Evolution

[keithprosser3]

Given the nature of reproduction and of natural selection isn't evolution inescapable?
How can evolution not happen?

[Jashwell]

[Replying to post 1172 by kenblogton]

When I said "They've probably identified where people believe they have transcended the physical and made contact with God" I'm saying it seems very unlikely that brain researchers in this obscure book that hasn't even been named have demonstrated that someone has been talking with God.

Unless you're suggesting I should take it at face value and accept that they were talking to God because "some researchers" from "the book" said so.

I didn't restate what you said, I disputed the truthfulness of it.

Nowhere did you explicitly say you disputed the truthfulness of what I said; rather you deliberately distorted what I had said to fit in with your preconceptions of what is truth.

And no, researchers have not "identified ... the brain area where humans transcend the physical and make contact with God", they've probably identified the region where people believe they transcend the physical and make contact with God.

Nowhere did I explicitly say "the researchers have not claimed that they have identified the brain area where humans transcend the physical and make contact with God".
To suggest that this particular response - saying that it's not likely that "some researchers from the book" (neither of which have even been named, not that it would do any good for your argument at this point) have identified someone making contact with God (which may be a-priori impossible to demonstrate) - is distorting what you said is flatly wrong.

My response wasn't even referring to particular researchers in the book you say this is from because you didn't even mention that it was specific researchers let alone from a specific book, I was saying that in general it seems unlikely that brain researchers in general (the scientific consensus on neurology) have identified the area where people literally make contact with God. If this was the case, most brain researchers would surely be theists by now.
If they have, why they haven't given this evidence for God to the general public is beyond me.

And, I have frequently observed, this is a pattern of your: Restate what the other person says in a way which is in accord with what Jashwell believes.
kenblogton

That's funny because I almost always use direct quotes - I rarely use paraphrased speech marks (and when I do, I tend to include the direct quote) and I've never been called out on my paraphrasing when I do. For instance, I abbreviated the particular lobe because it seems like an unnecessary detail. (I probably should've abbreviated "transcended the physical and made contact with God", I distinctly remember typing it a lot)

Could you give some examples from this archive you have of my distorting? Direct links to the posts I made would also be nice.

And when you're done with that, could you either present new arguments or address the previous objections?

(Though arguments for the existence of God isn't really the topic, it appears to be the one largely being discussed here. It doesn't seem like a large issue considering there are many other threads where the truth of evolution is being discussed, but I'll make a separate thread in C&A anyway)

[arian]

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to understand the evolution of morality...my example would be a serial killer. If you were to walk around killing people whenever it struck your fancy, after some time the surrounding survivors would hunt you down and either lock you up...or kill you.

If that was even remotely true, both President Bushes would be either in prison, or dead right now.

It is in the best interest of the people to work together otherwise they'd fall prey to wandering psychopaths.

Keep up with world events much? We are working together alright, only the purpose is very questionable? It's that 'purpose' that I'm talking about.

Since according to theists the Jews didn't have a moral guidebook before Moses produced his ten commandments (which being the only time this creator has ever actually written anything down, is quite a pathetic list of things.)how is it that they gathered at Mount Sinai without killing each other?

You think that 'Moses Laws' brought morality into the world? Now that's funny, .. really.
I agree that the 'Ten Commandments' IS a pathetic list of things, I can't believe God had to stoop so low as to actually give it to His creation 'Made in His Own Image'? It is the equivalent of a mother teaching her 40 year old son; "don't touch baby, .. you will get hurt! Don't take that from Elizabeth, .. she'll cry! Don't hit your brother or he'll hit you back and you both will cry! You have to honor mommy and daddy, OK? Oh no you don't, now put it back, that's not yours!"

This is what happens when diviners/mediums teach Bible Study.

Using this God created morality that theists suggests rules out every other human group that existed before the Hebrews created Jehovah. How do you explain the Egyptians? Romans? Neanderthals??

It's obvious that God loves a challenge, so He started with the Hebrews. He figured; "If I can get them back to me, the Egyptians, Romans and the rest will be like a walk in the park!"

They seemed to live harmoniously without a Christian God to muck up the works.

Again I agree, .. seems like we think alike Randall! That Christian god Legion sure mucked things up for the past almost 2000 years hasn't he?

The brain and the mind are one. Period. There is no separate entity living in your brain (or big toe for that matter.).

And who can argue with such 'deep' reasoning? Truly a divine insight; "The Mind is the Brain, .. period!"

Evolution is a fact, .. period!

Infinity can create anything, .. just by its sheer size! It doesn't need anything in it either, .. period!

Nothing in this Universe can exceed the speed of light which is, aah, .. oh about 180,000 m/p/s and not an inch more, .. period.

The Big-bang happened 13.75 billion years ago, .. period! .. or was it a Big Woossh!? It was an expansion, .. well half an expansion, because it only inflated from the inside, .. Period!

Oh yea, .. Time Dilation, .. speed causes time to dilate, ... , ..

"Physics class, now I will prove to you that Einstein was right about 'time dilation' OK? John, I want you to walk to Walmart 3.5 miles down the road, pick up a pack of gum and walk back. John leaves and returns with a pack of gum.

You see class, it took John exactly 2 hours to return with the pack of gum. Now John will sit on his 145 hp. Yamaha V-Max and run to Walmart again, and we will observe these 2 hours dilate using the same distance and the same task; gum/Walmart

John returns in 6 minutes with the V-Max. Proof for time-dilation; "Speed does dilate time" .. Period.

Humans are a part of this world just like a cockroach...we are not special except for in the way we celebrate our achievements, like glorified peacocks.

Yes, humans, cockroaches and peacocks are all part of this world, I can't argue with that?

[ReligionOFTHEsemites]

If that was even remotely true, both President Bushes would be either in prison, or dead right now.

Is this a response we are supposed to take seriously? I don't like the Bushes but bringing politics into this is doing what? This looks much like a red herring.

Keep up with world events much? We are working together alright, only the purpose is very questionable? It's that 'purpose' that I'm talking about.

Crime is lower than it has EVER been in history. Quality of life is highest. People live longer than ever. Only through religious eyes will you see everything as horrible?

This is what happens when diviners/mediums teach Bible Study.

Oh and somehow your version of the religion that has 55,000 different denominations out of probably millions of other religions is somehow correct and everyone else who ever lived is wrong?

It's obvious that God loves a challenge, so He started with the Hebrews. He figured; "If I can get them back to me, the Egyptians, Romans and the rest will be like a walk in the park!"

Is this a statement we are supposed to take seriously as well? A cop-out to an actual refutation? The great thing about defending religion is that you can just make things up and it's "evidence".

And who can argue with such 'deep' reasoning? Truly a divine insight; "The Mind is the Brain, .. period!"

Evolution is a fact, .. period!

Infinity can create anything, .. just by its sheer size! It doesn't need anything in it either, .. period!

Nothing in this Universe can exceed the speed of light which is, aah, .. oh about 180,000 m/p/s and not an inch more, .. period.

The Big-bang happened 13.75 billion years ago, .. period! .. or was it a Big Woossh!? It was an expansion, .. well half an expansion, because it only inflated from the inside, .. Period!

Science never says anything like any of your examples. Nothing has been seen to go faster than the speed of light...therefore the speed of light is the fastest something can go until something faster if found. No scientist would ever say what you are implying in most of your examples. Evolution is a fact, change does happen over time. It's been observed and there is more evidence for evolution than any other idea in science. It doesn't disprove your religion. But only YOU create this idea. Evolution says nothing about religion...only religion has a problem with evolution. Go figure the people who are against evolution cannot even define it. Keep your religion out of science and science will continue to ignore your religion...your one religion out of possibly millions of others.

And the rest of your response isn't even worth quoting.

[kenblogton]

[Replying to post 1172 by kenblogton]

When I said "They've probably identified where people believe they have transcended the physical and made contact with God" I'm saying it seems very unlikely that brain researchers in this obscure book that hasn't even been named have demonstrated that someone has been talking with God.

Unless you're suggesting I should take it at face value and accept that they were talking to God because "some researchers" from "the book" said so.

I didn't restate what you said, I disputed the truthfulness of it.

Nowhere did you explicitly say you disputed the truthfulness of what I said; rather you deliberately distorted what I had said to fit in with your preconceptions of what is truth.

And no, researchers have not "identified ... the brain area where humans transcend the physical and make contact with God", they've probably identified the region where people believe they transcend the physical and make contact with God.

Nowhere did I explicitly say "the researchers have not claimed that they have identified the brain area where humans transcend the physical and make contact with God".
To suggest that this particular response - saying that it's not likely that "some researchers from the book" (neither of which have even been named, not that it would do any good for your argument at this point) have identified someone making contact with God (which may be a-priori impossible to demonstrate) - is distorting what you said is flatly wrong.

My response wasn't even referring to particular researchers in the book you say this is from because you didn't even mention that it was specific researchers let alone from a specific book, I was saying that in general it seems unlikely that brain researchers in general (the scientific consensus on neurology) have identified the area where people literally make contact with God. If this was the case, most brain researchers would surely be theists by now.
If they have, why they haven't given this evidence for God to the general public is beyond me.

And, I have frequently observed, this is a pattern of your: Restate what the other person says in a way which is in accord with what Jashwell believes.
kenblogton

That's funny because I almost always use direct quotes - I rarely use paraphrased speech marks (and when I do, I tend to include the direct quote) and I've never been called out on my paraphrasing when I do. For instance, I abbreviated the particular lobe because it seems like an unnecessary detail. (I probably should've abbreviated "transcended the physical and made contact with God", I distinctly remember typing it a lot)

Could you give some examples from this archive you have of my distorting? Direct links to the posts I made would also be nice.

And when you're done with that, could you either present new arguments or address the previous objections?

(Though arguments for the existence of God isn't really the topic, it appears to be the one largely being discussed here. It doesn't seem like a large issue considering there are many other threads where the truth of evolution is being discussed, but I'll make a separate thread in C&A anyway)

In my post 1161, I gave you several examples of where you've distorted what I've said, and in your posting 1162, you distorted what I'd said in posting 1161. I said that researchers had identified the brain area where humans transcend the physical and make contact with God, and you said instead "And no, researchers have not "identified ... the brain area where humans transcend the physical and make contact with God", they've probably identified the region where people believe they transcend the physical and make contact with God." which gives you a more convenient straw man to deal with. I stated what the researchers said and you say no, they didn't say that.
Jashwell, I leave you to your views. We cannot debate if we don't at least acknowledge what we say.
kenblogton

[Jashwell]

In my post 1161, I gave you several examples of where you've distorted what I've said,

Incorrect, you claim that I distort what you've said, and then change the topic immediately

Jashwell, you incorrectly restate what I say so you can misinterpret it to conveniently maintain your logical fictions such as

Then go on to say various things (all of which I addressed) which are things you claim are my "logical fictions". Not examples of things you've said that I've distorted. (E.g. "the Universe was not caused")

and in your posting 1162, you distorted what I'd said in posting 1161. I said that researchers had identified the brain area where humans transcend the physical and make contact with God, and you said instead "And no, researchers have not "identified ... the brain area where humans transcend the physical and make contact with God", they've probably identified the region where people believe they transcend the physical and make contact with God." which gives you a more convenient straw man to deal with. I stated what the researchers said and you say no, they didn't say that.

No, as addressed in the quote in your post, I did not claim that the researchers did not say "we've identified the brain region where people transcend the physical and make contact with God".
I said that they HADN'T identified the region where people had made contact with God, but that they've probably identified the region where people believe they have. As would likely be the case if, for example, they themselves (the researchers) believed that these people had made contact with God.
In other words, I disagree that they have identified people making contact with God, not that they might have claimed to.

Not only that, but as you hadn't even mentioned it was from specific researchers from a book let alone given a reference but just said "researchers have identified ... " I assumed you meant researchers in general.
As is an expected interpretation of "researchers have identified", especially when you are referencing scientific research, where one might interpret you to mean there is any kind of consensus, not one specific book written by a few researchers.

Jashwell, I leave you to your views. We cannot debate if we don't at least acknowledge what we say.
kenblogton

The quotes are all here, plain to see.
For anyone else, click the names to go directly to the posts in the thread.

1161

[Replying to post 1144 by Jashwell]

Jashwell, you incorrectly restate what I say so you can misinterpret it to conveniently maintain your logical fictions, such as
1. there was no beginning of space, time, matter & energy and we cannot say there was nothing before the dense singularity from which evolved the big bang
2. the universe was not caused and its evolution can equivalently be viewed going forward and backward
3. if there was a cause of the universe, it definitely wasn't God

I would remind you that the physical, which you believe is the only reality, is not directly perceived by us; we perceive what is hopefully a reasonable facsimile created by our brains. Brain researchers have identified the posterior superior parietal lobe as the brain area where humans transcend the physical and make contact with God, and they point out that their meditations are as real brain-wise as their perceptions of the physical. They also cite data contrasting psychotic delusions and normal meditations, and note that meditators/religious people live happier, healthier and longer lives.
kenblogton

Extract from 1162 - the part where I supposedly distort what he says

And no, researchers have not "identified ... the brain area where humans transcend the physical and make contact with God", they've probably identified the region where people believe they transcend the physical and make contact with God.

Extract from 1175 - a specific response to him claiming I distorted this (my response to his response to his original claim of distortion)
(a response to: )

Nowhere did you explicitly say you disputed the truthfulness of what I said; rather you deliberately distorted what I said to fit in with your preconceptions of what is truth.

Nowhere did I explicitly say "the researchers have not claimed that they have identified the brain area where humans transcend the physical and make contact with God".
To suggest that this particular response - saying that it's not likely that "some researchers from the book" (neither of which have even been named, not that it would do any good for your argument at this point) have identified someone making contact with God (which may be a-priori impossible to demonstrate) - is distorting what you said is flatly wrong.

My response wasn't even referring to particular researchers in the book you say this is from because you didn't even mention that it was specific researchers let alone from a specific book, I was saying that in general it seems unlikely that brain researchers in general (the scientific consensus on neurology) have identified the area where people literally make contact with God. If this was the case, most brain researchers would surely be theists by now.
If they have, why they haven't given this evidence for God to the general public is beyond me.

So far, all of my "distortions" appear to just be me disagreeing with you.

[arian]

If that was even remotely true, both President Bushes would be either in prison, or dead right now.

Is this a response we are supposed to take seriously? I don't like the Bushes but bringing politics into this is doing what? This looks much like a red herring.

Yes my friend, I was very serious. Hitler downgraded Jews to sub-human, what did that have to do with the failing German economy?

Keep up with world events much? We are working together alright, only the purpose is very questionable? It's that 'purpose' that I'm talking about.

Crime is lower than it has EVER been in history. Quality of life is highest. People live longer than ever. Only through religious eyes will you see everything as horrible?

You have this backwards friend, it is ONLY through religious indoctrination that you could possibly make a comment like you just did.
1. The public REPORT of crime is lower than it ever been in history.
2. According to World Government Controlled Media the quality of life is the highest. Just because people are being killed or dying in super-modern hospitals, or abortion being done on-demand, both parents having to work 10-12 hour shifts to afford a car and a cell phone and an X-Box 1 doesn't mean the quality of life is the highest. Give me a tent besides a nice creek with an acre of land I can call my own without chem-trailing the sky above me, now that I would consider 'quality of life'.
3. People are kept living longer than ever in care homes with drugs, and life support. I would not consider this 'quality of life'. My wife and I did this for 9 years, because the loving family could not afford to keep the wife home to watch grandma, or the kids. Religion has clouded your mind my friend.

This is what happens when diviners/mediums teach Bible Study.

Oh and somehow your version of the religion that has 55,000 different denominations out of probably millions of other religions is somehow correct and everyone else who ever lived is wrong?

I don't know about the millions of others, but I do know of the major-religions, and they are all very religious. I try hard to keep religion out of my POV's.

It's obvious that God loves a challenge, so He started with the Hebrews. He figured; "If I can get them back to me, the Egyptians, Romans and the rest will be like a walk in the park!"

Is this a statement we are supposed to take seriously as well? A cop-out to an actual refutation? The great thing about defending religion is that you can just make things up and it's "evidence".

It's the truth, but you can debate it if you like. It's OK to tell me I'm wrong, but please try to tell me why you think I'm wrong? This way we can both learn from it.

And who can argue with such 'deep' reasoning? Truly a divine insight; "The Mind is the Brain, .. period!"

Evolution is a fact, .. period!

Infinity can create anything, .. just by its sheer size! It doesn't need anything in it either, .. period!

Nothing in this Universe can exceed the speed of light which is, aah, .. oh about 180,000 m/p/s and not an inch more, .. period.

The Big-bang happened 13.75 billion years ago, .. period! .. or was it a Big Woossh!? It was an expansion, .. well half an expansion, because it only inflated from the inside, .. Period!

Science never says anything like any of your examples. Nothing has been seen to go faster than the speed of light...therefore the speed of light is the fastest something can go until something faster if found.

Please re-read what you just said, think about it for a second and see if it makes sense?

No scientist would ever say what you are implying in most of your examples.

You mean no scientist would dare say what I am implying. And those that do, it doesn't get too far since the BB Evolution One World Government would never allow it to.

Evolution is a fact, change does happen over time.

Yes, if you mean like myself, I have evolved a great deal since I started on this Forum. But if you mean that monkeys change/evolve into humans, or one species into another, that would be a fact of a fairytale, not science.

It's been observed and there is more evidence for evolution than any other idea in science.

Show me a documented observation of one significant species evolving into another over the claimed billions, or millions, or even just hundreds of thousands of years? Fungus, viruses, bacteria and gnats with VD don't count in my opinion since there are too many variables involved in one species of gnats refusing to reproduce with another. Like forced mutation by radiation for one.

It doesn't disprove your religion. But only YOU create this idea. Evolution says nothing about religion...only religion has a problem with evolution. Go figure the people who are against evolution cannot even define it. Keep your religion out of science and science will continue to ignore your religion...your one religion out of possibly millions of others.

Evolution is a new-age religion invented by some very religious people and it's my job to point that truth out to others. This religion has kidnapped science and is distorting the meaning of observation with wishful fantasy-like thinking.
The idea of Evolution was to reduce the human mind to animal like thinking, and then to animal like behavior, and it is working perfectly.

Evolution is Trans humanism, and if you watch this documentary you should understand this. They cause diseases, they introduce radiation, poisons into children that cause autism, deformities, mutations anything to create the need for amputations where this fanatic religious group can come in as saviors turning/evolving humans into robots, and hopefully hybrid animals, mutants. They are determined that Evolution be true, that humans are not created in Gods image, but are nothing but animals, even if they have to do it themselves.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zcCh_7sP66c

And the rest of your response isn't even worth quoting.

Yes I understand, religious people can get very protective of their beliefs, and any revelation of truth will be suppressed and deemed worthless.

[ReligionOFTHEsemites]

[Replying to post 1180 by arian]

Honestly, responding would clearly be a huge waste of time. Wading through the conspiracy theories (chem-trails), red herrings, made-up facts (The public REPORT of crime is lower than it ever been in history) and non sequitur ("Please re-read what you just said, think about it for a second and see if it makes sense? " lol) would just take too long. Thanks for the laugh though.

[arian]

Again you missed it, Jesus was telling us that since we are all 'bad trees', He can fix it that we can all become 'good trees' through Him.

I reject your un-evidence claims due to the fact that I am not a bad tree. You may have committed acts that would make you be OK with a human being sacrificed over said acts, but I have done no such things.

Due to this, you come across as a bad tree projecting your badness on to the rest of us trees. Unless of course, you can show me that I'm a bad tree.

I hope you can do better than:
Once upon a time, there was a man that was tricked in to eating from a tree by a talking snake. Therefore, we are all bad trees and a humans needs to be nailed to a pole so we can be good trees.

The notion of sacrificing a human to a god concept for actions you have done, or not done could warrant the argument that said person is actually the bad tree and those that would not sacrifice a human for their actions would be the good trees.

So far, you have failed to convince me to be OK with or to kill another human for any actions I have done.

A) I am a bad person
B) But I'm ok with a human being sacrificed to a god concept in order to be redeemed for being so bad.
C) You will know them by their fruits.

Is it good fruit or bad fruit in your opinion to kill another human for actions you have committed?

First, you must understand what love is, and that our actions have consequences. Now I understand that your religion defines consequences very differently than what it once was, so this next explanation to your questions may not be logical for you. Try to think outside of your religious indoctrination Clownboat!

WARNING!!
The following is a quote from the Bible, and it is meant to explain in greater detail of the questions you had for me. Reading further could cause discomfort to some readers, and even the uncontrollable desire to report me. But you have been warned.

Romans 5:1 Therefore, having been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ, 2 through whom also we have access by faith into this grace in which we stand, and rejoice in hope of the glory of God. 3 And not only that, but we also glory in tribulations, knowing that tribulation produces perseverance; 4 and perseverance, character; and character, hope. 5 Now hope does not disappoint, because the love of God has been poured out in our hearts by the Holy Spirit who was given to us.

Christ in Our Place

6 For when we were still without strength, in due time Christ died for the ungodly. 7 For scarcely for a righteous man will one die; yet perhaps for a good man someone would even dare to die. 8 But God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us. 9 Much more then, having now been justified by His blood, we shall be saved from wrath through Him. 10 For if when we were enemies we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son, much more, having been reconciled, we shall be saved by His life. 11 And not only that, but we also rejoice in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have now received the reconciliation.

Death in Adam, Life in Christ

12 Therefore, just as through one man sin entered the world, and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men, because all sinned" 13 (For until the law sin was in the world, but sin is not imputed when there is no law. 14 Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those who had not sinned according to the likeness of the transgression of Adam, who is a type of Him who was to come. 15 But the free gift is not like the offense. For if by the one mans offense many died, much more the grace of God and the gift by the grace of the one Man, Jesus Christ, abounded to many.

The entire chapter.

[arian]

Replying to post 1159 by arian]

I did not mean to sound arrogant, .. but how do I an unschooled dummy sound convincing on something's I am absolutely sure about without sounding arrogant? Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated!!!

Then Im left to wonder why the barrage of questions about my education/background.

When someone tells me they are machinists, I ask them how much machining they did, and what type of machining? It isn't my plan to degrade them, but I just want to know how much do they know so I would not talk about machining beyond that persons ability to understand? It is from respect, not to belittle the person.

So if you can remember which Book, Chapter and verse a particular Bible quote is written in, you are much better than me.
Generally speaking, I cant and am forced to look it up as well. So, in this regard, I am no better than you. : )

Thank you KenRU

So I didn't mean to butt-heads with you on Scripture, but what I wanted to know is whether or not you understand what the Bible is about? The message in there?
I certainly believe I do. As for butting heads on scripture, I assume youre not making the argument that we ignore the more inconvenient parts of scripture that are barbaric and evil? They are a part of this message (after all) that you are referring to, right?

The Bible touches on everything, from love songs to those barbaric and evil things. This is why it is such a beautiful and yet frightening Book. It can lift our minds beyond this physical realm, to glimpses of sheer terror of hell. It leaves no stone unturned.

Yes many religious denominations study the Bible, Christian, Muslim, Judaism, .. etc. But I have found out that they don't know the God of the Bible. Each religion has a slightly different interpretation of Bible-God, but none of them are even close to 'knowing' the God of the Bible, .. our Creator "I Am Who I Am", .. so how would they understand the true meaning of the message?

This makes me wonder. What makes you so sure that you know this god better than they do? Can you possibly make this argument without sounding arrogant?

Yes, and I have suggested this many times in the past to other debaters here, but so far no one has taken me up on it. I understand that in a Debating Forum it is very impersonal, I mean what's a KenRU, .. right? I am arian, what's an arian, and the rest are even more wilder. The only way I could think of is if we met face to face. I would love to meet EVERYONE here, especially the ones I have debated for a long time. My name is Odon Sabo, I have posted my address and phone number many times before, so if you want it, please PM me and I would be glad to give it to you (or anyone here) or meet at a convenient place of your choosing?

Lets just say "I know our Creator", and He is not like any other religious definition I have heard before, or any acceptable quantum theorists definition either. If you were a machinist, I would tell you that I know machining also, pretty darn good too. Now I have heard many other people say they too were good machinists, but after talking to them, some were not so knowledgeable as they thought, or as they presumed. So is that arrogant of me to say this?

Well, .. now I know you will take this as an arrogant remark, but from what I have read/watched/listened to over the years from quantum theorists in their quest for their answer for the 'Big Picture', .. to the Big-Questions as to is reasoning from 'within' the box, or from a very limited physical POV, which will NEVER answer these important questions, .. never.

For the most part, I believe we can:

"Who are we?" We decide who we are. Its as simple as that.

Very good, and how do you come to this decision?

Mine is observing everything around us (science) and whatever other means I get a reasonable, rational philosophical answer I have discerned to be true. I then compare it with what I hear others claim to who they believe they are. Some people believe they are apes, some that they are Jesus Christ, or God.

"Where did we come from?" ancestors via evolution

So you believe you are part of a family of apes, right?

I believe I was created by a Creator, and made in His image. I can also tell you about my Creator through my observation of how I was created, from dust of the earth, and my mind as an image of my invisible Creator who I understand is an Eternal, Infinite, All Powerful Creative Mind.

"Where are we going?" If you are referring to an afterlife, most likely nowhere, but no one knows this.

No one knows? You sure assume to know a lot, don't you think?

The fact I have observed is that our mind is eternal, it is a part of our Creator, .. infinite, and not part of the brain which is finite. The finite can never reach infinity, it will always remain finite no matter how fast and how long it expands/grows. This is the fact that is the basis of my faith. From here, everything just fits in place. Here I can reason and tell you what ideologies are true, and which are not, and I can prove it.

and last but not the least; "What's our purpose for existing?" We decide our own purpose.

I agree on that, only I believe it is very important what we base our decisions on because the way I understand is that apes have a very different 'purpose' for existence than we humans created in our Creators image!?! I have never eaten my own poop yet, nor am I planning to in the near future.

What I am asking is if you can differentiate between science and sci-fi?
(I'm trying mightily to not take offense to this question) Yes, I am sane and can tell the difference between science and sci fi.

Yet you believe you are a member of a family of apes??
How do you understand the Blue brain project, Post Humanism, Trans humanism etc.? Would this be part of your evolutionary beliefs?

Not quite Substance as in matter and material (observing the universe around us - science), then wondering where it came from (using our mind which is not seen) as evidence.
Then consider this quote:

Proverbs 3:5-6 Trust in the Lord with all your heart, and do not lean on your own understanding. In all your ways acknowledge him, and he will make straight your paths.

Basically, this says the opposite of what you are asserting. My point, though, is that religions tend to cloud (intentionally as my quote above shows) ones ability to learn, especially when science comes into to direct conflict with scriptures.

I don't see science in conflict with Scripture, rather it compliments Scripture.

Proverbs 3:5-6 just proves my point. Leaning on my own understanding would be relying on what I have learned and stored in my brain; religious indoctrinations, classes on Evolution, the Big-bang, theory of relativity and its man-made rules and limitations and so on. But I am more than just my brain, I have a mind which can look at everything stored in my brain, and everything around me, and dream beyond it all at the same time. In this way I have a Gods-eye-view, .. an unlimited perspective, not a limited one like; one thing I have learned and stored in my brain relative to another thing stored in my brain, and make my decisions only on that.

But if you believe that the brain creates the mind, you will never understand this.
Oddly, I understand your point. But, if what you say is true, that the mind is separate from the brain, then how do you account for brain damage? Damage to certain parts of the brain directly impact the mind and who we are, and it fundamentally changes people. If, as you say, they are separate entities, then this should not happen.

How do you account for this reality?

Think of the brain as a computer, and your mind as you who is putting and retreating information from it. Now start beating that computer with a hammer till it just doesn't work anymore. Only the brain is far, far more complicated than a simple computer, you can damage a lot and the mind will still keep using the undamaged parts, until there is nothing left and becomes useless. Then it leaves and goes back to God who gave it, leaving the brain as it originally was created from .. and eventually it turns back to dust from whence it was taken.

You don't need luck if you have faith built on evidence, like gravity. You believe in gravity because of all the evidence, not because you accepted it because of your religion, correct? Now use this knowledge to see what could be evidence for God, our Creator?

Im going to need an equivalent example of evidence for god to fully understand the leap you are making here.

You were created in Gods image, it's all right there, your mind. Then imagine a concept, like a car for instance, now where did that come from? Now God can create that car in His mind and make it real, in a similar way (very limited) we can create the car from things outside of our mind. The physical things that God in His wisdom was able to provide.

I can explain in more detail, it is really awesome to ponder on, and once you start to understand, existence will mean so much more. You will appreciate God so much more also because everything will start to have a real meaning, a purpose that we can take part in, .. actually a purpose that we are invited to take a part in.

Aahh.. the possibilities are endless, and with one mind and intent with God, harmless. Fun, joy and enjoyment throughout eternity in infinity. Remember that creating finite things can NEVER reach infinity, it remains finite.

Don't allow religion and religious indoctrinations imprison your mind and chain it to your brain. You are far more than what you have in your brain, so don't die with it.

Obviously gravity is NOT equal to God, because gravity is a part of the created, like space and light.
I was not saying gravity was equal to god, I was trying to show you that the evidence for gravity is massive, obvious, verifiable and indisputable, and that no such argument can be made for the existence of a god.

I really pray that God would open your eyes, and please don't take this the religious way either. I know how they use this all the time, yet they are blinder than bats.

Once you see and understand my interpretation, not only gravity, but you will see the indisputable evidence of the existence of 'nothing' also. This is what opened my eyes to seeing God as Everything. Because Everything MUST contain everything, correct? So once you see the evidence of the existence of 'nothing' and I can actually show you this, then you will understand God as an Eternal Infinite Everything. And once you understand the difference between your brain and your mind, you will Understand our Eternal Infinite Creative Mind God.

[

b]But our mind is not affected by space, gravity, light or even time. [/b]
Sure it is. Take away gravity and your mind will cease to function as you float off into space and no longer have any access to oxygen and heat. And as for light and time, well, Im sure you heard of Sensory Deprivation Tanks, right? Well, there is ample evidence of the mind going wacky and cuckoo when people spend too much time in those tanks.

So, yes, the mind is most assuredly affected by these things.

No, only the brain is.
The mind interprets the sensation of the brain, and it's job is to keep that brain functioning under any and every circumstance. The brain needs the physical supplements like oxygen, or it will start messing up. Just like a computer when there is power surges.
Remember we are not God, or we are not all mind, but God put a little bit of Himself in a body with a brain. It is when God breathed His Spirit into that body made of dust that made us an individual living soul. We are little gods, or Children of God. For now because of Adams sin, we can die, but our spirit goes back to God, .. because the spirit cannot die, it is part of God.
God reserves the memory of who we were (Just like the Blue Brain Project is attempting to do) and once that Day has come, we will receive a New body (this is what I wanted to talk about in my Post Primo Post Human and the Blue Brain Project) because Satan is actually hoping to achieve in the physical realm what God has planned for us in the Spiritual. He is trying to convince man that he can live forever in a Matrix, and create his own reality.

The truth is, he knows better. This is all about convincing man to commit suicide, just like he did Marshall Applewhite and his heavens gate cult. He knows that once we die, we will never be able to enter into that Eternal rest where he used to be. This is his whole plan, to reduce us to believing we are animals, then that we are God not small gods, and that we can create our own destiny.

Our mind can dream up and create concepts, correct? The concepts we come up with doesn't create our mind, .. our mind creates the concepts. So the only thing that is outside of this physical reality is our mind, .. so could God be an Eternal, Infinite Creative Mind? And our mind be OF God?

Thats a mighty leap your making here. Im going to disagree with you that our minds are outside of the physical world. There is ample evidence that the two are inextricable. Damage the brain and the mind suffers. No reason to believe anything else is happening here.

Yes, you are correct that the spirit is limited to this physical body. Like I said, this is what makes us individuals, otherwise we would be God, one Spirit.
This is our temple, remember? We are also the temple of God; "He that destroys this temple, God will destroy". Damage the brain and the mind suffers, that's right. The mind by itself without the body is God, and it will return to God, but that individuality that makes us who we are will be resurrected into a new body, including the spirit that made us who we are.

Guessing becaause ...??
Because youre drawing conclusions based not upon evidence and reason, but of leaps of logic borne of faith.

Do you believe we have a body? How about a brain? How about a mind? I am trying to put all this into perspective. This is why I asked you how much you know about quantum theory, because if you listen to these scientific geniuses you would see that what I'm telling you here is what they are trying to figure out. They know from all their observations of every field of science that there is more than what can be detected. This is what quantum theory is all about, except like I said; "From a limited physical perspective". This is why I can prove the theory of relativity wrong, because I am not limited to what is in my brain, but these scientist geniuses are. So my lack of education is really my greatest blessing from God.

When you appeal to a supernatural entity, and ignore evidence (brain and mind inextricably linked), then yes, I believe you are guessing or wishing.

I am NOT appealing to no supernatural entity, I know what they are, and even seen one. God is not a demon, demons are created spirits who have been cast out of Heaven. You know the story, well I KNOW the reality of it, and not just with my mind, but with my own two eyes, and with witnesses.

The mind/spirit IS linked to the body/brain, as I have explained. But the mind is NOT a physical manifestation of the brain, one is spirit (operator) of the brain (computer). I mean come on, just think about it. When I want to touch something, or smell something, or go or do something, it's not my nose, hands and feet dictating that to my brain, something else is. It is the mind which is outside of the brain. still trapped within this body because as I said, .. it is what makes us who we are.

Yes, obviously all animals exhibit the possession of consciousness and sensory awareness, and that too was given to them by our Creator. But I cannot speak for dolphins or elephants, or even about that talking donkey who said a few words to the angry Prophet, all I can talk about is you and me, humans.

No, you can, however, talk about the evidence observed in nature and science, and draw reasonable conclusions from it.

Yes, but that's as far as I can go. I can dissect the monkey, but that's about all I can learn of it, scientific observation. But with you I can reason and put what we learned by the dissection together to answer things. We could never come to answering these other questions as to where we came from, and where we are going by dissecting a human.

It is in us humans that I see characteristics of a God who could create this universe and everything in it. Now if some human would have claimed they created the Universe and everything in it, then I would seek evidence in him/her, but for now, all I have is our characteristics, and that since we didn't create this universe, someone LIKE us could have.

That is a much larger leap of faith then saying the universe always was. For an excellent explanation on what science has to say on this topic, I suggest listening to Sean Carrolls debates on this subject.

I will make that a point, Sean Carroll, right?

Now I have read in a Book that there is a Being in whose image we were created, only He is Spirit. Now this makes all the sense in the world, we are an image of our Invisible Eternal All mighty Creator. So if we didn't create the universe, then it must have been Him.

Why do you believe that this assertion in your book is accurate, but do not believe in stoning adulterers to death? If you are getting your knowledge and morals from said book, why are you picking and choosing? What makes some parts worth following and others not so much?

The Old testament revealed to us the Laws, then the consequences in breaking those laws. Then came the Son of God and made us understand that we all deserve to be stoned (Remember the prostitute they brought before Jesus, what did He say to them?) And He revealed that God has chosen Him to pay off our debts, and just by accepting His body as sacrifice in our stead, we can be saved. It's not picking and choosing which parts to follow and which we don't, it is a story of our creation, our fall, and our way back to God as Children.

Better chance of survival by working together, right? Tell me, how many millions of years did it take man to figure out that working together increased their survival?
Modern man, as I understand it, is only approximately 200,000 years old. Theres nothing to figure out. Larger numbers of people thrive when in social communities. So, the creatures that are more likely to procreate (the ones that survive) are those that are social. So their offspring is more than likely social.

I will not debate your religious views, I have done my share. If you can believe that science proves that modern man is 200,000 years old, you should be able to believe the facts I am presenting here, verified by writings only 2-5000 years old, and what we can actually observe and have recorded now. Not 200,000 years ago.

After how many extinctions before man figured this out?

Um, I dont think you fully understand how evolution works. There are non-social creatures that still exist today. Some species of sharks, for example.

So, Im not sure what your point is here.

How and why did man figure out he must survive? How did he know the difference between survival and extinction? Time? How?

What gave man the idea that survival is better than extinction?

Already answered above. I think youre putting effect before cause.

No, Evolution is.
The effect is death, and the cause is whatever caused the death/extinction? How did man know that certain effects will cause his extinction unless he experienced extinction? What time? Did time teach them about extinction?

Did 'extinction' teach them this?
Extinction of what?

Extinction of the human race! How did human figure out that extinction is bad and that they should do whatever possible to avoid it?

Or was it 'before' man was a single celled bacterium: "It is better to be a single celled bacterium then to be non-existent" Then man becomes a single celled bacterium.
"It is better to cooperate with other single celled bacterium then become extinct, and we know this because we know how bad extinction is" ??
Come on, talking about assumptions ?

Your logic escapes me here. Youre going to have to clarify your point. When was man a single celled bacterium? Thats a new one to me.

Evolutionists here told me that monkeys don't change into humans, that monkeys remain monkeys, humans remain humans, zebras remain zebras, and crocodiles remain crocodiles. They told me there is and never was such a thing as crockaduck. So if they all evolved from single celled bacterium, then man evolved from single celled human bacterium, grew lungs, legs, arms and seeing a banana on a tree crawled out of the primordial soup, climbed the tree, developed the digestive system, ate the banana and you know the rest of the story.

How life knows to cooperate? If that is your question, then the answer is simple. Some forms of life benefit from this and others don't. I don't understand your confusion.

Again, so why did man stick together in groups? You said because it was beneficial for their survival, right? Was this an intentional thing they did to survive? I thought Evolution was no will of anyone or anything, but now there is intent to survive?? So HOW do they know that survival is better than extinction? Did they experience extinction?
If so, then let's say another species of man evolves, did the previous extinct humans leave some documents/records left behind to help the next humans (or whatever) not do what they did so they could survive?

Regarding my signature being fine as it is: That sure is a religious statement.
Please justify this comment.

Too long.

Yes, and? What's your point?
Quote:
Not everything in the bible is worthy of respect, so, I assume you pick and choose which parts to follow?

This was my point.

I see, thank you.
As I said before, the Old testament was about laws, and consequences in breaking those laws. Jesus brought us above the law with a price. He paid the price for us not being able to keep the law, and set us free. Christians want to keep the law (kill whoever they deem an axis of evil), AND still expect to have Jesus save them.

I don't pick and choose like the religious people do.

Of course not everything in there is worthy of respect. Like, why should I respect the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah? But should I disrespect the Bible for telling us about that story?

No, but you can have no respect for the lines I quoted (which it appears that you ignored).

Please forgive me, I might of been tired like I am now. Please tell me again.

The Bible is instruction on how to find God and follow what His Spirit teaches us.
So you say. Just what makes you the authority or so certain that your interpretation is correct? Why is your opinion better than the priests at my local church?

All the best,

I am nothing, just consider what I tell you. If it is the truth, it is from God, not me Odon. If I prove what is false, and reveal the truth about a thing, give God the praise. I am not here to gain anything in this flesh, it is my obligation to you my friend to reveal the truth. It is your duty to discern truth from the lies, it is your moral obligation. It has eternal consequences.

God bless you my dear friend.

[KenRU]

[Replying to post 1183 by arian]

Arian,

Unfortunately, I'm inclined to agree with the poster above, that responding would be a complete waste of time.

Big Bang/Pre-Big Bang
Please check out Sean Carroll's debate with William Lane Craig regarding the Big Bang:

Evolution
It is quite evident that you really do not know very much about evolution and how it works, yet you are ardently opposed to it. And, evidently, equally opposed to learning about it as well. And that is how informed decisions are made. For what it is worth, you may want to learn more about something before dismissing it outright.

Evidence
You said: This is why I can prove the theory of relativity wrong, because I am not limited to what is in my brain, but these scientist geniuses are. So my lack of education is really my greatest blessing from God.
Being willfully ignorant on a subject is not a selling feature in my book. You actually make my point for me here: Religion inhibits science.

You have made it clear, that you ignore real world and verifiable evidence in order to suit your belief system. And that is your choice.

Unfortunately, that being the case, there can be no fruitful way to have a meaningful conversation (at least none that I see).

Good luck in your endeavors, Arian. Perhaps in the future we will be able to have a meaningful conversation. Once that places a value on science and education.