premium Member
amen to that!Slide Rule said:
Does God Exist? (2 Viewers)
- Thread starter MoonlightSonata
- Start date
That particular part of the bible may be interpreted in a number of ways, and the idea that it is a symbolic representation rather than a literal description is a more recent interpretation that is now accepted by many. Also, as many have said, the bible does not necessarily lose its 'validity' when placed alongside modern day science.jm1234567890 said:
physician
Some things never change.
budj said:
I was referring to evolution not Natural selection. Natural slection is logical i didnt say it wasnt..... i agree to the theory of natural selection........ but since ur so wise, a fact is... natural slection does not prove evolution anyway, its what u said it was, logic. survival of the fittest, natural slection., the living organism is merely becoming extinct. natural slection does not produce a new species or a new form, it merely elimantes the old, and prospers the fittest. so nothing new is forming, the species that remain had allready existed they didnt form because of natural selection, they just became larger in number.
physician
Some things never change.
people presume that natural slection is somehow related to evolution and use it to prove their cause, where realy they're just arguing against what they say
Not-That-Bright
Andrew Quah
That is actually micro evolution physician... where a species changes its attributes slowly over time.. It's obvious that this is happening, there are many examples i could site...
As for macro evolution, it's just a longer ammount of time.. to claim that micro evolution is right but macro evolution is wrong is like saying that you can walk to the end of your street but you can't walk up the block.
As for macro evolution, it's just a longer ammount of time.. to claim that micro evolution is right but macro evolution is wrong is like saying that you can walk to the end of your street but you can't walk up the block.
physician
Some things never change.
Natural selection, that is what i mentioned, so that is what u should use to argue, theres no use in u arguing using macro and micro unless ur trying to make someone else understand, cause i'm certainly not. And anyways, theres nothing to prove evolution, everyhting that is used to prove it eventually turns against the thoery as technology advances.
Not-That-Bright
Andrew Quah
WTF?
Man micro evolution DEFINATELY happens, look it up.
Man micro evolution DEFINATELY happens, look it up.
physician
Some things never change.
i dont even know what that is, let alone me arguing about it happening or not (lol)
Not-That-Bright
Andrew Quah
Well if you want to make a blanket statement like "there's nothing to prove evolution" you should u kno... look it up?
physician
Some things never change.
ive read books on evolution, nothing in their about macvro and micro.
physician
Some things never change.
Bu thanks for the advice anyway, i'll make sure i'll look it up
Monkey Butler
Pray For Mojo
- Joined
- Jul 19, 2004
- Messages
- 644
- Gender
- Male
- HSC
- 2004
You care to explain that? How is it naive to see religion as a tool of control and subjugation? Because for the most part, that's what it is, and has been throughout history. But I suppose we're just too "nieve" to see the truth.superbird said:
Ok... It's late/early and at such time the mind expands and one is able to think more clearly. It's almost as if there is a finate amount of conciousness in any area and whilst most people are sleeping one is able to tap into more of it.
I have come up with a logical disputation of the existance of God.
Either that or I need sleep...
Here it is:
If there was a God would he not be able to both exist and not exist simultaneously?
As such we are both right to believe he exists and does not.
Yet if he exists and also doesn't exist then does that not precurse his original ability to exist and not exist at all?
Thus would he have to not exist at all.
Is that appropriate 3:30 AM philosophical banter?
Note: This applies only to Gods seen to be Omnipresant (ie. Christian God.)
I have come up with a logical disputation of the existance of God.
Either that or I need sleep...
Here it is:
If there was a God would he not be able to both exist and not exist simultaneously?
As such we are both right to believe he exists and does not.
Yet if he exists and also doesn't exist then does that not precurse his original ability to exist and not exist at all?
Thus would he have to not exist at all.
Is that appropriate 3:30 AM philosophical banter?
Note: This applies only to Gods seen to be Omnipresant (ie. Christian God.)
Just to clarify the reasoning there: An Omnipresent God must exist in all points and states simultaneously. However, to exist in all states requires the ability (and action) of existing in a non-state. Thus it would be seen to not exist.
And to misquote Douglas Adams:
"'I never thought of that,' said God and promptly dissapeared in a puff of logic."
Or as I'd say, Poo to you with nobs on. *pokes out tongue*
And to misquote Douglas Adams:
"'I never thought of that,' said God and promptly dissapeared in a puff of logic."
Or as I'd say, Poo to you with nobs on. *pokes out tongue*
ogmzergrush
LOL
- Joined
- Mar 21, 2004
- Messages
- 2,198
- Gender
- Male
- HSC
- 2002
That's either profound or deluded, and I'm too tired to decide which. I'm sure someone will have something interesting to say about it tomorrow though (Or rather, later today). 
Physician, there is, as you say, no concrete proof of evolution. What can be said is that there is a heck of a lot of evidence tospport the claims. biogeography, biochemistry, comparitive embryology, comparitive anatopmy, paelentology, the list goes on...
Natural selection is the precursor to evolution. Over years and years and years, natural selection acts in such a way that it changes a certain species in numerous ways (the selecting pressures of the changing physical,chemical environment and other factors such as comp. for resources, being the causative agent), such that organisms will not be able to breed with each other to form viable young, thus forming a new species (correct if wrong)
THus natural selection eventuially leads to evolution.
yes and micro evolution is definitely happeining, with viralent strains of bacteria, such as stepheloccocus Auerus etc, appearing, that is hard to beat due to natural selection leading to evolution.
Natural selection is the precursor to evolution. Over years and years and years, natural selection acts in such a way that it changes a certain species in numerous ways (the selecting pressures of the changing physical,chemical environment and other factors such as comp. for resources, being the causative agent), such that organisms will not be able to breed with each other to form viable young, thus forming a new species (correct if wrong)
THus natural selection eventuially leads to evolution.
yes and micro evolution is definitely happeining, with viralent strains of bacteria, such as stepheloccocus Auerus etc, appearing, that is hard to beat due to natural selection leading to evolution.
Physician, there is, as you say, no concrete proof of evolution. What can be said is that there is a heck of a lot of evidence tospport the claims. biogeography, biochemistry, comparitive embryology, comparitive anatopmy, paelentology, the list goes on...
Natural selection is the precursor to evolution. Over years and years and years, natural selection acts in such a way that it changes a certain species in numerous ways (the selecting pressures of the changing physical,chemical environment and other factors such as comp. for resources, being the causative agent), such that organisms will not be able to breed with each other to form viable young, thus forming a new species (correct if wrong)
THus natural selection eventuially leads to evolution.
yes and micro evolution is definitely happeining, with viralent strains of bacteria, such as stepheloccocus Auerus etc, appearing, that is hard to beat due to natural selection leading to evolution. there are also many more examples
Natural selection is the precursor to evolution. Over years and years and years, natural selection acts in such a way that it changes a certain species in numerous ways (the selecting pressures of the changing physical,chemical environment and other factors such as comp. for resources, being the causative agent), such that organisms will not be able to breed with each other to form viable young, thus forming a new species (correct if wrong)
THus natural selection eventuially leads to evolution.
yes and micro evolution is definitely happeining, with viralent strains of bacteria, such as stepheloccocus Auerus etc, appearing, that is hard to beat due to natural selection leading to evolution. there are also many more examples
Not-That-Bright
Andrew Quah
Micro evolution is definately happening and macro evolution is just the same process over a longer period of time...it's so frustrating lol