Dixie - In Memoriam
New member
I don't think a unicellular organism evolved into anything, do you have proof it evolved into a bird?
Scientific Evidence of God
- Thread starter Dixie - In Memoriam
- Start date
I don't think a unicellular organism evolved into anything, do you have proof it evolved into a bird?
I know YOU don't think that, because YOU do not accept the theory of evolution.
But that is what the theory of evolution IS. So, since we have clearly established that you do not understand it, one iota, please refrain from talking about it, pending further study.
Read the book and educate yourself, Dix. Then we can have a real conversation starting from knowledge not some basic question that has already been studied with a logical conclusion so easily explained.
Your question in the original post is not scientific evidence of god, it in fact supports natural selection and buttresses the theory of evolution. Because you were ignorant of the studies previously done, you asked a question, there is nothing wrong with that. When the question was answered you began a spin campaign rather than simply using the information, educating yourself, and working on a different tack that may not already have been studied so thoroughly..
If you do indeed come here to learn, then use the information to educate yourself on this subject so that you can bring your argument with strength rather than with ignorance and become a benefit rather than a detriment to your own argument.
We have evidence that it evolved into a multi-cellular life form through the fossil record. From that we have further evidence that those multi-cellular life forms evolved into others through tiny steps and over billions of years.
It is my opinion that evolution was the tool used by the Creator. It seems to be your opinion that the evidence was "planted" or something. Can you tell me what you are trying to say here, you seem to have gone far off track?
Dixie - In Memoriam
New member
No Damo, you educate yourself. Then we can have a real conversation starting from knowledge. Or better yet, don't bother educating yourself Damo, just continue on in your profoundly bigoted way, proclaiming yourself smarter than the rest of us, and denigrating the people you speak to. It's far better for you to insult me and call me names, than to actually debate me on the issues, because you can't debate.
The question hasn't been studied because you can't go back in time and study it, all you can do is speculate on what you THINK may be the case, and that is ALL you have presented here. And there has been no logical conclusion drawn, and nothing explained, except by closed-minded egotistical bigots like you, who want to brag about your intellect.
Dixie - In Memoriam
New member
What is ironic... I have read Origin of the Species, and I'll bet you haven't!
Stating that you don't know what you are talking about based on your hyperbolic responses and simply ridiculous assertions about the testing doesn't say anything at all to your intelligence level.
One can be very intelligent and still be ignorant on a subject, like you clearly are on this one.
On this subject you start from a point of ignorance, and then when the knowledge (such as the studies done on the subject, and yes there were studies done, if you want to find out how they did the studies your best bet is to educate yourself, starting with the book presented in the link above) is presented you then decide to wallow in that ignorance as if it is a strength. Mocking what you don't know and refuse to learn is simply the dogmatic approach. It is, because you say it is...
I simply point out that there are studies done on this very question with the result what I have stated, gave you sourcing which cites the studies and expounds on them, and pointed you in a direction that can end your ignorance.
Your argument now consists of, "I prefer to stay unknowledgeable on this subject." That's fine, you have a right to ignorance. Just don't expect anybody to take you seriously on this subject any longer.
Do you remember any of it?
Dixie - In Memoriam
New member
Well, no Damo, I am not ignorant on the subject at all, but I understand why you must try and convince others that I am. Nothing has been tested, nothing has been "studied" really, you can't study or test a hypothesis for something that happened 100,000 years ago. You can do a great deal of speculating, and you can form opinions based on those speculations, which you have... but those are NOT proven facts of life, no matter how much you need to believe that.
But that's okay, you just go right on believing you are right, and they have done these studies and tests to determine why man worships, and those are proven facts of life. We all have to believe in something and have faith.
And again you make the same statement from ignorance, that "nothing has been studied"... you repeat it even though a source has been given.
Read the book, Dix. Then come back and we'll hold a conversation that isn't based on what you don't know. The first step is to get you to recognize that there is, or may be, a hole in your knowledge.
Dixie - In Memoriam
New member
Nope, no hole in my knowledge. I probably have more degrees than you do, and I probably read more each day than you do. I actually am interested in reading the book you posted, but now that you've been such an ass about it, I don't think I will read it any time soon, I have to forget about your anal retentive obnoxious behavior toward me first.
What you really need to recognize is, a "study" involves tests and examination of evidence resulting from those tests, and that can't be done on this. The closest we could come would be a study on why men think ancient man worshiped, and that would be a study of speculations. I am sure the book is an interesting read, but it doesn't conclude a damn thing relating to this, and neither have you. So you can take your opinionated bullshit and rhetoric and shove it where the sun don't shine, Damo.
lol.. no one ever did.
no only stupid inferior people have to do this.
Again, if you want to learn something about how the testing was done, you can educate yourself by reading the book. Instead you seem proud to wallow in your ignorance and pretend it is somehow a position of strength.
It is unlikely that you "probably read more" than me. I've never met anybody who has even come close to reading as much as I do. That isn't bragging, it is simple fact. I own more books than our county library has and have never gone a day without reading at the least for pleasure some chapters in a book in any time that I remember in my life since boot camp where books were a luxury we got later in the experience. I have read since I was four, and it is something that has been a lifelong passion of mine since the mystery of the written word was part of my knowledge.
Dixie - In Memoriam
New member
I guess 95% of us are stupid inferior people then, huh?
Dixie - In Memoriam
New member
It is impossible to test something that happened thousands of years ago. Sorry, but unless you invented a time machine and went back to the beginning, you can't formulate any kind of a test to conclude why man began worshiping. You can have opinions, you can find evidence to support your opinions, just as I did... but you can't prove (and neither can I) why mankind began worshiping.
Now Damo, you can talk down to me and call me names, and try to infer that I am ignorant and uneducated, all you like... I can't do a damn thing to stop you. But you have not made a case here, and you have not proven me wrong. In fact, when you resort to such low class tactics of debate, it makes me wonder if you've not been hanging around these pinheads too long and they are rubbing off on you! Once was a time, you stuck to the subject and avoided the ad homs and insults, I guess you've changed.
Beefy
Worst gambler ever
This happens in every thread of yours. When someone reasonably and methodically refutes your arguments, you then claim you are a victim of attack and say they are attacking your character.
The science to your claim is not there. It has been shown over, and over again that it is not science. Why, for the love of Peter you need science to validate your faith is beyond me. Maybe you like reading your own words, maybe you need to be shown to be wrong time after time, or maybe you're really as dense and obtuse as you appear to be. Only you know, well, you and your Science God.
So why does your God need to be proved by mans instruments of science anyway?
Please spare the 3 paragraph prelude and 4th paragraph evasion. Isn't faith good enough?
Dixie - In Memoriam
New member
Oh sorry, I felt Damo's comments that I was ignorant, uneducated, and uninformed, was more of a personal insult than methodical argumentative points. I guess in the "APP" sense, personal insults and name-calling is legitimate above the fray debate here now, huh?
Animal behavior certainly IS there, and it IS science. Sorry. Just because you want to reject what I presented, doesn't mean it is without merit, it just means you want (and need) to reject it. I actually only need to be shown I am wrong once, but that hasn't happened in this thread. I don't need science to validate MY beliefs, and this thread isn't about MY personal beliefs.
Doesn't "need" to be, but a lot of science types only accept science explanations, so I felt compelled to give them one.
Faith is fine for the faithful. What is your point? I should keep my mouth shut and not articulate my opinions because it offends Atheists?
Dixie - In Memoriam
New member
Well, like I said, my numbers are generous, there probably are really more than 95% who believe in something greater than self. So you are probably right about that part.