Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed

Discussion in 'Off Topic Area' started by Blade96, Nov 16, 2011.

  1. holyheadjch

    holyheadjch Valued Member

    I'm far more impressed by a God who set in motion a highly complex system that has remained stable without intervention, than a God constantly having to perform error correction.

    Intelligent Design assumes God is stupid.
     
  2. melbgoju

    melbgoju Valued Member

    But evolution does not have
    a)goals/enpoints
    b)smoothness in 'progress'
    c)progress in the sense of more or less evolved (when comparing between lineages)
     
  3. Rand86

    Rand86 likes to butt heads

    None that we know of, at least. :p
     
  4. holyheadjch

    holyheadjch Valued Member

    ...erm, actually, yes on all counts.

    Homo-sapiens would be a goal, for example
    Smoothness in progress means, you don't have a velociraptor giving birth to a chicken, it is a smooth process over millions of years.
    ...and we are definitely more evolved than our primate cousins.
     
  5. melbgoju

    melbgoju Valued Member

    Not a goal. Our species is the result of the multiple, collectively unique evolutionary pressures on our ancestors (as is every other species on this planet), but where is any evidence that we are/were intended? Evolution has not finished acting on our species either, so it is safe to say that we are not the endpoint of our evolution either.

    Might I suggest [ame="http://www.amazon.com/Plan-Purpose-Nature-Science-Masters/dp/0297816462/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1321696494&sr=8-1"]"Plan and Purpose in Nature"[/ame] by George C Williams as one of the better reads on this topic?
     
  6. holyheadjch

    holyheadjch Valued Member

    Who are you to state that goals God had at the beginning of the universe?

    I'm not saying we are and endpoint, but how do you know that God didn't set out goals like 'Species with higher reasoning' or 'species that can survive in or out of water' or 'species that can reproduce asexually'.
     
  7. melbgoju

    melbgoju Valued Member

    Really? Good luck surviving on nothing but leaves (as the gorilla does), seeing in the dark (as do the bushbabies), having your voice heard clearly more than a kilometre away (like howler monkeys) or swinging through trees at speed using just your arms (like the gibbons).

    All are more evolved in their particular areas of specialisation than us (as we are compared to them), but in a general sense as we are all extant species, all have had 3.8 or so billion years of evolution leading to the current state of affairs. What objective criteria decides who is more or less evolved? If advanced is defined as compared to our strengths and specialisations, then of course we are more highly evolved. But that's hardly objective.
     
  8. melbgoju

    melbgoju Valued Member

    Which god? There are thousands to choose from, each equally likely and plausible.
     
  9. CosmicFish

    CosmicFish Aleprechaunist

    :topic: It cracks me up that pigeons are likely evolved from dinosaurs. :D
     
  10. Rand86

    Rand86 likes to butt heads

    You tell me. How big is YOUR "god?" :p
     
  11. melbgoju

    melbgoju Valued Member

    I'm sorry, but that makes no sense :confused:
     
  12. Rand86

    Rand86 likes to butt heads

    Does that make MORE sense?
     
  13. melbgoju

    melbgoju Valued Member

    Somewhat, but if we are talking logic, then in the absence of supporting evidence one way or another, it is equally plausible that there is no all-knowing, all-powerful god.

    But, given that neither of us can muster a skerrick of evidence to back our positions, there's not really much point continuing with this debate (and it is getting off-topic too).
     
  14. Oddsbodskins

    Oddsbodskins Troll hunter 2nd Class

    I saw a pigeon having a seizure once, tonic clonic. So I guess they either can suffer from epilepsy, or react to extreme pyrexia in a similar way to us, or somesuch. It was very odd.

    Oh yeah, gods, right, if homo sapiens were to be the end goal of evolution then it wouldn't explain why a drastic change of the earths environment (which has historically happened countless times) could leave us less suited to survival then a 'less' evolved species. Of course, if we could cooperate and think of a way to survive then that would still count, after all, social skills and creative problem solving are our strength.
     
  15. aikiwolfie

    aikiwolfie ... Supporter

    What you're doing here is humanising a natural process. Evolution doesn't have goals. It's not concious in any way we can measure. It's not even an entity. It's a human construct to explain how one species can emerge from another when looking at a very narrow snapshot in time on a geological scale.

    I personally consider attributing any goals or ultimate end points to evolution just as bad as saying it's guided by a god. It suggests to people there is some kind of entity or collective conciousness guiding the process and we'd always have ended up with the human race. Which just isn't true so far as we can determine.

    So far as being more evolved is concerned? I'm not so sure. We've certainly evolved differently with different skill sets. But "more evolved" again implies some sort of predetermined ultimate goal. Chimpanzees and humans have been evolving for exactly the same length of time. Both species have exploited ways of surviving that suits them.
     
  16. holyheadjch

    holyheadjch Valued Member

    My point hinged on God existing. I was advocating for evolution from the perspective of someone who believed in God (though that isn't my personal belief) where God set in motion a process that doesn't require constant course correction because he did it properly first time.

    As I said, Intelligent Design is for people who think God is stupid/incompetent.
     
  17. aikiwolfie

    aikiwolfie ... Supporter

    No it's for people who for one reason or another feel the need to cling to a concept of a deity guiding their life. I don't think any of them believe god is stupid or incompetent. In fact I get the impression they believe the exact opposite.

    However you have very nicely illustrated one of the fundamental problems with these debates. And that is people like yourself project your opinions of those on the opposing side of the argument as the opinion they have of god. Which is just wrong. You're not arguing the case one way or the other. You've just resorted to insulting people who don't agree with you.
     
    Last edited: Nov 19, 2011
  18. holyheadjch

    holyheadjch Valued Member

    What?

    The people who think that God is poking the evolutionary process to make improvements are implicitly stating that God didn't initially set the process in motion properly. That's the only conclusion that can be drawn. You don't need last minute course corrections if you plotted the course properly before you set out.

    The people who believe in creationism believe that God created the world in seven days, and on the eighth day, he manufactured a load of evidence discrediting that achievement. You know, for the lulz. Again, they might not agree with that explicitly, but their beliefs hold that as being implicitly true.

    If I wanted to just resort to insulting people, I'd do so directly.
     
  19. aikiwolfie

    aikiwolfie ... Supporter

    No they're not. That's simply your perception of them.
     
  20. Blade96

    Blade96 shotokan karateka

    Evolution. :p

    [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=faRlFsYmkeY&feature=related"]The Simpsons - Homer Evolution - YouTube[/ame]
     

Share This Page