itt: evolution and trolling

[Doc Flabby]

If you asked "Why are all the proteins of life composed of only 20 amino acids?" and I answered "Because God made it that way", that would not allow you to learn anything new about the world. However, in proposing a theory it potentially could; My answer might be "Well, if the theory of an intelligent designer is true, we may propose that the designer may have made proteins out of only 20 amino acids so that organisms could digest each other and construct their own proteins."

An thus I will show you why the ID theory is useless, it can me made to work anyway you want

The multitude and variaty of lifeforms on this planet are such because the intelligent designer created the first lifeform but designed it to so it would mutate and evolve by random chance into countless different lifeforms, each "evolving" there own different and unique properties over an extended period of time.

Game, Set and Match.

I am not claiming this particular case is a good argument, but I am most certainly stating that the argument "The purpose of science is not to be bothered if something is 'right' or 'wrong' but to extend our knowledge of the world" is useless. What are laws then? If there is no certainty at the end of science its efforts are wasted.

There in lies your mistake, you fail to understand the philosophy of science. In science there is NEVER the premise of certaintly. Every theory in science is open to challenge. nothing in science is a "fact" the only people who report "facts" are the media in the reporting of science, if you ask a scientist they would disagree with the (ab)use of the word.

Evolution I would gladly trade for the combined effects of evolution on Hitler causing Nazism and the Holocaust, on Karl Marx and the idea of Communism, the slave trade, Stalin, Mussolini, Mao, etc.

The slave trade started way way before the theory of evolution was suggested. There were slaves in Roman times. Incidently 1859 which is when the "Theory of Evolution" was published was a year before the American Civil War.

The biggest problem, which you havn't meantioned in the Theory of Evolution suffers from is the chicken & egg problem. I'm surprized you havnt attacked the theory in this way rather than just saying its "false". The theory of evelution does NOT explain where the first lifeform came from

[milosh]

The Theory of Evolution was around long before Darwin; he merely modified and coined it. I am not suggesting that all the slaves in history are a result of the Theory of Evolution; however, I think the treatment of African Americans on slave ships had a lot to do with the idea that they were an inferior race of humans.

I want to make one more probability point. Let's just pretend that 1:10^40,000 is not just a single part of the probability but the entire probability that life began on its own and evolved into humans all together. There is not infinite time like so many claim. The amount of time is estimated around 20 billion years. Do you know how many seconds are in 20 billion years? 60 * 60 * 24 * 365 * 20 x 10^9 = 63.1 x 10^17 approximately. How do 63.1 x 10^17 seconds stand up to 10^40,000 possibilities(not mentioning that we greatly reduced the probability for hypothetical purposes)?

[Doc Flabby]

I want to make one more probability point. Let's just pretend that 1:10^40,000 is not just a single part of the probability but the entire probability that life began on its own and evolved into humans all together. There is not infinite time like so many claim. The amount of time is estimated around 20 billion years. Do you know how many seconds are in 20 billion years? 60 * 60 * 24 * 365 * 20 x 10^9 = 63.1 x 10^17 approximately. How do 63.1 x 10^17 seconds stand up to 10^40,000 possibilities(not mentioning that we greatly reduced the probability for hypothetical purposes)?

how long is a second?

[milosh]

Multiply it by 60, 100, a million, or a billion. Multiply it by whatever you would like because it will still not stand up to the odds.

EDIT: It really is quite superfluous considering that any scientist will tell you that the conditions for life were not ideal for 20 billion years, but for a small fragment of that. 20 billion years ago marks the estimated beginning of the universe not the beginning of ideal conditions for life.

[Kolar]

I never took the time to reply to this statement, but I would like to. Whatever technologies, GM foods, or gene therapies we've gained from the Theory of Evolution I would gladly trade for the combined effects of evolution on Hitler causing Nazism and the Holocaust, on Karl Marx and the idea of Communism, the slave trade, Stalin, Mussolini, Mao, etc.

Social Darwinism != Darwinism/Evolution. GG, try again.

Edit: Darwinism, even social Darwinism has never been accepted in the United States. While the motivations were mostly economical the justifications for slavery in the United States were based on religious texts.

[castromarx]

MBV > The Hippos

[milosh]

Social Darwinism != Darwinism/Evolution. GG, try again.

Edit: Darwinism, even social Darwinism has never been accepted in the United States. While the motivations were mostly economical the justifications for slavery in the United States was based on religious texts.

Both sides of the argument were based on religious texts. The north and south used the Bible to try and prove their points. I am not blaming Charles Darwin for Social Darwinism just as I don't entirely accredit the Theory of Evolution to him. It's not his fault that humanity is evil. Who can say his intention was anything more than to explain the natural world? Just because someones intentions are good does not mean that terrible consequences will not follow from them.

EDIT: Yes, I'm also aware of the crusades and years of religious tyranny in Europe. I am not trying to justify it by trying to compare the level of horror in the tragedies, but just as I do not blame Charles Darwin for Social Darwinism I also do not blame the core of Christianity for the horrors that spawned from its perversion.

[Kolar]

So why then bring it up if Social Darwinism has nothing to do with Evolution, which has advanced our understanding of our world thus technology, science ect...? It sounds like you're just adding words like Nazis, Communist to Evolution to make both appear evil (while the former is) and wrong and not actually attacking the theory, which has nothing to do with what you're arguing with anyways.

Edit: You're smarter then this shit Milosh.

[milosh]

So why then bring it up if Social Darwinism has nothing to do with Evolution, which has advanced our understanding of our world thus technology, science ect...? It sounds like you're just adding words like Nazis, Communist to Evolution to make both appear evil (while the former is) and wrong and not actually attacking the theory, which has nothing to do with what you're arguing with anyways.

I am not claiming that both are evil or that the Theory of Evolution is directly responsible for Social Darwinism, but I also believe it is ignorant to say they have "nothing to do" with one another. I would also say it's ignorant to say that Jesus' teachings had nothing to do with the crusades. How can you though directly relate gene therapy, GM foods, or the entire study of Genetics all together to the Theory of Evolution? It may have had some impact on the discovery of these technologies but can it be considered wholely responsible? This is my point.

[Doc Flabby]

The multitude and variaty of lifeforms on this planet are such because the intelligent designer created the first lifeform but designed it so it would mutate and evolve by random chance into countless different lifeforms, each "evolving" there own different and unique properties over an extended period of time.

You never answered my main point ID theory is a bad theory as it can be twisted which ever way you want it.

Your challenge is to disprove the above statement supporting evolution (one in quotes)

[Zeebu]

You never answered my main point ID theory is a bad theory as it can be twisted which ever way you want it.

You challenge is to disprove the above statement support evolution (one in quotes)

on the other side of that coin, youd have to prove the existence of an intelligent designer, otherwise youre just deadlocked with no right or wrong answer

[milosh]

I agree. It is a bad theory by scientific standards; however, I don't think that just because something does not fit inside the box it is not possible or true.

[Zeebu]

I agree. It is a bad theory by scientific standards; however, I don't think that just because something does not fit inside the box it is not possible or true.

faith does not play well together with science and statistics

[Doc Flabby]

on the other side of that coin, youd have to prove the existence of an intelligent designer, otherwise youre just deadlocked with no right or wrong answer

Not really, Provided my theory is true.
A: THE ID EXISTS
If Intelligent Designer Exists
Then Theory of Intelligent design AND
Theory of Evelution must be correct
B: THE ID DOES NOT EXIST
Intelligent Designer Does not Exist
Then Theory of Intelligent design is therefore wrong.
Note: Theory of Evolution could still be incorrect

This use of logical deduction means the only way to attack my argument is to attack the theory I have put forward:

The multitude and variaty of lifeforms on this planet are such because the intelligent designer created the first lifeform but designed it so it would mutate and evolve by random chance into countless different lifeforms, each "evolving" there own different and unique properties over an extended period of time.

Trying to disprove this theory is pretty much impossible.

[castromarx]

Can somebody please prove to me that unicorn riding leprechauns do not exist? Maybe this number will help you: 14x13782^(3.14159e+99) / c+2.