Please, Iacchus. Evolution does not deal with the creation of things. Neither mean of the word "evolution" does. Try to understand this and you will have no problem at all.
Please, Iacchus. Evolution does not deal with the creation of things. Neither mean of the word "evolution" does. Try to understand this and you will have no problem at all.
Yes, isn't it amazing how the whole Universe is practically explainable, except for how it got here? Do you think that for whatever reason it did, that it too might be logical? Of course if that were possible, it tells us that logic (and/or truth) preceded the beginning of the Universe. Now how is that possible? It sounds to me like it must have been a part of some "grand plan."
And you seem to be speaking as if it all coudn't have happened in the same Universe ... which, in fact it did.
Would you go so far as to suggest that when a star system forms, it is just "following the script?" Or, what exactly do you mean by it not being an "adaptive change?" By the way, life is the only thing that appears to be an anomaly, in a Universe which otherwise conducts itself in an orderly and predictable fashion. Indeed, look at how widespread and evenly distributed the star systems are, and how much they entail the same process of formation and, are comprised of the same thing. Almost as if it was instinctively understood how to do this, right after the Big Bang occurred. Hmm ...
Actually, I wasn't thinking that but, now that you mention it ...
Evolution does not require a guider. Evolution does not deal with the creation of life (or of the thing which is evolving). Evolution only acts on pre-existing things. Evolution has no goal in mind. Please try to understand these, Iacchus.
Evolution is a process, and it requires whatever it is that put that process into effect.
Lothian
should be banned
Yes you could but how useful is it ? If it was all down to God how can we predict the future ?
Science is mainly about finding rules for the future. To do that we look at the past. Sometime science comes up with a theory that works for the past and appears to work for the future. It allows us to predict what will happen in certain circumstances.
Is that merely predicting what God will do in the future ? If we can predict everything God will do does that make him redundant ? Is god merely a god of the gaps for the ignorant ?
{emphasis added}
That is the crux, Iacchus. If it were possible, then sure, you've got a point. But it isn't.
No, it doesn't. Evolution (I assume you are talking about biological evolution, not "change over time" evolution) simply requires variation in a population, hereditary traits and selective pressure. It requires nothing of "whatever it is that put that process into effect" as the only thing that "put the process into effect" is the existance of life. Also, please not that you are assuming that the process has to be "put into effect" for it to work.
There was a farmer, had a dog...
And, if God does exist? All we are merely doing is suggesting God works in a logical and progressive manner. What's wrong with that?
Do you believe that truth existed before the advent of humans? If so, then at what point did truth not exist?
Lothian
should be banned
But you are doing it the other way round. You are saying that because it is logical there must be a god.
If there is a god and we know everything he will do. What use does he have ?
And therein lies the problem. For without said processes put in place, there would be nothing for science to predict.
I'm saying that because we don't know and, that it is logical, it might be possible. Now, what I believe on the other hand, is another story.
Obviously we don't know all about Him if we don't know that He exists.
Last edited:
Lothian
should be banned
It is possible. Lots of things are possible. Do you have any evidence to support yout theory ?
You miss my point. If god does not exist then the idea is useless. If god does exist and we can predict how she acts she is useless. It all leads to the same answer. What is the point of god ?
If you are asking if I have the means to determine this, the answer is yes.
Well, is there a point to existence? If there is no God, then I guess the answer would be no.
Lothian
should be banned
Well you would be the first !
Answer my question. What is the point of god ? and I will answer yours.
No, as I consider 'truth' subjective. But if you take "truth" to mean "properties of things", then yes, of course. They didn't exist before the big bang, as nothing existed before the big bang.
Of course, anything is possible.
Very true.
You assume he exists as a part of your argument, Iacchus. This is circular reasoning, also known as "Begging the Question".
Last edited: