News:

if there were no need for 'engineers from the quantum plenum' then we should not have any unanswered scientific questions.

Main Menu

According to Dredge: Abiogenesis is Magic

Started by Dredge, December 30, 2016, 05:23:33 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

Recusant

Quote from: Apathy on January 31, 2017, 04:45:46 AM
I can tell from here this guy is trolling.

:chin: You're not the only one who's said that.
"Religion is fundamentally opposed to everything I hold in veneration — courage, clear thinking, honesty, fairness, and above all, love of the truth."
— H. L. Mencken


xSilverPhinx

Yes, he hasn't been dredging up anything but dumb creationist ideas.
I am what survives if it's slain - Zack Hemsey


Asmodean

Quote from: Dredge on January 31, 2017, 12:03:09 AM
Organisms can't make themselves. God created them all.
What makes you think it was god? Why could it not have been Xzilotz, visiting from planet Axvkshaz, who dragged in some local microflora on his space boots?
Quote from: Ecurb Noselrub on July 25, 2013, 08:18:52 PM
In Asmo's grey lump,
wrath and dark clouds gather force.
Luxembourg trembles.

Dave

Quote from: Recusant on January 31, 2017, 05:44:07 AM
Quote from: Apathy on January 31, 2017, 04:45:46 AM
I can tell from here this guy is trolling.

:chin: You're not the only one who's said that.

And it's pretty poor quality trolling at that!
Tomorrow is precious, don't ruin it by fouling up today.
Passed Monday 10th Dec 2018 age 74

Davin

Quote from: Gloucester on January 31, 2017, 08:11:33 AM
Quote from: Recusant on January 31, 2017, 05:44:07 AM
Quote from: Apathy on January 31, 2017, 04:45:46 AM
I can tell from here this guy is trolling.

:chin: You're not the only one who's said that.

And it's pretty poor quality trolling at that!
The people responding to him are good quality replies though. At least I'm finding them interesting.
Always question all authorities because the authority you don't question is the most dangerous... except me, never question me.

Recusant

Quote from: Davin on January 31, 2017, 01:39:46 PMThe people responding to him are good quality replies though. At least I'm finding them interesting.

He already has had two warnings though. If he's trolling, he deserves to be given a suspension, at least. Even if a troll is getting calmly argued quality responses instead of the reaction they're looking for, that doesn't excuse their trolling.

"Religion is fundamentally opposed to everything I hold in veneration — courage, clear thinking, honesty, fairness, and above all, love of the truth."
— H. L. Mencken


Davin

Quote from: Recusant on January 31, 2017, 04:02:41 PM
Quote from: Davin on January 31, 2017, 01:39:46 PMThe people responding to him are good quality replies though. At least I'm finding them interesting.

He already has had two warnings though. If he's trolling, he deserves to be given a suspension, at least. Even if a troll is getting calmly argued quality responses instead of the reaction they're looking for, that doesn't excuse their trolling.
I agree. I don't mean that he/she should be allowed to troll, but to show my appreciation for those that spent their time to respond.
Always question all authorities because the authority you don't question is the most dangerous... except me, never question me.

Dredge

Quote from: xSilverPhinx on January 28, 2017, 12:52:02 PM
You don't go about proving a negative. You would have to look under every noock and cranny in the universe to prove that Tooth Fairies didn't exist.
If you could search every nook and cranny of the universe, you still may not find any Tooth Fairies, as they might be endowed with powers of invisiblity.  This is deep.

If you can't prove that TFs don't exist, does this mean you can't prove that God doesn't exist?   
Follow the evidence wherever it leads.

Dredge

Quote from: xSilverPhinx on January 28, 2017, 12:48:42 PMJust because an ideology is atheistic doesn't mean atheism was the driving force. You're forgetting that there were other factors involved, such as cult of personality. Not that cult of personality is incompatible with religion, such as the case of good ol' Hitler who was buddies with the Catholic Church.
Hilter deceived a lot of people, great and small, before he revealed his true nature and his true intentions.

QuoteDoes 'many' mean 'most'?
Catholics who actively oppose evolution and theistic evolution are a small minority.
Follow the evidence wherever it leads.

Dredge

#309
Quote from: Asmodean on January 28, 2017, 08:06:20 AM
Quote from: Dredge on January 28, 2017, 04:28:26 AM
It something appears designed, is is more logical to conclude that it is designed, or to conclude that is not designed?
It is not logical to conclude that something is what it appears to be based on that appearance. If anything, it's apophenic.
This is not what I asked.  I'm not talking about what it is, based on appearance; I'm talking about how it came into existence, based on appearance.

Are you saying that if something appears designed, it's more logical to conclude it's NOT designed, rather than to conclude that IS designed?  If so ... wow.  Now that is apophenic!

If you happen to be walking along a beach and come across what appears to be sand castles on the beach, are you saying it is more logical to conclude that the wind and waves made those "sand castles" rather than conclude that some children built them?  

There are some folks who believe that the four "faces" on Mt. Rushmore are man-made.  Are you saying that it makes more sense to believe that those faces are actually products of mindless erosion rather than products of human activity? 

What about the Sphinx in Egypt?  It is more logical to conclude that the wind accidentally formed that structure or to conclude that humans designed and built it? 
Follow the evidence wherever it leads.

Dredge

Quote from: Asmodean on January 28, 2017, 08:06:20 AM
In the case of the Universe, life or human eye, for that matter, they sort-of only appear designed to those without the knowledge or understanding of their workings.
Huh?  The more I learn about how organisms and their organs and cells work, the more I'm convinced they're designed.
Follow the evidence wherever it leads.

Asmodean

Quote from: Dredge on February 01, 2017, 04:42:00 AM
Hilter deceived a lot of people, great and small, before he revealed his true nature and his true intentions.
This is a very broad statement, and it is broadly inaccurate. Hitler was not an unpopular leader, not even after he revealed his "true intentions" (Unless you think he revealed those only after the Third Reich started crumbling to dust) and he did not really bother to hide his "true intentions" from those he commanded.

Quote from: Dredge on February 01, 2017, 04:51:12 AM
This is not what I asked.  I'm not talking about what it is, based on appearance; I'm talking about how it came into existence, based on appearance.
No, what you are trying to do is argue semantics with someone who would normally jump at half a chance to do so. In this instance, I'm happy to point out the flaw in your counter:

How it came to existence is an "is-statement." For example, "This airplane was built by Airbus." How it appears to have come into existence is an "appears to be" statement. For example, "A platypus appears to be the child of an otter who fucked a duck."

Beyond that, I'll stick to my point with yet another illustrative example; A smells like almonds and is roughly almond-shaped. B concludes that A is almonds and eats it. B dies of potassium cyanide poisoning.

QuoteAre you saying that if something appears designed, it's more logical to conclude it's NOT designed, rather than to conclude that IS designed?  If so ... wow.  Now that is apophenic!
Apophenia is the tendency to find patterns where there are none.

That said, I did not say what you seem to think I said. What I did say, was that if something appears to be designed, it's wrong to conclude that that something is a product of design. I'm sorry, I'm not going to allow you to turn my positive statements into negatives that easily. There is a big difference between them.

QuoteIf you happen to be walking along a beach and come across what appears to be sand castles on the beach, are you saying it is more logical to conclude that the wind and waves made those "sand castles" rather than conclude that some children built them?
No, not saying that at all. See above (and above the above. I said "what I'm saying" in my quartz post)

Now it's my turn though; how do you know they were children who built them? 

QuoteThere are some folks who believe that the four "faces" on Mt. Rushmore are man-made.  Are you saying that it makes more sense to believe that those faces are actually products of mindless erosion rather than products of human activity?
Oh, we know how those faces came into existence. The key difference between knowledge and faith is that one is subject to objective verification, the other is not.

Quote
What about the Sphinx in Egypt?  It is more logical to conclude that the wind accidentally formed that structure or to conclude that humans designed and built it?
See above.

Quote from: Dredge on February 01, 2017, 05:04:30 AM
Huh?  The more I learn about how organisms and their organs and cells work, the more I'm convinced they're designed.
Well, keep learning! It may well start to make a-whole-nother-kind of sense eventually. There are reasons why the scientific community is so sparsely populated with creationists, and it's not that science attracts atheists, but it is pretty good at making them.

That' by the way, is a very good example of imbuing something conceptual in nature with agency - giving it a mind of its own, if you will. People have been doing it for as long as there were people, but as we (well, one of us, at least) have established, just because it appears to be something, that does not mean that it is that something. So, my advice? Do not conclude without enough data to draw an informed conclusion, and when you do, always be ready to change your mind when someone else's conclusion makes more sense than your own.



Quote from: Ecurb Noselrub on July 25, 2013, 08:18:52 PM
In Asmo's grey lump,
wrath and dark clouds gather force.
Luxembourg trembles.

Bad Penny II

Quote from: Dredge on February 01, 2017, 05:04:30 AM
Quote from: Asmodean on January 28, 2017, 08:06:20 AM
In the case of the Universe, life or human eye, for that matter, they sort-of only appear designed to those without the knowledge or understanding of their workings.
Huh?  The more I learn about how organisms and their organs and cells work, the more I'm convinced they're designed.

What kind of designer do you have in mind? surely not an omniscient one.
Picky people do point to flaws in the design process, particularly those grumps with bad backs or knees.
Not me though, I'm a bum along, add a bit here, work with what I've got kind of maker, so a less than perfect creator appeals to me. 
Take my advice, don't listen to me.

xSilverPhinx

Quote from: Dredge on February 01, 2017, 04:32:13 AM
Quote from: xSilverPhinx on January 28, 2017, 12:52:02 PM
You don't go about proving a negative. You would have to look under every noock and cranny in the universe to prove that Tooth Fairies didn't exist.
If you could search every nook and cranny of the universe, you still may not find any Tooth Fairies, as they might be endowed with powers of invisiblity.  This is deep.

If you can't prove that TFs don't exist, does this mean you can't prove that God doesn't exist?   

And that's why the burden of proof is on the one making the claim. If I walked up to a stranger on the street and told them to prove that the invisible dragon living in my garage who doesn't interact with the natural world in anyway doesn't exist, they'd lock me up in an asylum.
I am what survives if it's slain - Zack Hemsey


xSilverPhinx

Quote from: Dredge on February 01, 2017, 04:42:00 AM
Quote from: xSilverPhinx on January 28, 2017, 12:48:42 PMJust because an ideology is atheistic doesn't mean atheism was the driving force. You're forgetting that there were other factors involved, such as cult of personality. Not that cult of personality is incompatible with religion, such as the case of good ol' Hitler who was buddies with the Catholic Church.
Hilter deceived a lot of people, great and small, before he revealed his true nature and his true intentions.

Come on, "revealed his true nature"? Are you saying that a monster such as Hitler couldn't have been a Catholic? That's resorting to the no true Scotsman fallacy.

As if Christians are a homogeneous lot. Where I'm from, most Christians are Catholics, and a whole lot of them are nasty people who think they can just confess away their sins and their slate is clean. It's disgusting.

Quote
QuoteDoes 'many' mean 'most'?
Catholics who actively oppose evolution and theistic evolution are a small minority.

Thank goodness, societal evolution in action!
I am what survives if it's slain - Zack Hemsey