[stone monkey]

This is an intriguing look at snake evolution. I'm not entirely comfortable with the "ontogeny recapitulates phylogent" emphasis, but given it is PZ's field (and my lack of any kind of qualification in the area) I guess I'll have to let it pass.

[Aimless]

Er, we have pharyngeal arches and pouches... they aren't gill slits.

EDIT: Pardon me, I didn't realise I had an ol version of the thread in this tab!

[Gem Windcaster]

Gimli said:

@ Gem

Guys no one here (I think ) is trying to imply that you are not an intelligent person, its pretty obvious by your posting that this is not the case.

Actually I think it is the fact that you DO come accross as intelligent is why you are receiving so much attention to your posts.

As a Atheist I am intrigued how others have arrived at their decission to believe in God.

Thanks fore the nice words.

Gimli said:

You have said before that you have not simply arrived at thie decission to believe in God but have formed your opinion over analysis of available information which you have weighed and measured.

Now if this is indeed the case I cant understand why you have simply said that you dont care how long ago homosapians came into existence. The suggests an essential area that hasn't been studied in depth. But if you dont care about this particular aspect this leaves a gap in knowledge.

Now i have plenty of MASSIVE gaps in my knowledge and as such retain an open mind on what is possible but tend to follow where the evidence points. I dont know any athesits that are 100% confident that what they believe is true but they do lean the way the available evidence suggests.

Now your faith is unshakable (to be honest fair play , this impresses me) but to have this unshakable faith would suggest that all possible routes and avenues have been explored (which you freely admit, you havn't done)

Faith however does not allow for an open mind to all possiblities. This is why it is viewed as such a commodity in religious circles. So to say that you have faith and that you have studied, weighed a measured and drawn a conclusion is a contradiction in terms.

What kind of open mind are we talking about here? The kind where you indiscriminately believe anything an accepted scientific theory says, or the kind where you critically accept something because you have no other choice? I consider myself have an open mind about almost anything. Belief, or even faith, is not a static occurrence. Sure, my open mindedness is a relative thing, in regard to where the boundaries of my faith goes - but I am not that different about boundaries than other people, even atheists - they just have different kind of boundaries. Also, the contradiction you speak of makes perfect sense in my mind - it makes life interesting.

Gimli said:

So my question to you (or any other religious people) Is what have you studied and what results have prompted your position for

a) Believing in God
Not beliving in Evolution

As for a) it can be described as willfully being insane. It's a deep ray of...something that goes right through you and burns right through your bones - to the point where you can't deny it. But all the started after I made a choice. It's a completely irrational and rational thing both at the same time. God for me has been me trying to reach him, and then reaching through.

As for I think I have already recounted all I can recount about why I don't agree with the conclusions drawn by the theory of evolution. I don't think think what I feel about it can be explained as 'not believing' - simply because I don't really care that much about the whole thing. If might sound like I do here, but really I just have a deep urge to argue for things. I can't help myself.

Dolorous Menhir;362224 said:

Ok Gem. To help this debate, I'd like to explain what I saw when I read the above paragraph:

"If the theory was proven beyond a shadow of a doubt, I would still feel the way I do about christ, I would still believe that the Bible is true and all that jazz. The Bible doesn't necessarily contradict any points of the evolution except for the part about God making the world, which is pretty fundamental, so it's not really a problem for me."

You're saying "even if evolution was proven beyond doubt, it wouldn't really affect my faith except for disproving one of the central planks of it. I'm not concerned about that."

I find this confusing.

Hum, you got it a bit wrong. I don't think the evolution could ever disprove Gods existence. Because how would that happen? The big bang theory for instance, which I guess is what you're thinking about, can't only go so far as to prove how it happened. Not why. Same with the theory of evolution. God is the why imo. You're all welcome to believe in chance, or whatever reason for the universe you believe in.

Hence, evolution could never, if proven beyond doubt, disprove any central planks of my faith - and it could never disprove that God made the world. The theory of evolution doesn't even try to explain why, only how.

I hope that helps your confusion.

BTW, I am sorry I sort of inadvertently hijacked the thread; it was not my intention. I don't see anything wrong with the theory of evolution being studied by school kids. My concern is that the kids learn to think for themselves - I think making your own opinions and then own up to them is far more important than any kind of fights over theories. Science should be taught as it is, as an ongoing process, and not something set in stone imho.

[stone monkey]

Charlie Brooker on evolution

Actually, it's a piece from the tv section of The Grauniad from Saturday on the documentary on Darwin that's on C4 tonight.

[Gothos]

my question to you at this point, Gem, is: why does there have to be a "why?" at all? why dismiss the possibility that there's no reason for all of this?

also, about your little venture into explaining the universe, try tinkering a bit around various upcoming theories of quantum gravity.

[Dolorous Menhir]

stone monkey;364522 said:

Charlie Brooker on evolution

Actually, it's a piece from the tv section of The Grauniad from Saturday on the documentary on Darwin that's on C4 tonight.

Brooker - "If the Bible had contained a passage that claimed gravity is caused by God pulling objects toward the ground with magic invisible threads, we'd still be debating Newton with idiots too."

Truth.

[cauthon]

Is there any theory that tries to explain why we would have evolved from asexual procreation (heheh) to sexual procreation?

[Morgoth]

cauthon;364715 said:

Is there any theory that tries to explain why we would have evolved from asexual procreation (heheh) to sexual procreation?

yeah, I read at one point that it has to do with mixing of genes and a greater potential for adaption

[Adjutant Stormy~]

Yeah, I could be wrong, but my one college level biology class said something along the lines of it originating in a couple amoeboid species developing a habit of exchanging halves of their DNA. It's a biochemical mystery at this point how we got from there to humping each other- considering that the earliest life didn't leave too many penis fossils.

[Gem Windcaster]

Gothos;364548 said:

my question to you at this point, Gem, is: why does there have to be a "why?" at all? why dismiss the possibility that there's no reason for all of this?

Heh, that's such a classical philosophical catch 22. Make me lulz.

Anyway, this is how I see it: We ask the Why for the same reasons as we ask the HOW. Okay, this will probably not make any sense to you, but: not searching for a reason is just as much a reason as searching for one.

To some people (not saying you're one of them) finding a reason for all of this is a scary thing - almost like imagining the vastness of the universe - and succeeding. I will counter: Why dismiss the possibility that there are a reason for all of this?

Gothos;364548 said:

also, about your little venture into explaining the universe, try tinkering a bit around various upcoming theories of quantum gravity.

I love the M theory. What I know of it anyway. It's my favorite scientific theory! I am trying to learn more about it.

[Gothos]

Gem Windcaster;364920 said:

To some people (not saying you're one of them) finding a reason for all of this is a scary thing - almost like imagining the vastness of the universe - and succeeding. I will counter: Why dismiss the possibility that there are a reason for all of this?

To some people (not saying you're one of them) not ever finding a reason for all of this is a scary thing - almost like facing the ultimate meaninglessness of their lives and all they accomplished beyond what it means to them when they die :-)

[Illuyankas]

Of course, why does there have to be an artificial meaning beyond what you make for yourself?

[Gem Windcaster]

Gothos;364973 said:

To some people (not saying you're one of them) not ever finding a reason for all of this is a scary thing - almost like facing the ultimate meaninglessness of their lives and all they accomplished beyond what it means to them when they die :-)

Indeed. But we all want some kind of meaning to our lives. Do you deny this?

Illuyankas;365275 said:

Of course, why does there have to be an artificial meaning beyond what you make for yourself?

So, are you saying that my choice is less artificial? (which I don't dispute btw if that's what you mean) And if not, then there's no real difference between my choice and yours, as long as it's my choice.

[Adjutant Stormy~]

There doesn't HAVE to be a Capital-R-Reason for the world, etc.
There also doesn't HAVE to be no Reason, either.

[Now, if you'll excuse the following generalizations, for the sake of argument.]

The world is not nearly so neat, black and white, that either is the 'right' image of Reality.

There are some people who are looking for the(ir) Reason. These people are people of faith. They seek a spiritual answer to the questions: Who, What, Where, When, Why, are we?

There are some people who don't know if they can find the(ir) Reason, but like toying with the idea of that committed Reality. These people are Agnostic, they're certain only in their uncertainty. They're Reason is, at present, a Maybe Why rather than a Why.

Finally, there are some people who are not looking for the Capital-R-Reason. They're either convinced of the lack of Reason in the universe, or are not convinced of the merits of searching for the Reason. These are the Atheists, with some distinctions. They could be looking for a more concrete reason for existence, etc. But the main take-away is that they're not diggin' the Big Reason.


So Illy,
The whole matter is subjective, people tend to toss their hat in one of these rings. Any meaning anyone finds IS the meaning they make for themselves.

[Gothos]

Gem Windcaster;365500 said:

Indeed. But we all want some kind of meaning to our lives. Do you deny this?

the difference is whether we make it, or we make it up

[Adjutant Stormy~]

And I would argue that each is equally arbitrary, it is just varies which is viewed as more arbitrary.

[Cause]

Im going to disagree. Their is no reason why peoples opinions should be respected just because it is THEIR opinion. Why they hold that opinion, is it really helpfull, is it even true. These are not just questions to be sweeped under the rug.

People who believe the earth is flat, or only 6000 years old. Well they are deluded, its that simple.

[Gem Windcaster]

So, let me get this straight, you have no problem telling everyone else they make things up?

It is pretty arrogant coming from individuals that thinks science is the answer to everything (yes, I assume that, for the sake of argument, sorry), considering how many times in history science has been wrong.

Cause said:

Im going to disagree. Their is no reason why peoples opinions should be respected just because it is THEIR opinion. Why they hold that opinion, is it really helpfull, is it even true. These are not just questions to be sweeped under the rug.

So you're fine with people not respecting your opinions, just because they don't agree with them? You're doing it a roundabout way, but that's essentially what you're saying.

Oh dear.

[Terez]

Gem Windcaster;366118 said:

It is pretty arrogant coming from individuals that thinks science is the answer to everything (yes, I assume that, for the sake of argument, sorry), considering how many times in history science has been wrong.

Unlike religion, science doesn't claim to have all the answers, and unlike in religion, readjusting details and even paradigms based on new discoveries is all a part of the "creed" of science. No matter how hard religion tries to prove science wrong, it's only science that proves science wrong. Religion has never been successful at that, for obvious reasons.

[Cause]

Gem Windcaster;366118 said:

So, let me get this straight, you have no problem telling everyone else they make things up?

Some things we can sit on the fence for since theirs no concrete proof one way or the other.

However not respecting people opinions is something we do all the time.

I think we can all agree that the opinions of white supremicists for instance hold no respect. When they say black people have smaller brains or that jews spread syphilis why you look up the truth see they are talking crap and by god, ironic use here, we should save these people children from them before their lunacy spreads.

Thats an extreme example but equally are other opinions. The world is flat. Its 6000 years old. The stars are formed by the spirits of my ancestors. The world is hollow and filled with lizard men. The jews run the worlds banks etc etc

Quote

It is pretty arrogant coming from individuals that thinks science is the answer to everything (yes, I assume that, for the sake of argument, sorry), considering how many times in history science has been wrong.

Science HAS been wrong about things. Science corrects itself with time. Further science when its wrong is most often wrong about the details not the crux of the matter. Newtonian mechanics might work for some equations, quantum on others. Both models fall apart at certain points. They are wrong but useful.

However their are things which are of no doubt. The world is not flat for instance

Also if you think the search and study for the truth, Science, is not the best model what is?

Quote

So you're fine with people not respecting your opinions, just because they don't agree with them? You're doing it a roundabout way, but that's essentially what you're saying.

Oh dear.

Thats excactly what Im saying. No one needs respect my opinion. You dont believe the world is round. Go look at its curvature from a plane. Watch as a mast appears in the horizon before the ship. See how my calculations will get that artillery shell in place whilst yours wont because you dont take curvature into account. Circumnavigate the globe. Or come back and show me why the world is really flat. Hell if you do it Ill thank you, since I was deluded for years.

So in conclusion no opinion is safe. Not mine not yours. A strong argument makes its own case. Does god exist who knows. Is christianity, judaism or Islam correct? Who knows but they cant all be telling the truth. Jesus is or is not the messiah.

Its not okay to just say well jew you believe what you want and Ill believe what I want. Its good for peace, it helps us all get along, but its not an answer!