Debate thread (revived)

[Homestar]

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHH too much to deal with at one time.

... So I'll break it down into different 'points' and 'arguments'


(I'll just ignore CoBB's comments with the exception of one, because I think his logic (or sarcasm it was hard to tell) disproves his own arguments)

And we haven't even mentioned Gödel's name here.

God, Jehova,(not Jehovah-witness),I AM, ect.(I'm a christian) These are just 'names' we have for God because his true name is too holy for a mere man to speak or know.

If evolution did not happen, then why have we found fossils of creatures that very closely resemble whales, but moved on four legs? Why have we found fossils that are intermediate steps between these creatures and whales?

Then why didn't you give me a real picture, not just one anyone could draw. The only 'actual' "link" they have is the "man-ape" named lucy. That "link" is less than 1/4 of the total body, and the different bones came from miles apart and "billions of years" difference in strata (different depths).

"Why do we, as fetuses, go through stages that resemble a fish, then a lizard, then a rabbit? Why do all creatures share so much of the same chemistry, like DNA? Why do species adapt to changes in their environment (this is proven to happen)? Why did one species of fruit fly become two when scientists subjected the two groups to different environments?

Because God created us that way. "Why do creatures share much of the same chemistry?" Because God invented Science and all that is in the earth. He made every part of knowledge for us to discover (according to His will) and He was considerate enough to make it easy to classify.

I know evolution is true, I know DNA was just a matter of random synthesis of elements caused by excess heat and electricity, the only thing I don't know is where all the matter in the universe came from. Time travel could possibly explain it, but then where did that come from in the first place.
Of course, on the same argument, where would God have come from. Obviously the ability to create energy and matter isn't something we can at the moment scientifically explain, so I'm just gonna sit down until my head stops hurting.

No need for science to explain... It has already dis-proven itself.

Has anyone here thought of this?:
- First Law of Thermodynamics- Energy cannot be created or destroyed. It can only change form.
-Second Law of Thermodynamics- The entropy* of the universe must always either increase or remain the same. It can never decrease. (everything is in a constant state of 'constincancy' or decay, but evolution talks about everything getting better.)
*(measure of the disorder that exists in any system)
- Newtons first Law: Objects in motion (or at rest) tend* to stay in motion (or at rest) until it is acted upon by an outside force)
*(Merriam-Webster Definition: to move, direct, or develop one's course in a particular direction)

Actualy, the church claimed Darwin recanted evolution, his daughter who was in the room with him the intire time said diffrently.

TFG: , well string theory is one of the possibilities (12 dimensions, micro black holes, ect) and the other is that T=(e+m) ((which could fit in string theory)

Then they're wrong, I've never heard of that before, and I don't know who/what your talking about in Darwin 'recanting his beliefs'... but oh-well. I don't understand your TFG theory.

Morals exist as an evolution, a moral society is more likely to survive than a amoral one...and actualy, throughout the natural world, their are cheaters and they who cheat are often punished by their peers. Look at bees, if a bee tries to eat more jelly than it is alowed, it will likely get attacked by the others. Same with many other animals.

... that's not morals that's instincts. Are you saying it's ok just to kill (for taking too much jelly )? Also in that society aren't the cheaters the ones who succeed (through natural selection, ect.)

Oh, living things DO come from non-living things. It is called synthesis, and almost every thing makes new living cells from non-living material...can something not a live come to life? Not instantly or under most conditions, so how does that support your god?

See my list of the above theroms: 1st & 2nd Law of Therodynamics, and Newtons 1st Law.

On the note of technology, we are increasing our processing power exponetialy...hell, we have single atom ciciuts in development and you say that we can't make life? We can, we just haven't yet.

"haven't yet" well... untill you do...

Finaly, you took this way off topic...the argument wasn't is/are god(s) real, but which belief systems are more harmful to our society. Seeing how irrational you have become, I have to say you aren't helping your case.

No, This is a debate-thread, and this debate has stayed on your first comment:

which is better, theism or athiesmtheism

------
@ threefingeredguy for his enlightening comic:

First of all, God created man, not man, God.

Second, Didn't man make up evolution?

[necro]

@tfg

****************************
Communism
The socioeconomic system where social relations are based upon the equal distribution of income and wealth and state control of the means of production. Not to be confused with a totalitarian political system.
http://www.sage.edu/academics/schoolofp ... itions.htm

totalitarian
A totalitarian state trys to control all aspects of its citizens lives. Some ancient Chinese rulers seem to have attempted this, but in the West, it is a distinctively modern form of government since it depends on huge government efforts to bring about. Classic examples of attempted totalitarian societies are France under the Committe of Public Safety in 1794, Nazi Germany, the Stalinist Soviet Union, Mao's China, and Kim's Korea.
academic.brooklyn.cuny.edu/history/virtual/glossary.htm

Socialism
an economic system in which the people (government) own and operate the principle means of production. This means things such as communications, railroads, steel, oil, and so on
instruction.blackhawk.tec.wi.us/ghoffar ... ossary.htm

Capitilism
Economic system based on private ownership of the means of production, distribution and exchange for profit without State regulation. In effect, concentrates wealth into hands of the few and denies equal rights for the many. A belief that all human interaction should involve the exchange of artifacts called Money. Usually seen as the opposite of Socialism.
http://www.embassy.org.nz/encycl/c1encyc.htm
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

[CompWiz]

the only thing I don't know is where all the matter in the universe came from

Exactly, I've thought about the same thing. an infinite all powerful God that has been around forever could have created matter from nothing. However, what science law allows matter and energy to be created from nothing? Where did it all come from?

[threefingeredguy]

Right, thats the only thing that still has me on religion.

[CompWiz]

Oh, living things DO come from non-living things. It is called synthesis, and almost every thing makes new living cells from non-living material...can something not a live come to life? Not instantly or under most conditions, so how does that support your god?

So, if you take a competely dead rock from space, and without exposing it to any living things, you shoot electricity at it or whatever, it will come to life?

[threefingeredguy]

Yes, provided it has the correct elements. Phosphorus, nitrogen, and certain glucose molecules. Well, not come to life, say, but ew life would be created from it.

[necro]

...ranting and flaming cobb...

And we haven't even mentioned Gödel's name here.

God, Jehova,(not Jehovah-witness),I AM, ect.(I'm a christian) These are just 'names' we have for God because his true name is too holy for a mere man to speak or know.

Lets see, your first statement seems like "He is too holy for us to understand. " Hmmm, now if you don't even understand your own beliefs I think your beliefs have some holes in it.

If evolution did not happen, then why have we found fossils of creatures that very closely resemble whales, but moved on four legs? Why have we found fossils that are intermediate steps between these creatures and whales?
~img~

Then why didn't you give me a real picture, not just one anyone could draw. The only 'actual' "link" they have is the "man-ape" named lucy. That "link" is less than 1/4 of the total body, and the different bones came from miles apart and "billions of years" difference in strata (different depths).

Well, first, of all…can you show me a picture of god making the earth? You can't, really? Oh, lucy is only one of a hand full of hominids...google it. Need more proof than that, we share like 90+ percent of our DNA with other primates.

"Why do we, as fetuses, go through stages that resemble a fish, then a lizard, then a rabbit? Why do all creatures share so much of the same chemistry, like DNA? Why do species adapt to changes in their environment (this is proven to happen)? Why did one species of fruit fly become two when scientists subjected the two groups to different environments?

Because God created us that way. "Why do creatures share much of the same chemistry?" Because God invented Science and all that is in the earth. He made every part of knowledge for us to discover (according to His will) and He was considerate enough to make it easy to classify.

Um, is that what people call rambling? Why, I do believe it is.

I know evolution is true, I know DNA was just a matter of random synthesis of elements caused by excess heat and electricity, the only thing I don't know is where all the matter in the universe came from. Time travel could possibly explain it, but then where did that come from in the first place.
Of course, on the same argument, where would God have come from. Obviously the ability to create energy and matter isn't something we can at the moment scientifically explain, so I'm just gonna sit down until my head stops hurting.

No need for science to explain... It has already dis-proven itself.

Has anyone here thought of this?:
- First Law of Thermodynamics- Energy cannot be created or destroyed. It can only change form.
-Second Law of Thermodynamics- The entropy* of the universe must always either increase or remain the same. It can never decrease. (everything is in a constant state of 'constincancy' or decay, but evolution talks about everything getting better.)
*(measure of the disorder that exists in any system)
- Newtons first Law: Objects in motion (or at rest) tend* to stay in motion (or at rest) until it is acted upon by an outside force)
*(Merriam-Webster Definition: to move, direct, or develop one's course in a particular direction)
And the concept that energy+matter=existance=time is that confusing? Matter flows through time...but has no concept of it. Why is it some asume it has the same relation to time? By that I mean, what makes you think time hasn't always been there and always will be?

Umm, evolution isn't getter better, it is just sequential like dominos...are we better than bacteria? Nature doesn't think so...nor does physics. We are just more complex due to randomness.

Actualy, the church claimed Darwin recanted evolution, his daughter who was in the room with him the intire time said diffrently.

TFG: , well string theory is one of the possibilities (12 dimensions, micro black holes, ect) and the other is that T=(e+m) ((which could fit in string theory)

Then they're wrong, I've never heard of that before, and I don't know who/what your talking about in Darwin 'recanting his beliefs'... but oh-well. I don't understand your TFG theory.

err...TFG is a person, and he hapens to be communicating in this thread (three fingered guy)...

And if you aren't read up on remedial quantum physics then perhaps you shouldn't be arguing about how the universe works.

Morals exist as an evolution, a moral society is more likely to survive than a amoral one...and actualy, throughout the natural world, their are cheaters and they who cheat are often punished by their peers. Look at bees, if a bee tries to eat more jelly than it is alowed, it will likely get attacked by the others. Same with many other animals.

... that's not morals that's instincts. Are you saying it's ok just to kill (for taking too much jelly )? Also in that society aren't the cheaters the ones who succeed (through natural selection, ect.)

no, because cheating kills the species...so the species evolved simplistic morals and punishments. For example, my pet dog knew as a puppy not to bite us...hmmmm, an instictive moral! Further more, our culture (family) taught her the moral of not eating food we drop unless we say "ok".

On the note of technology, we are increasing our processing power exponetialy...hell, we have single atom ciciuts in development and you say that we can't make life? We can, we just haven't yet.

"haven't yet" well... untill you do...

well, until you provide me a shred of evidence...

Finaly, you took this way off topic...the argument wasn't is/are god(s) real, but which belief systems are more harmful to our society. Seeing how irrational you have become, I have to say you aren't helping your case.

No, This is a debate-thread, and this debate has stayed on your first comment:

which is better, theism or athiesmtheism

------
@ threefingeredguy for his enlightening comic:

First of all, God created man, not man, God.

Second, Didn't man make up evolution?

[/qoute]
Not much worth going into.

[CoBB]

(I'll just ignore CoBB's comments with the exception of one, because I think his logic (or sarcasm it was hard to tell) disproves his own arguments)

I have to bow before your superior debating skills.

And we haven't even mentioned Gödel's name here.

God, Jehova,(not Jehovah-witness),I AM, ect.(I'm a christian) These are just 'names' we have for God because his true name is too holy for a mere man to speak or know.

Just for the record, it is beyond me why you picked this specific sentence and have not the slightest clue in what way your reply is connected to it.

[kalan_vod]

I think this will help settle everything.

[Spooner]

I think this will help settle everything.

That's pretty cool kalan

[Homestar]

@ nerco & all

I have shown great proof. In your previous post you only had putdowns, not arguments based upon facts.

I liked the three LAWS (not theries like evolution) I stated earlier (not to say you added to my quote)

No need for science to explain... It has already dis-proven itself.

Has anyone here thought of this?:
- First Law of Thermodynamics- Energy cannot be created or destroyed. It can only change form.
-Second Law of Thermodynamics- The entropy* of the universe must always either increase or remain the same. It can never decrease. (everything is in a constant state of 'constincancy' or decay, but evolution talks about everything getting better.)
*(measure of the disorder that exists in any system)
- Newtons first Law: Objects in motion (or at rest) tend* to stay in motion (or at rest) until it is acted upon by an outside force)
*(Merriam-Webster Definition: to move, direct, or develop one's course in a particular direction)

my point (in which you seemed to conviently overlook ) was how did the universe get it's first start. How did life come into the first "random assortment of atoms, that just happened to be in the right place at the right time".

According to the Second Law of Thermodynamics "The entropy of the universe must always either increase or remain the same. It can never decrease. "
Entropy is order (like the order of genetic code, "random matter", ect.) Evolution is a theory that conrtadicts this LAW.

According to the First Law of Thermodynamics "Energy cannot be created or destroyed. It can only change form."
How did the atoms come into being... from mere chance?... no that would cotradict this theory... BIG TIME (atoms are composed of a HUGE amount of energy) How do you think the earth's core was heated? or The magnetic field? (which just happens to save earth from cosmic destruction) How did the sun form and just-so-happen to save us from freezing and being stuck in darkness.

According to Newtons First Law- "Objects in motion (or at rest) tend to stay in motion (or at rest) until it is acted upon by an outside force"
In addition to re-instating the facts I listed for the Second Law above, this also makes perfect clarity for some more interesting questions. How did the Earth and all the planets get into perfect orbit? How about the moons? How did the earth start rotating? What started the first heartbeat?

So... I would like to hear your responce to this. Besides the fact I have only heard theories, rumors, out-of-context facts, and un-related 'put-downs' from my opponents; I have just stated three LAWS that say the life, earth, and motion could not have happened no matter what random chance could have brought; even at it's very unlikely best.
---------
@ CoBB I thought you wanted to know what god (God in my case) I was arguing for (although the evidence He left in His creation should be enough to do the arguing for Him). Mabye I missed your intent.

[CompWiz]

Yes, provided it has the correct elements. Phosphorus, nitrogen, and certain glucose molecules. Well, not come to life, say, but ew life would be created from it.

Ok, you try that. Let me know how it goes. Isn't it it strange no one has done that yet?

We now have at least three generally accepted scientific theories that contradict themselves with regards to the creation of the universe and the creation of life. Strange how the Bible, written by many different people who lived in many different places in ancient times, doesn't have any of those contradictions.

[Timendus]

@Homestar:

People attacking the evolution theory always talk about it being "just a theory". It's just as much a theory as those "laws" you put down, it just happens to be named differently (by most people).

If tomorrow someone would prove or discover that energy can emerge from nowhere into our reality/dimension/world/whatever you call it, then those "laws" of yours would be revised to fit reality. That's how science works; something is true untill the contrary has been proven. That's also how the theory of evolution works, and it's still standing because it's never been proven incorrect.

I'm really sorry if you honestly didn't know that, because it makes your entire last post worthless if you think about it...

And I'm glad the Flying Spaghetti Monster was mentioned in this thread

[Timendus]

Strange how the Bible, written by many different people who lived in many different places in ancient times, doesn't have any of those contradictions.

WHAT?! The Bible doesn't have any contradictions you say?
I am so sorry that I don't have the time, but I bet someone else will give you some examples of how very much that isn't true

[CompWiz]

Strange how the Bible, written by many different people who lived in many different places in ancient times, doesn't have any of those contradictions.

WHAT?! The Bible doesn't have any contradictions you say?
I am so sorry that I don't have the time, but I bet someone else will give you some examples of how very much that isn't true

See, many people claim there are contradictions, but no one can actually find any. Scientific theories about this stuff blatently contradict themselves, and yet they are still taught in schools.

@Timendus: And you know there is an edit button, so you don't have to double post. You even posted both replys within one minute of each other.