Conquer Club

Oh come on we're at page 87 and people are still posting rubbish like that?

There is oodles and oodles (yes that is a scientific term) of evidence for both evolution and the big bang. It's just the people who have influenced you have lied to you in order to falsely discredit it. The mere fact you're saying evolution tries to explain the big bang or abiogensis shows just how big the gaps in the stuff you've been taught are. That's not your fault, but get out there and read up, do actual research on the subjects and you will find all the evidence you need. It's all out there, you just have to go look for it.

Nobody (at least nobody sensible) will ever say that there can be no creator. But we're talking about biblical God here, and there is both no evidence and huge contradictions in the definition for Him. If there were the same contradictions and inconsistencies in a scientific theory it would be laughed out of town before you even got to the 2nd day of Genesis in the story.

One day I hope you realise just how insulting you're being to the entire human race to suggest that science is faith, but I'm not going to hold my breath....

warmonger1981 wrote:creation and evolution are both religions since they are both based on faith. there is no proof for either side to be right or wrong. creationists say that God made all this. evolutionists say we all came from a big bang and came from a rock and somehow transformed into some type of organism that evolved into what we have today.... yet both cant truly prove beyond a dout who is right, thats why both are religions. i skipped a few parts in both creations and evolution processes but you get the idea....

what would qualify as evidence in your opinion?

warmonger1981 wrote:creation and evolution are both religions since they are both based on faith. there is no proof for either side to be right or wrong. creationists say that God made all this. evolutionists say we all came from a big bang and came from a rock and somehow transformed into some type of organism that evolved into what we have today.... yet both cant truly prove beyond a dout who is right, thats why both are religions. i skipped a few parts in both creations and evolution processes but you get the idea....

You have made the single most retarded post in the history of online forums. I'm shocked that you've done so little research into either subject and yet you manage to speak on them as if you know what you're talking about.

Jesus Christ, do some fucking research. The biggest difference between creationism and evolution is that you won't find evolution in the fiction section of a library.

oss spy wrote:

warmonger1981 wrote:creation and evolution are both religions since they are both based on faith. there is no proof for either side to be right or wrong. creationists say that God made all this. evolutionists say we all came from a big bang and came from a rock and somehow transformed into some type of organism that evolved into what we have today.... yet both cant truly prove beyond a dout who is right, thats why both are religions. i skipped a few parts in both creations and evolution processes but you get the idea....

You have made the single most retarded post in the history of online forums. I'm shocked that you've done so little research into either subject and yet you manage to speak on them as if you know what you're talking about.

Jesus Christ, do some fucking research. The biggest difference between creationism and evolution is that you won't find evolution in the fiction section of a library.

and yet his post contained more useful information than yours

john9blue wrote:

oss spy wrote:

warmonger1981 wrote:creation and evolution are both religions since they are both based on faith. there is no proof for either side to be right or wrong. creationists say that God made all this. evolutionists say we all came from a big bang and came from a rock and somehow transformed into some type of organism that evolved into what we have today.... yet both cant truly prove beyond a dout who is right, thats why both are religions. i skipped a few parts in both creations and evolution processes but you get the idea....

You have made the single most retarded post in the history of online forums. I'm shocked that you've done so little research into either subject and yet you manage to speak on them as if you know what you're talking about.

Jesus Christ, do some fucking research. The biggest difference between creationism and evolution is that you won't find evolution in the fiction section of a library.

and yet his post contained more useful information than yours

How so John?Do you know of religions named 'creation' or 'evolution'..?The study of evolution is not remotely concerned with the big bang,or abiogenesis as you well know.To describe this nonesense as retarded is generous yet you think the 1st post contains more useful info?

Well if you have evidence of humans evolving from nothing with no gaps (such as a missing link) prove it otherwise I say you have FAITH in science. Remember science also told humanity the earth was flat. So if you lived in those times you must have been right. Science is nothing more than a bunch of people all being able to agree on something even though they may change their opinion many times throughout the process...

God is not bound by laws of physics. God is outside of time.space and material. In the beginning (time) God created the heaven (space) and earth(material). A day to God could be millions of years to humans. So as far as Genesis goes you might not be able to take it litterally crisps

I also think that people look to science for all the answers as if it were some sort of God with all the answers. Remember what is fact today will be dismissed years from now. Funny how humans think we know everything yet we are still infants in the big picture of time and knowledge.

warmonger1981 wrote:I also think that people look to science for all the answers as if it were some sort of God with all the answers. Remember what is fact today will be dismissed years from now. Funny how humans think we know everything yet we are still infants in the big picture of time and knowledge.

Are you a human being?

If "yes," how do you know?

warmonger1981 wrote:I also think that people look to science for all the answers as if it were some sort of God with all the answers. Remember what is fact today will be dismissed years from now. Funny how humans think we know everything yet we are still infants in the big picture of time and knowledge.

I thought people look to answers in Science, because it is, well Science.


--Andy

warmonger1981 wrote:I also think that people look to science for all the answers as if it were some sort of God with all the answers. Remember what is fact today will be dismissed years from now. Funny how humans think we know everything yet we are still infants in the big picture of time and knowledge.

That is precisely the strength of the scientific method,it is a work in progress,it doesn't pretend to give us anything but the latest answers and rejoices when new ones are accepted.Contrast that to theism whose adherents often arrogantly believe they can provide absolute answers to questions that are on a scale of complexity way beyond the comprehension of our partially evolved mammalian species.Anything but humble IMHO..

Your other post has been dealt with by a few others.... so....

warmonger1981 wrote:Well if you have evidence of humans evolving from nothing with no gaps (such as a missing link) prove it otherwise I say you have FAITH in science. Remember science also told humanity the earth was flat. So if you lived in those times you must have been right. Science is nothing more than a bunch of people all being able to agree on something even though they may change their opinion many times throughout the process...

Evolution isn't limited to ONLY humans. On mammals evolutionary changes take thousands or millions of years to become distinguishable from normal generational mutations like "he just has an abnormally large nose/ears/whatever". We can however show the effects on very short lifespan fast reproducing organisms such as in the following page:

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn1 ... e-lab.html

warmonger1981 wrote:God is not bound by laws of physics. God is outside of time.space and material. In the beginning (time) God created the heaven (space) and earth(material). A day to God could be millions of years to humans. So as far as Genesis goes you might not be able to take it litterally crisps

I'm not the one taking anything literally. I'm taking every piece of information I'm given, and weighing it up against all the other pieces of information I've been given, based on credibility and provability of premises, rationality of processes, validity of conclusions and competence and expertise of the person making the interpretation from raw facts to narrative. You should try it sometime, it really is illuminating! It's called the scientific method, and it's why your sunday school teacher shouldn't be preaching astrophysics or advanced biology and should stick to religion.

Didnt say I was a believer in religion did I? Didn't think so. Also didn't say I believed completely in science. And no this life we Think we live Could be all a dream. I mean how does anyone know this is all nothing more than a dream? I guess what I'm saying is no one can say for sure. All the information in the world will neither prove for or against religion or science. That's where faith comes into play. Scientists THINK their right or have faith in the end answer. If science is so right then why are there still billions of believers in religion if it is so easily proven false?

warmonger1981 wrote:Didnt say I was a believer in religion did I? Didn't think so. Also didn't say I believed completely in science. And no this life we Think we live Could be all a dream. I mean how does anyone know this is all nothing more than a dream? I guess what I'm saying is no one can say for sure. All the information in the world will neither prove for or against religion or science. That's where faith comes into play. Scientists THINK their right or have faith in the end answer. If science is so right then why are there still billions of believers in religion if it is so easily proven false?

Evidence suggests that life isn't a dream (at least in the definition of a dream you are suggesting). This sort of argument sort of sounds like the 'Tides go in, tides go out' argument that circled around the zeitgeist last year or so.

Oh, and there is a little beauty in piece by the Bad Astronomer. Recently some new models of Earth-Moon system show that maybe the collision that created the system was bigger than first thought and widely accepted, and if it turns out to be based on better evidence than the previous model, science will likely embrace it (eventually, even science has bias at times!)


--Andy

warmonger1981 wrote:Didnt say I was a believer in religion did I? Didn't think so. Also didn't say I believed completely in science. And no this life we Think we live Could be all a dream. I mean how does anyone know this is all nothing more than a dream? I guess what I'm saying is no one can say for sure. All the information in the world will neither prove for or against religion or science. That's where faith comes into play. Scientists THINK their right or have faith in the end answer. If science is so right then why are there still billions of believers in religion if it is so easily proven false?

So now you know what scientists think!!Can you name even one scientist who has said religion is easily proven false,as opposed to one who doesn't believe in the claims made by religion?If you are going to make sweeping and uninformed claims like this you have to back them up before they can be taken seriously......

warmonger1981 wrote:Didnt say I was a believer in religion did I? Didn't think so. Also didn't say I believed completely in science. And no this life we Think we live Could be all a dream. I mean how does anyone know this is all nothing more than a dream? I guess what I'm saying is no one can say for sure. All the information in the world will neither prove for or against religion or science. That's where faith comes into play. Scientists THINK their right or have faith in the end answer. If science is so right then why are there still billions of believers in religion if it is so easily proven false?

Actually you did say you are a believer in religion:

warmonger1981 wrote:I am a man of faith by the way and thats all I have.

From this thread:

viewtopic.php?f=8&t=175962&p=3863373#p3863373

Ever read any Descartes by any chance?

All the information we have that is coming down on one side or the other if the question is "what can teach us more about how the universe works?" is coming down on the side of science.

There is no information to come down on either side if the question is "What made the universe start?". Religions make claims about their stories but none that I have seen has ever provided a scrap of actual evidence. Science doesn't even try to give an answer, as it's outside of it's remit. Talk to any astrophysicist and they'll tell you the furthest back we can go with current theories is a few millionths of a second after the big bang.

If there is such a thing as "faith in science" then it's not faith that our scientific ANSWERS are correct. It's faith that our scientific METHOD is correct. And even then faith is the wrong word, because faith is belief without evidence, and we have so much evidence that the scientific method works to constantly allow us to better our understanding of the universe. In fact, the very post you made in this thread and others is part of that. Without scientific advances in electronics, materials science, algorithmic mathematics and hundreds of other various basic and advanced techniques we'd still be writing this conversation to each other on cave walls with ground up plant dyes.

If you really don't "believe in science" then turn off your computer, turn off any electric lights, take your clothes off because chances are they are made of semi-synthetic fabrics (unless your wear 100% silk and cotton), don't watch TV, don't read printed books, only hand written ones, walk (or ride a horse/donkey) to work tomorrow and when you get there don't use any computers or machinery. I hope you don't need glasses or contact lenses because without science you wouldn't be able to see clearly. No beer either, brewing is just a by-product of chemistry. When you have lunch you better make sure it's fresh from the farm and cooked over a fire or in a wood oven rather than in an electric/gas oven. Throw your mobile phone away as that's just faith based too. But of course there's no evidence that science is right, just an entire global infrastructure that, when you consider it's complexity, is a "miracle" in and of itself that it doesn't just fall over and fail given that science is just "faith".

chang im not speaking for all scientists on a whole but science in general proves something to be right or wrong does it not? when it came to stating: warmonger1981 wrote:
Didnt say I was a believer in religion did I? Didn't think so. Also didn't say I believed completely in science. And no this life we Think we live Could be all a dream. I mean how does anyone know this is all nothing more than a dream? I guess what I'm saying is no one can say for sure. All the information in the world will neither prove for or against religion or science. That's where faith comes into play. Scientists THINK their right or have faith in the end answer. If science is so right then why are there still billions of believers in religion if it is so easily proven false?


Actually you did say you are a believer in religion:

warmonger1981 wrote:
I am a man of faith by the way and thats all I have.
lets not get petty .. i was speaking in this forum........and even if science proves evolution does it prove that god does or doesnt exist ??

Actually you did say you are a believer in religion:

warmonger1981 wrote:
I am a man of faith by the way and thats all I have.
lets not get petty .. i was speaking in this forum........and even if science proves evolution does it prove that god does or doesnt exist ??[/quote]

Strawman,nobody has come close to arguing it does...not being petty but you seem seriously confused here..

When you go to open a door, you don't doubt the existence of the doorknob by pondering that there may be no doorknob, or no door for that matter. If you sincerely doubt reality, you'll attempt to walk through. But no one (who's sane) does this. Why? Because of sensual experience and learning:

This isn't an exercise of faith. This is experience and action. What we perceive with our senses is real, and sensual experience is the fundamental means with which science operates. To call this faith is completely wrong and evidently makes no sense.

The belief in something which is not observable or is immaterial while positing cause-and-effect relationships between the real, observable world and this Supernatural Thing is the essence of faith (and theology). That's not science by any stretch of the English language.

warmonger1981 does not understand this fundamental dichotomy between science and faith. And he seems to be a radical skeptic of reality, which is unfortunate. Perhaps he doubts the existence of a doorknob right before he extends his hand to open the door? (I doubt it. His fingers type, but his actions in everyday life reject his radical skepticism---unless of course he's mentally ill, which may be the case).

warmonger1981 wrote:If science is so right then why are there still billions of believers in religion if it is so easily proven false?

1. Because cognitive bias.
2. Because network effects of religion.
3. Because of the benefits of weak ties within a club (i.e. local religious community and a more widespread identity).
4. Because low search costs to fundamental questions which are difficult to answer.
(Why did A happen? Cuz God. Oh okay! /end dilemma).
etc.

In other words, the benefits still offset the costs.


1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias
2. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_effect
3. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interpersonal_ties
3. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Club_goods
4. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Search_cost
4. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Substituti ... onomics%29
4. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God_of_the_gaps

warmonger1981 wrote:......and even if science proves evolution does it prove that god does or doesnt exist ??

No, but it does narrow down the alleged cause-and-effect arguments espoused by various religions. Of course, some may reject the scientific explanation due to reasons #1-4 and etc.

So it's petty to point out that you have claimed to be a man of faith when you said you hadn't?

I wonder what that makes it to point out that science is faith and not based on evidence?

crispybits wrote:So it's petty to point out that you have claimed to be a man of faith when you said you hadn't?

I wonder what that makes it to point out that science is faith and not based on evidence?

Crispy I think Warmonger has simply got in over his head and doesn't know how to extricate himself so he continues to dig himself a bigger hole..

No, if that was the case I'd be more sympathetic.

What he's done is deliberately try and misrepresent himself in order to appear less religious than he is, more neutral, however you want to phrase it, and that's just plain dishonest.

I'd much rather talk to Lionz (who I actually believe is far more deluded than warmonger, but that's just personal opinion) because at least he's honest about his beliefs and isn't trying to sneak under the radar by pretending to be something he's not.

Warmonger ask yourself, if you feel you have to lie to make your point how strong is your point to start with?

BigBallinStalin wrote:When you go to open a door, you don't doubt the existence of the doorknob by pondering that there may be no doorknob, or no door for that matter. If you sincerely doubt reality, you'll attempt to walk through..

Slightly pedantic, but if you sincerely doubt reality you won't do anything, you'll lay down somewhere and close you eyes and just not bother with it at all. Which is why the solipisistic argument always goes nowhere

[quote="crispybits"]No, if that was the case I'd be more sympathetic.

What he's done is deliberately try and misrepresent himself in order to appear less religious than he is, more neutral, however you want to phrase it, and that's just plain dishonest.

I'd much rather talk to Lionz (who I actually believe is far more deluded than warmonger, but that's just personal opinion) because at least he's honest about his beliefs and isn't trying to sneak under the radar by pretending to be something he's not.

Warmonger ask yourself, if you feel you have to lie to make your point how strong is your point to start with?[/quote

You could well be right,I also agree with you about Lionz,at least he isn't devious.