Why does any exisatnce exist at all in the first place.

Ah yes. Like I've said before, the Big Bang and black holes are the only two events which appear to be irrational, and are the only events which may require 'God'. If anything is, Quantum mechanics is going to provide an answer to the first one. I sort of lied a little when I said that the Universe is governed by 'cause and effect'.
Events in quantum mechanics don't exactly follow that model, and things are a little more complicated. Things still have 'cause and effect', but the effect can occur before the cause.
Quantum mechanics doesn't require "God", either.

Yes, stat. And don't we seem happier?

Note: I am not Buddhist, or any other organized religion. The closest thing I can call my system of beliefs is agnostic.

------------------
Baby Mama's Drama

What's so wierd about black holes? There like, holes, but in space. But there not realy holes. Kind of. Just kidding. They are imploded stars. With tonnes of gravity. Kinda wierd, but not realy wierd.

And what is this "Big Band" of which you speak. If it's a rubber band, give it to me. I want to make a rubber band cannon.

Evolution within a species is adaptation. They are minor changes like thicker fur for artic animals than tropical animals.
Beoyond a species is a major and complicated change (for sexual beings, more specifically). Asexual creatures should have no problem evolving, depending on whatever stimuli.
But the evidence is critically lacking. If you think about it: This type of evolution takes millions (or even billions) of years. That would leave a plethera of fossil evidence, correct? Yet there has been great difficulty in coming up with just one fossil between two species. One fossil would only prove that one animal mutated. Evolution of sexual organisms would have to happen to an entire community, and should leave plenty of fossils. So where are they?

Stradle that fence! This follows no logic whatsoever. Maybe the "evidence" you look for is right under your nose!
Is this post proof that I exist? If you want to be consistent, you'll have to say "no," because if this is proof that I exist, the delicate balance of the atom, and the complexity of the universe are proof that God exists.
And if this isn't proof that I exist, it would be hypocritical to expect proof of God, a far greater being than I. Surely you have something small that means great things to you. It'd be like that. Um... everything? I mean... nothing is exactly like something else, no matter how much in appearance or quality they seem the same.
(This is based on the fact that matter can't be shared.)

------------------
For a healty meal, eat mashed potatoes, peas, and catloaf.
Massassi's cuttin' into my free time, man.
Valuable Life Lesson: Frog + Potato Gun = Blindness
Worship Examples - Christians' love for God should be seen and heard, not merely talked about. It is through actions that one is determined to be Christian, not through words. Words (and thoughts, as well) deceive even one's own self, but the heart speaks truth.

[This message has been edited by DogSRoOL (edited August 23, 2004).]

The 99%+ of land that hasn't been dug through and searched?

------------------
Roach - Gyring and gimbling in the wabe...
0 of 14.

They were supposedly little blobs back then, with no bones. How does a little blob with no bones leave fossils?

------------------
Map-Review | My Portfolio | The Matrix: Unplugged

Banks and banks of humming machinery! I've never seen so many knobs. We're going to have to do something, Charlie! Try pushing that button there. No? How about that one? No, not that one either. I know! I'll try pushing this one. Hold my hat will you? Good fellow.

When mammals started to evolve it was still the ice age. You don't get many fossils when things die in ice. (Unless the ice was never melted between then and now).

------------------
╔═════════════╦══════════λ 2;═══════╗
║ TheJkWhoSaysNi║ -----@% (Snail racing. ) .║
╠═════════════╩══════════λ 2;═══════╣
║Warning: This post may contain traces of nut║
╚════════════════════════λ 2;═══════╝

[This message has been edited by TheJkWhoSaysNi (edited August 23, 2004).]

We have proof of adaptations.......

But he was talking about reproduction. Dinosaurs humped too.

------------------
Map-Review | My Portfolio | The Matrix: Unplugged

Banks and banks of humming machinery! I've never seen so many knobs. We're going to have to do something, Charlie! Try pushing that button there. No? How about that one? No, not that one either. I know! I'll try pushing this one. Hold my hat will you? Good fellow.

I still don't understand the difference.

The more significant the change, the more evolutionary generations it took to take. From 'fish' to 'bird' is simply a lot more evolutionary steps than from wooly mammoth to slightly-more-wooly mammoth. The process of natural selection is exactly the same.

The problem with fossil evidence is that as you have to go back many many more evolutionary steps to finding the common ancestor, you have to find much older fossils. Those older fossils are going to be much much deeper in the ground, and be more likely to be broken up beyond recognition.

I still don't understand this problem with "species" and evolution. Can you explain more?

[This message has been edited by Mort-Hog (edited August 23, 2004).]

on the subject of evolution Vs creatism(sp?)

if you go here at the bottem of the past programs thing, there is a good debate about It, its about 60mins long (*30mbs, if I remeber right)

that has alot of good info that both sides might find informative..

* = edit




[This message has been edited by Grim Zombie (edited August 23, 2004).]

Ok, I'll try to clarify what I was saying.

Religion (say, in this case, Christianity) and science both offer different explanations as to how the universe works. But, philosophically, there is no completely valid starting point for either approach: you have to make some kind of assumption. Christianity's basic assumption is that there is an omniscient, omnipotent God whose will determines every event that shall happen.

Science's assumption is somewhat different. It assumes that everything has a logical reason, and that all events in the universe can be understood through reason.

Now, granted, humanity has made a lot of progress (or, at least, change) by making this second assumption.* But, it is nonetheless, still an assumption. We can observe that Event A tends to be followed by Event B, and even that this has ocurred after every Event B. But, ultimately, we cannot prove that there are absolutely no counterexamples, and moreover, cannot prove that there is definitely some force linking the two.

We live in an age where that assumption is so fundamental to our thought that it's not always obvious that it's an assumption, and it's hard for me to find a more precise way to explain what I mean. Basically, there's no guarantee that everything obeys logic.


*(We've made progress as far as science is concerned. If we take Assumption #1 as our basis, then scientific progess may not amount to much.)


I'm not trying to say that religion is better than science or the other way around. I'm just trying to point out that both (not just one or the other) start by making assumptions that aren't entirely justified. It's all a matter of which of those assumptions you find more plausible, which is why debating surface issues like evolutionism vs. creationism rarely convinces anyone.

Other. I was raised a Christian (Pentecostal). After years of watching people fake "The Holy Ghost/Spirit" and even faking it myself (which was incredibly easy, despite their claim that they know it when they see it), as a teenager, I decided that it wasn't for me.

I'm still open to the possibility that Jesus (I don't feel like getting into Hebrew) is indeed the son of God, but I will no longer follow, blindly. When the case can be stated, logically, and proven without a doubt, I will leave my "backslider" (as Pentecostal's say) status and return to the realm of so-called "Christianity". In the meantime, I'll live my life with what I call "common-sense values", and pray to the creator(s) to forgive me if I am headed in the wrong direction, and to show me the path to enlightenment.

------------------
www.MentatMM.com (status = down :/)
Napalm Death Squad (status = alpha)

I'd just like everyone to know that everyone who disagrees with me is wrong.

------------------
<ubuu> does hitler have a last name?
<jipe> .. yes, Ubuu, we're racist commy nazi jews, and we hate male pattern baldness
<Professor`K> Sorry, but half-way through your logic, my head exploded

Sexual reproduction. Chromosomes must match in numbers to pair up. The exception is down syndrome, when there is one unpaired chromosome, and the creature is (unless I'm thinking of something else) unable to reproduce.
Different species can rarely mate, and all that can (like a horse and donkey) yield offspring that are unable to reproduce.

There's a few problems with the logic you're following.
1.) You assume that because you faked it, others must be.
2.) If they were faking it, you assume that all Christians fake it.
3.) You faked it yourself, and apparently are upset by people who fake it. Doesn't that make you a hypocrite?

Assumptions, assumptions.
(and very unfair ones at that.)
No, YOU'RE wrong!!!! WRA!!!!!
/calamity

------------------
For a healty meal, eat mashed potatoes, peas, and catloaf.
Massassi's cuttin' into my free time, man.
Valuable Life Lesson: Frog + Potato Gun = Blindness
Worship Examples - Christians' love for God should be seen and heard, not merely talked about. It is through actions that one is determined to be Christian, not through words. Words (and thoughts, as well) deceive even one's own self, but the heart speaks truth.

[This message has been edited by DogSRoOL (edited August 24, 2004).]

I'm not saying that at all. What I'm saying is, in my opinion, everyone that I've witnessed receiving "The Holy Ghost" or "speaking in tongues" were faking. I am open to the possibility that there are people who can speak in tongues and who have received this Holy Ghost, but I have yet to witness this, in my opinion.



See above.



I'm not upset by people who fake it. As a matter of fact, I feel sorry for them. I once sought acceptance the same as they do (I don't know everyone's reasons, but acceptance is the likely culprit, in my opinion). I honestly think that some of these people truly believe that they're receiving this so-called gift (I'm referring to those that aren't truly receiving this gift; those who only believe that they are, which may or may not be all of them).

What does upset me is those folks that know they're faking, and I think we can both agree that there are those people (I was one of them), continue on as if they truly experienced something. I did for a time, but eventually, once I no longer required their acceptance, I admitted to everyone that I was indeed faking, and that I believe that every case that I've witnessed was fake.



Hopefully your assumptions regarding my opinion have changed after reading my response. I apologize for not explaining myself better to begin with. Again, I am in no way saying that these things aren't possible, I'm just saying that I don't believe that the hundred or so cases of each that I've witnessed, were authentic. One could make the argument that I'm simply mistaken, but that opinion wouldn't have any more validity that mine.

If I can fake speaking in tongues, and receiving The Holy Ghost/Spirit, to a group of Christians (Pentecostals) who claim to know when they see these things, anyone can. That leads me to believe that there are others like myself, and that there is a possibility that this could all simply be a psychological phenomenon based on the need for acceptance (or something that is too deep for me to understand).

Woah...I need to stop typing now.

------------------
www.MentatMM.com (status = down :/)
Napalm Death Squad (status = alpha)

Down Syndrome isn't the only one. DS is a very specific situation where the 21st pair has an extra chromosome (trisomy 21). Another case is an extra chromosome on the 18th pair (trisomy 18/Edward's Syndrome).

Cross-species breeding doesn't always result in infertile offspring. There have been cases of mules and ligers/tigons having offspring (In fact, there have been cases of ti-tigons, ti-ligers, etc).

Mutation tends to happen at a more basic level than chromosomes. The slightest change of an allele can change the appearance of the offspring greatly. Especially for traits that only require one or two allele pairs.

------------------
Roach - Gyring and gimbling in the wabe...
0 of 14.

A creature can't evolve from one creature to another. In order to do that it must add alleles to it's genetic make up. That's impossible. Micro-evolution, which is changes of a creature with-in a species, however, is possible. An example of micro-evolution is the breeding of dogs. Micro-evolution is just changes to current alleles. Macro-evolution, which requires the adding of alleles, is not possible. A fish just can't evolve to a bird. Maybe in a little bit I'll explain the current evolution theory that tries to get around this.

I don't know what the hell is wrong with me, by participating in this I will feel dumb for the rest of the week but I guess I'm really THAT bored.

I am an atheist because I don't really see a place for a higher power in this random ocean of chaos we call the world. I also don't have need for a higher power to hold on to when emotional storms come, I find myself quite adequate for that.
Unfortunately my thoughts are a bit too incoherent at this time to really keep explaining my philosophies further.
It's all lovely stuff about the potential and fundamental meaning of the individual.

just add sami.nousiainen@pp.inet.fi into your MSN list if you want to discuss, I need the practise if I'm going to get rich by writing stupid books about Self-Improvement and all that Zen-like stuff I keep doing for the dumb people who are willing to pay for the life instructions of a weirdo Finnish whackjob. Almost as beautiful as selling people their own fat arses back in the form of soap.
Whoa, this turned out to be a pretty cynical post, I should try again some other time

------------------
Yeah, you stay here and take life seriously. I'll go and have some fun.

[This message has been edited by Morpheus (edited August 25, 2004).]

------------------
www.MentatMM.com (status = down :/)
Napalm Death Squad (status = alpha)

False...



I'm not that familiar with the genetic makeup of dogs, but several subspecies(example; scarabs), can have different numbers of alleles.

However, congratulations on a coherent post.

------------------
WAITER: Here’s your green salad, sir.
ANAKIN: What? You fool, I told you NO CROUTONS! Aaaaaaargh!

[This message has been edited by Flexor (edited August 25, 2004).]

As far as I have seen, things usually exist regardless of your perceived need for them.

Yes, I suppose I wasn't being too coherent...meh *shrug*
*Just goes with the flow*

Obi, in here I would like to use the simple theory of Ockham's razor: We shouldn't assume unnecessary creatures. I don't.
------------------
Yeah, you stay here and take life seriously. I'll go and have some fun.


[This message has been edited by Morpheus (edited August 25, 2004).]

Did you know that a frog's (or was it toad...) DNA is significantly more complex than a human's?

Isn't science fun.

Indeed. People just assume that a develloped brain = complex genetic makeup.

------------------
WAITER: Here’s your green salad, sir.
ANAKIN: What? You fool, I told you NO CROUTONS! Aaaaaaargh!

Heh. You think Evloution follow Occam's razor?

I was not talking about evolution.

------------------
Yeah, you stay here and take life seriously. I'll go and have some fun.