Atheists are so funny!

PostmodernProphet said:
just mentioning the last time the human race was reduced to a boatload......
Click to expand...

But according to the Bible she did not have any daughters that survived the flood, idiot. Further, according to the science this is based on the ancient population never dropped anywhere close to 8 people but was at least tens of thousands. You are cherry picking.
 
Professor Baxter said:
But according to the Bible she did not have any daughters that survived the flood, idiot.
Click to expand...

????....did you think none of her DNA passed to her three sons?.....

Further, according to the science this is based on the ancient population never dropped anywhere close to 8 people but was at least tens of thousands.
Click to expand...

obviously that isn't true....at one point it stemmed from one, in fact at the very point we may be discussing.....
 
PostmodernProphet said:
????....did you think none of her DNA passed to her three sons?......
Click to expand...

MATRILINEAL. Her sons could not pass on her mitochondrial dna. Try to read and understand your source, instead of just mining it for whatever you can use to confirm your bias.

PostmodernProphet said:
obviously that isn't true....at one point it stemmed from one, in fact at the very point we may be discussing.....
Click to expand...

No, it did not obviously stem from one at any point and certainly not at the point we are discussing. Again, quit cherry picking.
 
Last edited:
This is one of those arguments that drive me nuts. What does it matter? WE ARE HERE.....period.

I believe that God created the universe....I believe that there was an original male and female that spawned the modern human race.

With our current knowledge of science....we know that humans didn't always look like we do today and that our ancestors were more ape-like. I am absolutely fine with the notion that God planted the seeds of life on this planet and let it grow under his care. I am also fine with the idea that we may not be the only....or even the FIRST world God created....leaving the possibility of life...even more advanced life than us out there.

I don't limit God's abilities to what I read in a book that was written when knowledge of the Natural World was so limited.

IMO, the perfection of the world and the surrounding galaxies and universes is indicative of a guiding hand. To me, it makes more sense than some mysterious "Big Bang" that happened Eons ago...and everything after happened randomly.

So....the bottom line is that we are here....living our lives. To argue incessantly about trivialities is insane. Believe....don't believe....I don't care. God wants us in the here and now....love....compassion....understanding....that's what God wants from us.
 
Steelplate said:
This is one of those arguments that drive me nuts. What does it matter? WE ARE HERE.....period.

I believe that God created the universe....I believe that there was an original male and female that spawned the modern human race.

With our current knowledge of science....we know that humans didn't always look like we do today and that our ancestors were more ape-like. I am absolutely fine with the notion that God planted the seeds of life on this planet and let it grow under his care. I am also fine with the idea that we may not be the only....or even the FIRST world God created....leaving the possibility of life...even more advanced life than us out there.

I don't limit God's abilities to what I read in a book that was written when knowledge of the Natural World was so limited.

IMO, the perfection of the world and the surrounding galaxies and universes is indicative of a guiding hand. To me, it makes more sense than some mysterious "Big Bang" that happened Eons ago...and everything after happened randomly.

So....the bottom line is that we are here....living our lives. To argue incessantly about trivialities is insane. Believe....don't believe....I don't care. God wants us in the here and now....love....compassion....understanding....that's what God wants from us.
Click to expand...

This has nothing to do with your belief in God.

There was no original male and female that spawned the human race.

It matters because science helps us to solve problems, many of us are genuinely curious and others try to use knowledge/ignorance to control.
 
PostmodernProphet said:
or the descendant of someone Eve gave birth to a thousand years earlier......and yes, that merely steps the incestual act back a few generations.......of course you have the same problem with the first human that evolved from a primordial slime ancestor.....with the added complication of the frustration that must have occurred when he discovered the only other human that evolved was another guy......
Click to expand...

I am going to revisit this because as discussion has expanded pmp has conclusively proven he doesn't understand theories of speciation, which he criticizes...


There was not one individual that suddenly evolved from some previous form. Male or female, who would they breed with? That can't work and you may be so ignorant that you think evolutionary theorist are trapped by such an obvious flaw, but they are not. It is not necessary that by some strange chance that two of opposite sex evolved independently into some new form, either. That is highly unlikely and still fails to explain speciation. Therefore, there is no necessity of sibling incestual relationships, not that it would be a relevant criticism, since evolution is amoral rather than immoral like your Bible stories.


To explain the basic theory... A population of form "a" is separated into groups "b" and "c" and breeding between these subgroups ceases. Each group could contain any number of individual members. Since the groups are separated mutations are no longer shared within gene pool "a." Over many generations "b" and "c" become "new" forms and their mutations are so great that they are no longer able to produce fertile offspring from a pairing of "b" and "c." At no midpoint is it necessary that it be superficially clear that "b" is no longer "a" or that "c" is no longer "a."
 
Last edited:
Professor Baxter said:
This has nothing to do with your belief in God.

There was no original male and female that spawned the human race.

It matters because science helps us to solve problems, many of us are genuinely curious and others try to use knowledge/ignorance to control.
Click to expand...

When have I ever said anything against science? God gave us an intelligent and adaptable brain for one reason....to use it....Not to cover your ears, eyes and mouth like the "hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil monkeys"

IMO...and yes....it is my opinion.....that makes God even more dynamic and complex than we can imagine.
 
Professor Baxter said:
You asked what does it matter and I answered.
Click to expand...

Well...I was referring to the argument of this godawful chicken/egg argument. I believe the way I do, you believe the way you do..

I know that I am somewhat of an anomaly on these boards in which I believe in God and Jesus Christ AND do not deny scientific research/conclusions, but someone has to speak out against unproductive, inane arguments like this.

You are never going change PMP's stance....he is never going to change yours. My question is.....why can't it be both?

The more we learn about Natural Laws, the more it makes sense that an omnipotent being would work within those laws to create. Why would God discourage us to learn these things for the betterment of mankind? Of course there are dark and evil applications to many of our achievements and growth. But that doesn't mean that growth and achievement is evil in and of itself.

Like I said....the more we learn, the more my awe of God grows....from the Macro science such as Astronomy to the Micro science and even Nano science of our microscopic world.
 
Steelplate said:
Well...I was referring to the argument of this godawful chicken/egg argument. I believe the way I do, you believe the way you do..

I know that I am somewhat of an anomaly on these boards in which I believe in God and Jesus Christ AND do not deny scientific research/conclusions, but someone has to speak out against unproductive, inane arguments like this.

You are never going change PMP's stance....he is never going to change yours. My question is.....why can't it be both?

The more we learn about Natural Laws, the more it makes sense that an omnipotent being would work within those laws to create. Why would God discourage us to learn these things for the betterment of mankind? Of course there are dark and evil applications to many of our achievements and growth. But that doesn't mean that growth and achievement is evil in and of itself.

Like I said....the more we learn, the more my awe of God grows....from the Macro science such as Astronomy to the Micro science and even Nano science of our microscopic world.
Click to expand...

If you are objecting to the information I have presented on the science then you are rejecting scientific research and conclusions. There is nothing inane about my argument. Pmp misunderstood and continues to purposefully misrepresent the science, because he is an ignorant scumbag. I have been correcting his errors and lies.

I don't care about changing pmp's stance. I don't want him on my side.

Again, it has nothing to do with whether you believe in God. You can believe in God and evolution. You can believe in Genesis as allegory and evolution. You can't believe in the literal truth of Genesis and evolution.

There is nothing about the science that bolsters the idea of God. I don't know what you are talking about "dark and evil applications" but the truth or falsehood of an idea is not to be judged by how you imagine it might applied.
 
Steelplate said:
Well...I was referring to the argument of this godawful chicken/egg argument. I believe the way I do, you believe the way you do..

I know that I am somewhat of an anomaly on these boards in which I believe in God and Jesus Christ AND do not deny scientific research/conclusions, but someone has to speak out against unproductive, inane arguments like this.

You are never going change PMP's stance....he is never going to change yours. My question is.....why can't it be both?

The more we learn about Natural Laws, the more it makes sense that an omnipotent being would work within those laws to create. Why would God discourage us to learn these things for the betterment of mankind? Of course there are dark and evil applications to many of our achievements and growth. But that doesn't mean that growth and achievement is evil in and of itself.

Like I said....the more we learn, the more my awe of God grows....from the Macro science such as Astronomy to the Micro science and even Nano science of our microscopic world.
Click to expand...

Really can't be both. If you want to say some entity you call god kicked off the big bang and the rest followed scientific laws... ok. I still don't buy it -where was this "being" before the big bang? - but ok, if you want to call the force that caused the big bang god, go ahead.

But Adam and Eve? Rib creating a woman? That god is watching every sparrow that falls? That there was a flood but somehow Noah got 2 of everything onto the Ark and they were able to repopulate the world?

There was a Marge Piercy book, "Grass", where one of the main characters decided that people were like white blood cells... they have a job to do, including stopping evil/infection; but god didn't send us to do any particular action, anymore than we tell our white blood cells what to do.. it just happens because of our nature. Made more sense to me than the personal god so many people seem to have.

Your vision of religion is kinder, gentler than most, Steel. And if it brings you peace, comfort, a path through life - great.

But it isn't science. god doesn't have to work "within natural laws" because those laws are going to make things happen, omnipotent being or not. A god's only purpose would be to contravene natural law/science and, well, that just doesn't happen.
 
Professor Baxter said:
If you are objecting to the information I have presented on the science then you are rejecting scientific research and conclusions. There is nothing inane about my argument. Pmp misunderstood and continues to purposefully misrepresent the science, because he is an ignorant scumbag. I have been correcting his errors and lies.

I don't care about changing pmp's stance. I don't want him on my side.

Again, it has nothing to do with whether you believe in God. You can believe in God and evolution. You can believe in Genesis as allegory and evolution. You can't believe in the literal truth of Genesis and evolution.

There is nothing about the science that bolsters the idea of God. I don't know what you are talking about "dark and evil applications" but the truth or falsehood of an idea is not to be judged by how you imagine it might applied.
Click to expand...

You don't know what I am talking about "dark and evil applications"?.....how about nuclear fission? The same technology that gives us power can also be used to cause an extinction level event.

Other than that....I agree with you.....I'm just saying it's a dumb argument(IMO).
 
Steelplate said:
You don't know what I am talking about "dark and evil applications"?.....how about nuclear fission? The same technology that gives us power can also be used to cause an extinction level event.

Other than that....I agree with you.....I'm just saying it's a dumb argument(IMO).
Click to expand...

It's not a dumb argument to correct his strawman characterization of evolution or his misrepresentation / misunderstanding of mitochondrial Eve. You have exhibited similiar errors. We did not come from two people or even eight, the science he quoted does not support such nonsense and even contradicts it.
 
Professor Baxter said:
It's not a dumb argument to correct his strawman characterization of evolution or his misrepresentation / misunderstanding of mitochondrial Eve. You have exhibited similiar errors. We did not come from two people or even eight, the science he quoted does not support such nonsense and even contradicts it.
Click to expand...

Does it matter? Is scientific research going to stop in its tracks because of him? Are people going to stop believing in the the literal text of the bible because of you? Is this anything more than two people flexing their "Internet muscles"?

I am just trying to interject some.common sense from a perspective of a person who doesn't see a conflict between science and faith.

But then again.....am Ai going to change either of your minds?....fuck....Internet muscles flexed, I suppose.
 
tekkychick said:
Really can't be both.
Click to expand...
both what, a god and science?.....of course it can....

the rest followed scientific laws
Click to expand...
where were the scientific laws before the Big Bang.....obviously if they had been in place before, the bang would have banged.....


That there was a flood but somehow Noah got 2 of everything onto the Ark
Click to expand...

there were fewer "everythings" then than there are now......didn't need two lions and two cheetahs and two tigers and two bobcats and two housecats.......just needed two felines....

but god didn't send us to do any particular action
Click to expand...

but what if he did?.....the Bible says he did....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top