Re: Religion retards scientific disovery?
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJZiggy
Quote:
Originally Posted by HowardRoark
Atheists are ignorant sheep, saying whatever they are told to say by their masters in the zeitgeist.
Although maybe you guys are those intermediary beings who have not yet fully evolved intellectually, so I guess in that sense your existence makes a compelling argument for your case.
While not a complete atheist, I do take issue with this. It is the atheists who have usually, thought about, struggled with and ultimately rejected the religions of their families. They are the ones who have thought things through and not blindly accepted what they were taught. If religion is correct, then which is it? Is it the religion that says that the moon gave birth to the earth? I recall one about a giant holy crocodile. Are the Taoists right about creation or is it the Buddhists? Maybe the Hindus or is it some tribe in Middle Africa that has it right?
There are a thousand creationist ideas, so which one is it that's right? Yours? Why is that? Is it because it's what your church told you to believe?
There's no point in discussing anything with Howard, he was given the links with detailed information and has proven to be far too much of a coward to try and discuss it. So he just acts like an ostrich with its head in the sand and tries to pretend the information isn't there. Then he throws out insults to try to change the subject.
Howard the Coward is proof positive of the original posters question about religion retarding scientific discovery (or religious retards inhibiting scientific discovery).
Re: Religion retards scientific disovery?
Quote:
Originally Posted by MadScientist
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJZiggy
Quote:
Originally Posted by HowardRoark
Atheists are ignorant sheep, saying whatever they are told to say by their masters in the zeitgeist.
Although maybe you guys are those intermediary beings who have not yet fully evolved intellectually, so I guess in that sense your existence makes a compelling argument for your case.
While not a complete atheist, I do take issue with this. It is the atheists who have usually, thought about, struggled with and ultimately rejected the religions of their families. They are the ones who have thought things through and not blindly accepted what they were taught. If religion is correct, then which is it? Is it the religion that says that the moon gave birth to the earth? I recall one about a giant holy crocodile. Are the Taoists right about creation or is it the Buddhists? Maybe the Hindus or is it some tribe in Middle Africa that has it right?
There are a thousand creationist ideas, so which one is it that's right? Yours? Why is that? Is it because it's what your church told you to believe?
There's no point in discussing anything with Howard, he was given the links with detailed information and has proven to be far too much of a coward to try and discuss it. So he just acts like an ostrich with its head in the sand and tries to pretend the information isn't there. Then he throws out insults to try to change the subject.
Howard the Coward is proof positive of the original posters question about religion retarding scientific discovery (or religious retards inhibiting scientific discovery).
The ad hominem started here:
I read your deeply informative crap from Wiki and responded:
Quote:
Explain to me (yourself, not The Googles) why the semi formed nonfunctional eye offered a selective advantage. And at what stage in evolution did it occur, thus insuring that all vertebrates have the exact same basic infrastructure? And why did the semi formed nonfunctional eye give an advantage in all environments simultaneously, so that in the end every species had the same basic template?
Pull your angry scientist head out of the ground yourself and respond.
Re: Religion retards scientific disovery?
I read your deeply informative crap from Wiki and responded:
Quote:
Explain to me (yourself, not The Googles) why the semi formed nonfunctional eye offered a selective advantage. And at what stage in evolution did it occur, thus insuring that all vertebrates have the exact same basic infrastructure? And why did the semi formed nonfunctional eye give an advantage in all environments simultaneously, so that in the end every species had the same basic template?
Pull your angry scientist head out of the ground yourself and respond.[/quote]
I took you post as indicating you did not read it as instead of you completely not comprehending what you read. At no time was the eye nonfunctional. Photoreceptors are functional. Photoreceptors in a pit are functional, and directional. A deeper pit with a smaller opening gives better directionality and leads to a pinhole camera style eye which produces basic images. Etc, etc. All stages functional, all could confer selective advantages.
Furthermore a human eye has a blind spot, and can suffer from things like detached retina. These are products of the backwards nature of the human eye, that is the light passes through the neurons and blood vessels to get to the rods and cones, and the neurons have to go back through the retina at the optic nerve (blind spot). When you look at a squid, it's retina, it's retina is laid out in a more straight forward way with the neurons and blood vessels behind the photoreceptors. This makes sense as an artifact of evolution. Without evolution, are you saying that god likes squid better than people? The the intelligent designer was using a buggy genetic compiler? Insufficient QA for the deadline of populating earth?
Re: Religion retards scientific disovery?
Quote:
Originally Posted by HowardRoark
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tyrone Bigguns
Quote:
Originally Posted by HowardRoark
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tyrone Bigguns
Quote:
Originally Posted by HowardRoark
Quote:
Originally Posted by hoosier
it is currently the indisputably superior account of the origin of the species.
From what I understand, physics and math don’t back up the theory.
Take Creation out of the discussion…..what are the other competing theories about the origin of species?
How did new species evolve?
How do explain the evolution of one very small component of species…..the eye? That one tiny part of the whole body is said to be statistically impossible to have evolved. And that’s just one part of the whole. Is it time? Just throw more time at the problem?
I am not trying to be confrontational, I am interested in your answers.
Howard, are you really serious. They eye? Statistically impossible. C'mon.
Remenber, I am dense. Tell me how I am wrong.
Already answered by a previous post.
Explain to me (yourself, not The Googles) why the semi formed nonfunctional eye offered a selective advantage. And at what stage in evolution did it occur, thus insuring that all vertebrates have the exact same basic infrastructure? And why did the semi formed nonfunctional eye give an advantage in all environments simultaneously, so that in the end every species had the same basic template?
Atheists are ignorant sheep, saying whatever they are told to say by their masters in the zeitgeist.
Although maybe you guys are those intermediary beings who have not yet fully evolved intellectually, so I guess in that sense your existence makes a compelling argument for your case.
1. Semi formed eye. Who knows? There are various reasons that being light sensitive might benefit a creature. But, it isn't a far leap that being light sensitive might help against predators.
2. Stage. Why is that important for me? I don't know. Just like you don't know that god created them. If eyes are god's creation..why did he create so many that failed? Or, in we believe in evolution..emerged and then
withered away.
3. Species. You show an alarming lack of knowledge. Several different eyes came and went.
But, thank you for mentioning species..as every stage in scientist's theories of eye development exists in species living today.
Sheep. You are so right. Why should i look at the many writings of scientists, learned men and women, etc...when i can base my beliefs off of one book written in the bronze age. :roll:
Re: Religion retards scientific disovery?
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJZiggy
Quote:
Originally Posted by HowardRoark
Atheists are ignorant sheep, saying whatever they are told to say by their masters in the zeitgeist.
Although maybe you guys are those intermediary beings who have not yet fully evolved intellectually, so I guess in that sense your existence makes a compelling argument for your case.
While not a complete atheist, I do take issue with this. It is the atheists who have usually, thought about, struggled with and ultimately rejected the religions of their families. They are the ones who have thought things through and not blindly accepted what they were taught. If religion is correct, then which is it? Is it the religion that says that the moon gave birth to the earth? I recall one about a giant holy crocodile. Are the Taoists right about creation or is it the Buddhists? Maybe the Hindus or is it some tribe in Middle Africa that has it right?
There are a thousand creationist ideas, so which one is it that's right? Yours? Why is that? Is it because it's what your church told you to believe?
From my perspective, it does not take much courage in this day and age to profess one’s atheism or to be an agnostic. The Christians of the world are the ones who take the scorn of the so called sophisticated. We are bombarded in all media with anti-religion and anti-Christian messages constantly.
It matters not what I, or you, believed when we were growing up. Nor for that matter does it matter one iota whether or not you or I believe or don’t believe. Belief does not make it true. It either is or isn’t true.
You are probably already aware of these authors and books, but if not, they give a nice account of atheists who became theists or deists, and then moved to Christianity (in the case of Lewis).
C.S. Lewis:
Mere Christianity http://www.amazon.com/Mere-Christian.../dp/0060652926
Surprised By Joy http://www.amazon.com/Surprised-Joy-...8372432&sr=1-1
Antony Flew (notorious ex-atheist now a deist)
There Is A God http://www.amazon.com/There-God-Noto...8372479&sr=1-1
Also, check out this interview/book…..
http://www.amazon.com/God-World-Conv...8374577&sr=1-2
These will give a much better answer than I could to your questions....if they are true questions.
Re: Religion retards scientific disovery?
Quote:
I took you post as indicating you did not read it as instead of you completely not comprehending what you read. At no time was the eye nonfunctional. Photoreceptors are functional. Photoreceptors in a pit are functional, and directional. A deeper pit with a smaller opening gives better directionality and leads to a pinhole camera style eye which produces basic images. Etc, etc. All stages functional, all could confer selective advantages.
Furthermore a human eye has a blind spot, and can suffer from things like detached retina. These are products of the backwards nature of the human eye, that is the light passes through the neurons and blood vessels to get to the rods and cones, and the neurons have to go back through the retina at the optic nerve (blind spot). When you look at a squid, it's retina, it's retina is laid out in a more straight forward way with the neurons and blood vessels behind the photoreceptors. This makes sense as an artifact of evolution. Without evolution, are you saying that god likes squid better than people? The the intelligent designer was using a buggy genetic compiler? Insufficient QA for the deadline of populating earth?
Atheist fundamentalists all seem a little too touchy for my tastes. I think the presence of a person who thinks differently than you scares you. I find your frantic posts amusing, as you hurl invective all those who dare to deviate from your fundamentalist positions. You remind my of some religious people I have met – angry, afraid of other ideas, head in the sand, not willing to listen to those who do not exactly agree with you.
As for the eye/retina; I'm sure the same crowd that is mesmerized by bright shiny spinning objects is also impressed by your use of jargon. But buried in you meaningless jargon (yes, I understand the histology and physiology of the eye, it is actually not that difficult to understand), is an interesting phrase, "all stages functional, all could confer a selective advantage." What if they didn't? It seems farfetched to me that they all did. I think it requires a lot of faith to believe that all of those strange configurations resulted in a selective advantage in the environment hundreds of millions of years ago, an environment that we cannot possible comprehend. But that is something you have an abundance of - faith. Your blind faith in your belief system is more impressive than the faith of most Christians I know. Maybe you'll tell me that "of course the intermediary stages conferred a selective advantage, because we have the eye today." Please don't do that. The illogic of such a statement would be beneath such a high end thinker as you.
So animals evolve. So what? You may be surprised to hear that I believe in that wholeheartedly. I am debating with you because fundamentalists like you scare me. Nowhere in this thread have I talked about Intelligent Design or Creation. The reasonably elegant, though extraordinarily lacking, theory of evolution probably partially explains some of the observable facts about the natural world. I'm not the one trying to use a crowbar to make this specific 19th century scientific theory (described a hundred years before the discovery of DNA) explain everything is the cosmos. You are. And you seem to be very angry with anyone who might not think that a 19th century British scientist didn't explain everything from why there is an eye to why some marriages fail. But guess what? Darwin's theory is not able to explain everything under the sun. So your attempts to take this modest theory and force into contortions for which it is completely unsuited will only continue to anger you, and will force you to continue to ridicule kind, gentle people like myself, who just happen to believe something different than what you believe.
Re: Religion retards scientific disovery?
Quote:
Originally Posted by MadScientist
This makes sense as an artifact of evolution. Without evolution, are you saying that god likes squid better than people? The the intelligent designer was using a buggy genetic compiler? Insufficient QA for the deadline of populating earth?
Ahhh, God, the Null Hypothesis.
Re: Religion retards scientific disovery?
Pardon the digression, but I found this somewhat amusing :lol: :
Quote:
Originally Posted by HowardRoark
You wax poetic about things pathetic.
Quote:
Originally Posted by HowardRoark
Darwin's theory is not able to explain everything under the sun. So your attempts to take this modest theory and force into contortions for which it is completely unsuited will only continue to anger you, and will force you to continue to ridicule kind, gentle people like myself, who just happen to believe something different than what you believe.
Re: Religion retards scientific disovery?
[quote="HowardRoark"][quote]Take Creation out of the discussion…..what are the other competing theories about the origin of species?
quote]
Well here's one that has been surpressed more than any religious organization in the known history of our planet:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sumer
In short, around 6000-7000 years ago we were created by a race of highly intelligent people, (for the record, the only thing that differs between us and them is their brain capacity, we are only capable of using 10% of our brains, yet they are able to use a much higher percentage, although i am not sure as to the accurate perentage) genetically engineered in THEIR image, thats why when you read the bible it says "God made man in his image", the bible, according to fact, is a shortened version of the original creation story, The Book of Enoch, and key elements of higher knowledge are omitted from the Bible for control/power reasons. That is why it does not make sense.
Religion is the ultimate tool of control, the scholars of past knew this, and thats were we get Christianity from. There is a reason why Jesus was crucified and three day later rose from the dead. He is a sun God, which was later changed to The Son of Man/The Sun of God.(http://www.dailygrail.com/node/5736) His resurrection has more to do with astronomy then anything else. Horus, the God that the ancient Egyptians worshipped, was also a sun God. Strangley enough he was also born on the 25th of December and was crucified and died? Coincidence?
The problem with religious people is that they tend to take their beliefs as fact and truth, because after all, that is exactly what the religion asks of you right? The will do anything to justify their "truth". By doing so they ignore common sense, logic and practicality, this is how you get ignorance. Religious people are ignorant not because they choose to be, but because that is exactly what the religion asks of them. Trust me i used to be a Catholic(and a devout Catholic at that, or so i thought!) before i stumbled onto a little more TRUTH, i know EXACTLY how they think, it is irrational, and one would do just about anything to prove his faith is truth, even senseless murder, in the name of religion. Speaking of murder, did you know religion has killed more people over the last 2000 years than all the history's war's(not including religious wars!) and dictatorships combined? The numbers aren't even close. Also in the dark ages if you were caught with any type of book, you were killed, nobody but the Catholic church was allowed to read books for a very long period of time. That was the type of control that they had back then. A religious person will come in and try to justify the last few sentences, saying something like "well we were much less intelligent than we are today blah blah", but the fact of the matter is that there is something sinister going on behind the scenes about which people are kept in the dark. As the saying goes, where there is smoke, there is fire.
Religions ultimate weapon of control is fear, it is the fear that gets you, after all, all i have to do is believe in Him and i will have eternal life in heaven, right? And if i choose not to i will go to burn, for eternity? Well in my mind, i know which one im choosing, hmmm eternal pleasure or eternal pain? Common sense indicates that this answer is pretty simple.
That is another problem with religion. It does not take you anywhere spiritual-wise, because that is not in its design, the way in which it is set up is to hold you down. Keep each other bickering about stupid shit like you are, it teaches you from a young age not to ask questions, and to just take things at face value, it has no critical aspect. 95% of "religious" people i run into have absolutley no spiritual side to them, yet they make bold claims and walk around with an air of superiority because they think they know something more than you, and that they are better than you. The other 5% actually know most of these things, and they are much more normal and civil than regular believers, in terms of their arrogance(or lacktherof). Religion actually hinders your spiritual growth, im speaking from experience, there are so many bullshit rules you must follow that its practically impossible to live up to, and 100% of Christians break at least one command DAILY, i guarantee you.
DO NOT mistake true spirituality for religion, they are two completely different things, one is practical and the other is not. Thats not to say religion is not a beautiful thing, because it is, but in terms of its practicality, there is zero to none in my opinion. In other words what im trying to say is that there are really good aspects about religion(i.e. the commandments, the theme of forgiveness, and also prayer/meditation) but if they are not applied intelligently there is absolutely no spiritual growth to be had.
In summing up, im not trying to demean anybodys beliefs in anyway, but im sorry in advance, because i know the truth hurts, it did when i first found out, and it completely flipped my view of the world upside down. But if you are truly a seeker of truth and not a follower of religion, you will find your path and undertake your own spiritual journey for the quest of ultimate knowledge.
Peace and much love