Why Should Jesus Love Me?

“A sentient umbrella speaks”

Since: Mar 11

Some stable somewhere

#481500 Jan 29, 2013
G_O_D wrote:
<quoted text>
No. I am pointing out that you are exagerating the reality of science.
Theory is not Proof. Never has been and never will be.
Please provide a single example of observered mutation of one advanced life form into an entirely different one. The virus/bacteria BS ain't going to cut it.
Perhaps a mouse population that was observed to transform into bats ?
I never claimed it was "proof." In fact, I never use the word "proof." I am quite careful with my use of language.

First - why would you disregard bacteria and viruses? You don't consider these species? Are they all the same to you because you cannot see their differences and don't know enough about their populations to differentiate among them?

That's not a my problem thing. That's a your problem thing.

Most recently, E. coli evolved to digest citrate in the lab. E. coli is defined, as a species, as not being able to digest citrate. So...that's a mutation that led to a new species. This took 5 years in the lab and hundreds of thousands of generations.

Second, in 1972, Jean demonstrated evolution of a new symbiote. She housed an amoeba and its bacteria parasite together in an isolated environment for five years. At the end of that period, the bacteria had lost its parasitic genes and the amoeba had lost many of its life support genes (replaced by the bacteria). The two had become a symbiote.

If you discredit the above, as you do with bacteria, as somehow not supporting evolution, you are demonstrating that you do not understand that evolution is gene frequency change in gene pools over time.

Third - 11 rabbits were released in Australia over 150 years ago. There are now 4 species of rabbits there.

Fourth, yes, the word species is basically a categorical error on the part of human language. I explained this in a previous post.

Fifth - the evidence from genes and fossils demonstrates phylogenetic relationships between species. We know that Homo and Pan are more closely related than either is to Gorilla. We know that all apes and monkeys are equally related to all bats - and less related to any fish species.

Your demand for direct observation here is absurd. The fossil and gene evidence is overwhelmingly in support of our current taxonomies and that "species" evolve over time.

Now you can deny that all you like - but until you produce another theory capable of both explaining the existing evidence and unifying all biological sciences, then you don't have anything to stand on.

“"None shall pass"”

Since: Jul 11

There

#481501 Jan 29, 2013
You are quite wrong.
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
False. It's been observed in the lab several times now. It's been observed in nature a few times - rabbits in Australia being the easiest example.
<quoted text>
False. Evolution is the framework theory for all biological sciences.
You don't seem to understand what evolution means. At it's very basic, it means "gene frequency change in gene pools, over time." All biological phenomena are subsequently interpreted through this lens. Evolution does not mean "speciation." You are confusing the two terms here - speciation describes how parent species evolve into daughter species. It is not the theoretical framework, but a part of it - a testable, disprovable part of it.
Evolutionary theory has four lenses of analysis. These are:
1. Ultimate explanations
1a. Phylogenetic explanations - evolutionary lineages (speciation goes here)
1b. Adaptation - the mechanisms of problem solving produced by natural selection
2. Proximate explanations
2a. Ontological explanations - how development and life experience produced an individual or trait
2b. Immediate explanation - the immediate cause of the phenomena being observed, be it motivation in individuals or chemicals at the molecular level.
All biological sciences study phenomena within the umbrella theory of evolution, from genetics to biophysics. Sure, their specific hypothesis may not need to refer to phylogeny - but, ultimately, they do. When you're comparing the actions of two genes or proteins, you may not need to refer to the framework theory and can simply compare their actions, but ultimately whatever data you provide tells us about their evolutionary history - and can be used to test ultimate hypotheses.
No biological science is without that evolutionary history. No drug works in some people and not other people "just because" or "because of X deity." There's always an ultimate explanation that can be tested. For lots of primary research, ultimate causation can be ignored. However, the causation remains: all biological phenomena are the product of evolution (all previous tests and observations support this). Hence, primary research can be tested within an ultimate framework quite easily - and they all fit into it.
Moreover, lots of primary research, when ignoring evolutionary theory, fails catastrophically. Medicine is rife with examples - giving iron to malaria patients, ignoring the placebo effect, failing to understand that fever is an adaptive response.
So, no, you are mistaken. Mostly because you are confusing speciation with evolution, but also because you don't seem to understand what a framework theory is.

Since: Dec 12

Yes, I'm an Atheist.

#481502 Jan 29, 2013
Qu_innocence wrote:
The Son of God Music Ministry
The True Grace of God
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =RpRCClg8pEYXX
Hikari Nakamura believes! Smile.
----------
"Great is Thy faithfulness,” O God my Father,
There is no shadow of turning with Thee;
Thou changest not, Thy compassions, they fail not
As Thou hast been Thou forever wilt be.
“Great is Thy faithfulness!”“Great is Thy faithfulness!“
Morning by morning new mercies I see;
All I have needed Thy hand hath provided—
“Great is Thy faithfulness,” Lord, unto me!
Summer and winter, and springtime and harvest,
Sun, moon and stars in their courses above,
Join with all nature in manifold witness
To Thy great faithfulness, mercy and love.
Pardon for sin and a peace that endureth,
Thy own dear presence to cheer and to guide;
Strength for today and bright hope for tomorrow,
Blessings all mine, with ten thousand beside!
Ahh...that's better. Bless your heart Qu <3

“I see quantum effects”

Since: Jan 11

In the macro world.

#481503 Jan 29, 2013
G_O_D wrote:
<quoted text>
You have proved that deities don't exist ?
Must have been right after you filmed that new species being evolved.
LOL
I am not denouncing the evolution of species but many of you sound as pompous and ridiculous as the Creationists.
That's not what I said, and I'm disappointed in your intentional misrepresentation.

I had thought better of you.

AFAIC, I've seen no valid test for any god.

If it can't be tested, it may as well be nonexistent.

Until new-ANY-evidence presents itself, I find belief in any god to be useless at best, and a serious problem at worst.

Right on these forums is abundant evidence that even just a simple belief in some seemingly random version of god can do serious mental and emotional harm.

“A sentient umbrella speaks”

Since: Mar 11

Some stable somewhere

#481504 Jan 29, 2013
G_O_D wrote:
<quoted text>
You are the one comparing them, not me.
There is nothing "religious" about it.
Creationists claim that species do not transform into other species and that is demonstrated to them everyday by simple observation.
Please "disprove" that with a new species that has been observed to come into existance.
Got any fish giving birth to amphibians ?
While I do not hold to creationism, your posturing and indignation is a disgrace to the sciences.
We have a good theory, that does not make it a proven fact. To imply otherwise "is, frankly, ignorant or dishonest."
No, I did not compare creationism with evolution. You did.

Again, I have never invoked the words "proven fact." But evolution is, in lay terms, fact.

You are being dishonest here in your misrepresentation of how science uses evidence. You are claiming that we can only support theories if we directly observe phenomena - and that is patently untrue.

Evidence comes from fossils and genes. Fossils are no longer changing, but provide us with clues as to how the past was. Genes are dynamic, and provide us with how the past was.

Just look at the absurd examples you use - taken right out of creationism "can a fish give birth to an amphibian." No one has ever claimed that happened, evolutionary theory does not describe that.

So, basically you're resorting to misrepresenting my words and misrepresenting evolutionary theory so that you can make a pretense to have some insight into how it's "just a theory."

If you have to misrepresent me and misrepresent science, you don't have an argument.

Is this how you reacted when you gave that anthropologist what you thought was a good idea? We discussed this and I've already explained to you why you were incorrect - but you refuse to listen. Out of pride, I guess. But certainly not because you're objective or in any way a good scientist. If you were, you'd consider all the information and not just cherry pick to support your own ideas.

“Runner John Green disqualified”

Since: Aug 12

4 Bible Scripture on headband

#481505 Jan 29, 2013
Epiphany2 wrote:
<quoted text>
HI QUIN....
Its been 24 hours since I posted too....
Internetholic group: "Hi Ep"
Epiphany2 wrote:
<quoted text>
Today it will ge up to 70 degrees here....NICE...Gonna enjoy the weather
Amen to the Amen! I'll be going out myself to get me some rays... enjoy it while you can because it might be sub-freezing next week.
Epiphany2 wrote:
<quoted text>
Type to ya Later
Au Revoir... btw, I felt a slight tremor yeserday... thought it was my cat who always uses his head to knock on the door if he wants in. I said, "Stop Tabbie"... but Tabbie was elsewhere. Anyways, felt an earthquake this way before... wondering if you noticed it.

“A sentient umbrella speaks”

Since: Mar 11

Some stable somewhere

#481506 Jan 29, 2013
Aerobatty wrote:
<quoted text>
That's not what I said, and I'm disappointed in your intentional misrepresentation.
I had thought better of you.
AFAIC, I've seen no valid test for any god.
If it can't be tested, it may as well be nonexistent.
Until new-ANY-evidence presents itself, I find belief in any god to be useless at best, and a serious problem at worst.
Right on these forums is abundant evidence that even just a simple belief in some seemingly random version of god can do serious mental and emotional harm.
Yes, G_O_D does this from time to time. He suddenly turns and misrepresents what someone is saying - and attacks them for it.

It's dishonest.

I think he gets this way because of insecurity. He's attacked me a lot, especially when I told him why his pet theory didn't work. He desperately wants to believe that he is the authority on certain subjects and has great difficulty accepting that others might know more than he does.

Not a my problem thing, not a your problem thing. But I will treat him as any other poster who presents fabrications and absurd claims.

“A sentient umbrella speaks”

Since: Mar 11

Some stable somewhere

#481507 Jan 29, 2013
G_O_D wrote:
You are quite wrong.
<quoted text>
Whatever. Come back when you have an argument.

“I see quantum effects”

Since: Jan 11

In the macro world.

#481508 Jan 29, 2013
Qu_innocence wrote:
Good Morning Peeps... as you know I'm an internetholic.
Now, on the subject of Atheism, Evoultion, Beliefs and Creationism. Here is what I wrote last night or early this morning to HFY:
"As much as it takes to have faith that God exists (not so much faith as is common sense, imho)... BUT IT TAKE THE SAME AMOUNT OF FAITH to believe that God doesn't exist. Can one prove God exists at will... no, it takes faith to believe that He is. But at the same token, AN ATHEIST CANNOT PROVE that God does not exists. The creation/evolution argument, dialogue, debate... whatever you want to call it... eventually cancels each other out because IT IS A FRUITLESS EXERCISE. It takes faith on both ends of the spectrum whether to the affirmative or to the negative. "
http://www.topix.com/forum/topstories/T0N0LOR...
Now, the dialogue is indeed a fruitless exercise imho and that is why I said last night that I would hold off on it because I see where it is headed. I just would like to remind some of you that when you guys crossed over to this thread... it is not based on the subject of "Prove There is A God." Most of the people who usually frequent this thread already believe in God so it is a moot point as we are on the affirmative in that question. If not, we would have crossed over to PTAG. Our evidence that God exists is simply creation itself. If I were on the PTAG thread then the ball would be in my court to prove that God exists since I entered that thread. Since some of you who are Atheists are here, glad to have you btw, but this thread is mainly a Christian-based, God-fearing, Bible-believing thread about Jesus...this isnt' PTAG version 2. The ball is actually in your court... some of us already Believe in God but just simply hammering out the details, and yes, lol... hammering each other.
I believe that I did due deligence and in fairness answered some of your questions earlier. Also, I gave you my beliefs on Creationism but now it's my turn to ask you guys a question but it is on the serious side. I think that would be fair yes? I want to challenge you on something and I hope that you who are Atheists are up to it.... because this isn't the PTAG thread and this isn't PTAG version 2.
Since you are in this Christian-based thread... Prove that God doesn't exist using your scientific method. I'm not talking about a whimsical, care-free answer. I'm talking about a serious undertaking. Until you, who are Evolutionists (which is theoretically based btw) can prove God does not exist... I'll hold off on answering further questions on the matter.
All I want to know is why Jesus should love me.

Not believing in god may take a bit of faith, but it depends predominantly on reason.

Many of us have examined MANY gods in much more depth than many Christians here have examined their own.

Reason, logic and experience have lead us to the conclusion that no gods exist.

We know that you will never be convinced by any of our reasons and we know that unless you are willing to see reason, nothing we say could convince you.

“Runner John Green disqualified”

Since: Aug 12

4 Bible Scripture on headband

#481509 Jan 29, 2013
Epiphany2 wrote:
<quoted text>
Yea....And we were "Left Behind"
:-(


Just messin'...

“"None shall pass"”

Since: Jul 11

There

#481510 Jan 29, 2013
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
I never claimed it was "proof." In fact, I never use the word "proof." ...
You didn't have to. No more than the Biblicists do.

You threw out the "Australian rabbit" as a proof. It is as lacking as the English moths or human skin pigmentation differences. Last I looked 'Negroes' weren't considered a seperate species any more. LOL

“I see quantum effects”

Since: Jan 11

In the macro world.

#481511 Jan 29, 2013
Off to the gym.

“Runner John Green disqualified”

Since: Aug 12

4 Bible Scripture on headband

#481512 Jan 29, 2013
Juicylu wrote:
<quoted text>
Ahh...that's better. Bless your heart Qu <3
Praise God... I'm glad that you're okay regarding that flooding situation.

“Runner John Green disqualified”

Since: Aug 12

4 Bible Scripture on headband

#481514 Jan 29, 2013
Aerobatty wrote:
Off to the gym.
Have a good workout Aero... smile.

“Runner John Green disqualified”

Since: Aug 12

4 Bible Scripture on headband

#481515 Jan 29, 2013
G_O_D wrote:
<quoted text>
Last I looked 'Negroes' weren't considered a seperate species any more. LOL
Amen Yo. Yo it wasn't fun at all being considered part human you know das right? Ya'll is mad stupid.

smile...(from ebonics translator)...

“Runner John Green disqualified”

Since: Aug 12

4 Bible Scripture on headband

#481516 Jan 29, 2013
Juicylu wrote:
<quoted text>
Hi Epi :) I got power back about 2 and half hours ago so, yay. It was like a sauna today. Not the best weather to be dragging wet furniture around but I'm happy to sit in the breeze now and indulge in my addiction. Oh dear, I've said it...
Internetholic Group: "Hi Juice."

Since: Dec 12

Yes, I'm an Atheist.

#481517 Jan 29, 2013
Qu_innocence wrote:
<quoted text>
Internetholic Group: "Hi Juice."
"Hi Qu", I'm Juice and I'm an Internetholic. Who must now try to sleep once again.
Blessings and love to all <3

“Runner John Green disqualified”

Since: Aug 12

4 Bible Scripture on headband

#481518 Jan 29, 2013
Happy Lesbo wrote:
<quoted text>
.. as long as the pet consents, what's the problem ??..
Zoophilism (beastiality) is abnormal sexual activity... to be blunt, it is disgusting.

“Runner John Green disqualified”

Since: Aug 12

4 Bible Scripture on headband

#481519 Jan 29, 2013
Happy Lesbo wrote:
Happy Lesbo wrote:
<quoted text>
.. for every Christian, it's the opposite of giving up. You engage fully with your God on a daily basis. You admit you are powerless and surrender your life and will to Him on a daily basis. That gives you power ..
<quoted text>
.. why do you think I meant it in a different way ??..
Different perspectives... while you may see surrender our lives as weak... we see that weakness of surrendering our lives to God as strength.

“Runner John Green disqualified”

Since: Aug 12

4 Bible Scripture on headband

#481520 Jan 29, 2013
Hidingfromyou wrote:
I wrote a lot. Sorry. I'm going to sleep now. Tomorrow my computer is being returned so I may not come back for some time. Thanks for indulging me.
:)
btw, I'm right about everything I wrote. So there.
Take Care HFY... whenever you come back hope to C ya.

If you read this from another computer, prove that God doesn't exist using the Scientific Method before any further discussions on the matter...thanx. Oh, I do have to grandfather this in and say that I do accept your concession regarding Atheism being an inference rather that completely factual.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Top Stories Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
The Christian Atheist debate (Jun '15) 3 min Bongo 28,002
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 3 min truth 637,026
Play "end of the word" part 2 18 min Aussie Kev 1,421
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 32 min Ooogah Boogah 968,650
Jehovah's Witnesses are true disciple of Jesus ... (Mar '07) 49 min truth 44,061
I never REALIZED........ 1 hr andet1987 4
Poll Was 9/11 a conspiracy?? (Oct '07) 1 hr here 280,449
Why do white men hate white women who want blac... (May '11) 3 hr Paul is dead 3,571
More from around the web