Morality Defined

You guys can keep lobbing shit bombs at me all you like, you haven't provided any evidence for any theory on origin of life. Except for AssClown, who thinks a theory on Evolution (which Mott thinks is 'fact') explains something it doesn't even deal with.

You can claim I don't understand what Science is, but I know that Science does not prove things and scientific theory is not established fact. If you don't believe me, go look up the words in a dictionary and see for yourself. This is not dependent on whether you took more Science in college, or if you are a nuclear physicist, the truth doesn't changed based on educational background. Science doesn't disprove ID any more than it proves ET, and the two theories are not related in subject at all.

My 'argument' here has always been, for open-mindedness and exploring the possibilities. Your counter argument has been closed-minded refusal to accept possibilities based on personal faith. Which one of us is the 'Scientist' and which is the 'Zealot'?

Now, I could have easily said, we were created because God said we were, and if you doubt his word you are going to hell.... case closed! It must be true! Don't need to hear your Science, don't need to hear your theory bullshit. But you see, I haven't done that, I haven't even mentioned God or Religion, other than to point out that an Intelligence source for design doesn't necessarily mean a God. You, on the other hand, continue to argue that your "god", Science, is infallible and empirical, and somehow proves intelligent design is impossible. You have offered no evidence to support this belief, so I have to assume it is a belief based on faith alone.
 
Mottleydude said:
I think! Therefor I am.:readit:
Click to expand...

Except in your case, where you're not thinking but you still exist and we still have to put up with you. Why do you feel compelled to interject some innuendo about my intelligence with almost every post? Is that your way of avoiding the topic, or do you think this is one of those 'he-said-she-said' things, where all things being equal, you are in better shape if you destroy my intellectual credibility?

Science is the method of gaining knowledge of the physical and natural world through observation, it makes no conclusions and proves nothing definitively with theory. It certainly doesn't disprove the possibility of Intelligent Design with a theory concerning species evolution. I noticed you didn't call AssClown's intelligence into question when he tried to make this argument, instead, you slapped him on the back and yucked it up about how 'stupid' Dixie is. Apparently, you have personal faith in some myth that ET somehow offers a scientific explanation of origin as well. It's really difficult to have a reasonable and rational conversation with faith-based zealots.

You have made so many illogical assumptions and inaccurate conclusions, if you really do have a degree in Science, they should come revoke it and issue a public apology for ever granting it to you in the first place. Nothing you are saying is conducive with any science I have every studied, and in fact, contradicts the very principles of science, as well as logic and rationality.
 
It's impossible to scientifically prove how life was created because there are multiple possibilities and it was a single event in Earths history four billion years ago. It is possible to make a scientific hypothesis on the matter, though. And ID isn't one of the ones currently being floated.
 
Watermark said:
It's impossible to scientifically prove how life was created because there are multiple possibilities and it was a single event in Earths history four billion years ago. It is possible to make a scientific hypothesis on the matter, though. And ID isn't one of the ones currently being floated.
Click to expand...

Well, you got one thing correct, it is impossible to scientifically prove how life was created. And it is good to know you believe it was 'created' and didn't just happen randomly. This puts you light years ahead of simpletons who are closed minded to possibilities of intelligence in design and creation.

It is possible to make a scientific hypothesis for natural and physical things we are aware of in our known universe. ID is certainly one of those. We can't conclude there was a 'single event' which occurred in Earth's history four billion years ago, we simply have no way of knowing or concluding this. If by chance, there was only a single event that originated all life forms we know of on the planet, I would suggest this is even more evidence of intelligence in the original design of life. To create something do diverse and inter-dependently tied together, in so many intricately complex forms with billions of complex components and functions, all working in a harmonious balance we call 'nature' and able to thrive and evolve for all this time, is pretty impressive stuff when you think about it. Obviously the work of genius intelligence. Of course, this can't be proven, so it is only a theory, but a very valid and legitimate theory, based on common sense and knowledge of scientific principle.

The only people who refute this, are Atheists who claim disbelief in God. Because of their chosen personal faith, they are unable to remain objective to the evidence, and examine the possibility of an intelligent designer, because this seems to contradict what their faith teaches. I suggest, it doesn't have a thing to do with a Deity. Intelligence doesn't necessitate a god, nor does the source of intelligence have to be defined to theorize its possibility.

As I have pointed out, Darwin's own theories of natural selection state, desirable attributes to the species are retained as undesirable traits are discarded. Mankind has maintained the psychological connection to Spirituality for as far back as we can observe. To this day, 96% of all humans, believe there is something greater than ourselves. Sorry to keep bringing up this nagging detail, but it is Science and it is observable evidence. Occam's Razor is a 'logics' principle which states that the explanation of any phenomenon should make as few assumptions as possible, eliminating those that make no difference in the observable predictions of the explanatory hypothesis or theory. I would say this means there is a fundamental reason humans, by and large, believe life was created. Any 'creation' of something so intricately and vastly complex as life, was most probably intelligent.
 
Mottleydude said:
He does at that.
Click to expand...

LOL... No, I don't, read the thread. I am not your typical wet-behind-the-ears religious nut, telling you how you're all going to hell for not listening to Gawd. My argument has been based on nothing from religion, and completely from Science and scientific observation. You can't refute it without sounding like idiots, so you resort to attacking me personally.

It's okay, I understand how it is. I like it better when I just leave you speechless, but baseless attacks and personal insults are fine too. Since you really have no argument left, I guess we can close this thread now... tell AssClown to catch the lights on his way out, will ya?
 
Dixie said:
LOL... No, I don't, read the thread. I am not your typical wet-behind-the-ears religious nut, telling you how you're all going to hell for not listening to Gawd. My argument has been based on nothing from religion, and completely from Science and scientific observation. You can't refute it without sounding like idiots, so you resort to attacking me personally.
Click to expand...
"Everything is so complex there must be a creator" is at best an inept sillyjism.
It's okay, I understand how it is. I like it better when I just leave you speechless, but baseless attacks and personal insults are fine too. Since you really have no argument left, I guess we can close this thread now... tell AssClown to catch the lights on his way out, will ya?
Click to expand...
This thread will never be closed. we will be happy to fist you repeatedly throughout all eternity, or until you just shut up with your stuipidity and go away.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top