Evolution vs. Creation

[Drew Smith]

anonymous wrote:

And every election season those statistics don't hold up.

It held up in Maine, Maryland, and Washington.

I guess you missed that.

anonymous wrote:

From where I stand, statistics don't mean much.

Yeah, we should just throw out voting, since that's just "statistics" for determining who Americans want for their leaders. We should throw out weather forecasting, since that's just models based upon statistics. Let's throw out actuarial tables, medical treatments, gas mileage predictions, heck, pretty much any technological advance that depends upon data, because it's all just "statistics".

anonymous wrote:

You're moving from zero acceptance to minor acceptance in old-school liberal territory.

No, we've moved to majority acceptance. You really need to keep up.

anonymous wrote:

The numbers look like momentum because there's almost only one direction that they can go.

The numbers who favor same-sex marriage, which is over 50%, could go down. They aren't.

anonymous wrote:

You're just a small player in an upcoming conflict. Most likely, one of the human sandbag variety. You clearly don't see how this works. You don't bring anything to the table but a number, and you've bought into the idea that numbers is all that it takes. Reality is going to hit you hard.

You just watch your backs, warned the homophobe?

[xxxooxxx]

FREE SERVANT wrote:

<quoted text>I can't say that I have seen scriptures to prove the Creator did not have a beginning, could you point something out to me?

Isaiah 40:28 -“Do you not know? Have you not heard? The Lord is the everlasting God, the Creator of the ends of the earth, He will not grow tired or weary and his understanding no one can fathom.”

The idea that you have of God coming into existence at the time of creation, is actually a Buddhist concept of "mutual arising"...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prat%C4%ABtyasam...

[xxxooxxx]

I know this world is ruled by infinite intelligence. Everything that surrounds us- everything that exists - proves that there are infinite laws behind it. There can be no denying this fact. It is mathematical in its precision.

Thomas A. Edison

The idea of Edison "infinite intelligence" seems to be reflected in...
Psalm 147:5 -“Great is our Lord, and mighty in power; his understanding has no limit.”

[Drew Smith]

xxxooxxx wrote:

I know this world is ruled by infinite intelligence. Everything that surrounds us- everything that exists - proves that there are infinite laws behind it. There can be no denying this fact. It is mathematical in its precision.
Thomas A. Edison

How does one get from "infinite laws" (which are *descriptive*, not prescriptive), to "infinite intelligence")?

[samantha258]

creation

[xxxooxxx]

Drew Smith wrote:

<quoted text>
How does one get from "infinite laws" (which are *descriptive*, not prescriptive), to "infinite intelligence")?

I notice that to...would seemingly be a paradox...sort to speak.

I think the implication here is, infinite laws from an infinite intelligence...

[xxxooxxx]

xxxooxxx wrote:

<quoted text>
I notice that to...would seemingly be a paradox...sort to speak.
I think the implication here is, infinite laws from an infinite intelligence...

I really cannot imagine, how anyone can look at the incomprehensible complexity of design, in the structure of the Universe, and not be able to perceive some sort of intelligence behind it...albeit forever beyond the limited capacities of the human intellect...

and this is the concept of God, that that people like Edison and Einstein have... a incomprehensible underlying intelligence, that is plainly self evident in the structure of the Universe.

[anonymous]

Drew Smith wrote:

<quoted text>
It held up in Maine, Maryland, and Washington.
I guess you missed that.
<quoted text>
Yeah, we should just throw out voting, since that's just "statistics" for determining who Americans want for their leaders. We should throw out weather forecasting, since that's just models based upon statistics. Let's throw out actuarial tables, medical treatments, gas mileage predictions, heck, pretty much any technological advance that depends upon data, because it's all just "statistics".
<quoted text>
No, we've moved to majority acceptance. You really need to keep up.
<quoted text>
The numbers who favor same-sex marriage, which is over 50%, could go down. They aren't.
<quoted text>
You just watch your backs, warned the homophobe?

Parse! Parse! Parse! Statistics! Statistics! Statistics!

You don't accept the reality that human beings are intelligent. They can't be predicted like simple physics.

I've already given you the fairest analysis I can on the subject, but you're pulling a lame "Thelma and Louise". Nobody is going to ride off a cliff with you. In the long run, you're only going to become part of some cliche tale of the the decadent new Romans.

I'm reasonable to admit that I kind of visually looked at the size of the state of Maryland and underestimated their population as part of the Eastern seaboard megalopolis. My reality check should be to remember that Colorado has one, maybe two area codes for the entire state. There's at least three in the Cleveland area alone.

None of that changes what's at work, politically. You're caught up in your fantasy rapture as much as any Creationist. I certainly can't predict the future, but as a country, we're destined to have a big collapse soon. Unless something turns around the old Northeast aristocratic control of Washington, several obvious economic and political trends will tear your world apart.

...and the point that I have been trying to suggest without endorsing it, is that good ol' boys will have their day and they won't be happy with you and your methods. You should be making your peace with society, not fitfully trying to game the system.

[Benjamin Frankly]

xxxooxxx wrote:

<quoted text>
I really cannot imagine, how anyone can look at the incomprehensible complexity of design, in the structure of the Universe, and not be able to perceive some sort of intelligence behind it...albeit forever beyond the limited capacities of the human intellect...
and this is the concept of God, that that people like Edison and Einstein have... a incomprehensible underlying intelligence, that is plainly self evident in the structure of the Universe.

All the words you just used have the imply a designer before you tried to show one exists.

[FREE SERVANT]

xxxooxxx wrote:

<quoted text>
Isaiah 40:28 - &#8220;Do you not know? Have you not heard? The Lord is the everlasting God, the Creator of the ends of the earth, He will not grow tired or weary and his understanding no one can fathom.&#8221;
The idea that you have of God coming into existence at the time of creation, is actually a Buddhist concept of "mutual arising"...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prat%C4%ABtyasam...

Thank you for the reply, but I do not read the scripture you gave to say that God did not have a beginning.

[xxxooxxx]

Benjamin Frankly wrote:

<quoted text>
All the words you just used have the imply a designer before you tried to show one exists.

That which is self evident needs no proof.

[Drew Smith]

xxxooxxx wrote:

I really cannot imagine, how anyone can look at the incomprehensible complexity of design, in the structure of the Universe, and not be able to perceive some sort of intelligence behind it

What *exactly* in the structure of the Universe implies "some sort of intelligence behind it"?

[MADRONE]

xxxooxxx wrote:

That which is self evident needs no proof.

Delusions are self evident to the Delusional.

[Drew Smith]

anonymous wrote:

You don't accept the reality that human beings are intelligent. They can't be predicted like simple physics.

So it's just coincidence that polls taken over a period of time by different organizations show the same results?

It's just coincidence that polls are able to predict who wins in elections?

That humans are intelligent does not allow us to conclude that, when taken as a large group, we can't predict their behavior.

Otherwise, it would be impossible to design highways or buildings, it would be impossible for restaurants to predict how many staff they'll need for different shifts, it would be impossible for stores to predict how many items they need to put on the shelves.

And yet all of these things are done.

Intelligent humans, in the aggregate, are still predictable.

anonymous wrote:

In the long run, you're only going to become part of some cliche tale of the the decadent new Romans.

Ah, the wishful thinking of a homophobe. I do love a good fantasy story. But just like the Jetsons and their flying cars, your view of the future isn't likely to happen, either.

anonymous wrote:

I certainly can't predict the future

And yet you keep doing it. Why is that?

anonymous wrote:

but as a country, we're destined to have a big collapse soon. Unless something turns around the old Northeast aristocratic control of Washington, several obvious economic and political trends will tear your world apart.

Well, since you admit that you can't predict the future, your predictions are valueless, are they not?

anonymous wrote:

the point that I have been trying to suggest without endorsing it, is that good ol' boys will have their day and they won't be happy with you and your methods.

You mean the way that the "good ol' boys" have managed to prevent interracial marriages from taking place?

Oh, wait, they haven't.

I guess those "good ol' boys" won't have their day, after all.

[Cybele]

MADRONE wrote:

<quoted text>
Delusions are self evident to the Delusional.

Delusions are dangerous if one cannot comprehend them with intelligence.

[xxxooxxx]

MADRONE wrote:

<quoted text>
Delusions are self evident to the Delusional.

So Einstein and Edison were Delusional...?

[xxxooxxx]

Drew Smith wrote:

<quoted text>
What *exactly* in the structure of the Universe implies "some sort of intelligence behind it"?

everything including you...well not so much you...but you get my drift...lol

[MADRONE]

xxxooxxx wrote:

So Einstein and Edison were Delusional...?

I have no idea.

[Drew Smith]

What *exactly* in the structure of the Universe implies "some sort of intelligence behind it"?

xxxooxxx wrote:

everything including you...well not so much you...but you get my drift...lol

You're avoiding my question. I'm asking *how* anything in the structure of the Universe implies "some sort of intelligence behind it".

[Cybele]

xxxooxxx wrote:

<quoted text>
So Einstein and Edison were Delusional...?

Perhaps. They say there is a thin line between genius and crazy.