• Welcome to The Cave of Dragonflies forums, where the smallest bugs live alongside the strongest dragons.

    Guests are not able to post messages or even read certain areas of the forums. Now, that's boring, don't you think? Registration, on the other hand, is simple, completely free of charge, and does not require you to give out any personal information at all. As soon as you register, you can take part in some of the happy fun things at the forums such as posting messages, voting in polls, sending private messages to people and being told that this is where we drink tea and eat cod.

    Of course I'm not forcing you to do anything if you don't want to, but seriously, what have you got to lose? Five seconds of your life?

Does a God of ANY KIND exist?

God created reality as humans know it. God may well be bound by his own reality that we are unaware of.
And the Big Bang may have taken place in its own reality that we are unaware of. Special pleading.

God is omnipotent, but he acts through his 'holy spirit'. Humanity clearly doesn't know how this works, but it isn't too far to say the 'holy spirit' would be a toolkit or machinery (or whatever the equivalent in 'Godworld' is.)
So in lieu of combining pieces of established knowledge, you are inventing a being which ignores everything we know and then admitting that nobody knows how it works. This is absurd.

Treating both creation and evolution as fictional (to put them both on a level playing field) I see why evolution seems more logical - it was designed that way. Creation is about what we don't know, and a) it can seem fanciful and b) it can be scary. Evolution can only result in depression
Appeal to consequences. The possible fallout of acceptance of evolution has zero bearing on whether or not it is true.

I must also note that the most popular religions paint people as mere pawns created for the entertainment of some deity and describe life as a short and fairly pointless waiting room before we get to the good stuff. Evolution is only depressing if you cannot figure out what to do with your life without someone telling you, which is kinda pathetic.

1) Evolution relies on chance. It relies on the chance mutation being benificial for the organim in an environment. The organism may not evolve randomly but what it evolves into has a random element to it.
Irrelevant. Everything in the world relies on chance. Particles move about at random, yet reactions always work out the same way and water still evaporates at room temperature.

This argument is akin to saying that you will never get a 6 if you keep rolling a die because it relies on random chance.

2) I can demonstrate that this intelligence might exist, but you will just say 'that was evolution'
Convenient! My work is done for me.

Again, I call the parts where a lot of the evidence seems to rely on extrapolating what is shown at another level speculation, not evolution as a whole.
I am not convinced you understand how science works. Evolution makes predictions, and we have found evidence that confirms these predictions. The same applies to every new proposal and every existing theory.

Creationism, on the other hand, predicts and implies nothing. It cannot be tested at all.

I like the word 'more.' It seems to fit. There's still no absolute proof, however much evidence you have. If you want absolute proof, get a a time machine.
Why are you demanding absolute proof if, by your own admission, it is impossible to find?

We cannot even absolutely prove that gravity works how we think it does. All we can do is notice that it usually works a certain way, make predictions ("if I let go of this ball, it will fall to the ground"), and test them. Gravity has never predicted anything that has proven false, so we accept it. If we ever found an exception, we would have to rethink our understanding of gravity.

Even a large amount of evidence doesn't make something correct, however.
No, but it certainly makes it likely, and useful for understanding the world if nothing else.

I think it comes down to how evolution is within human understanding but God is beyond it
I see no reason to think anything is beyond human understanding. This is a cop-out and more special pleading.

the concept of this not being everything seems 'wrong' to some people, wheras others feel there must be something else. Is it irrational to think this isn't everything there is?
What makes you think I believe "this" is all that exists? I don't discredit the possibility of other universes or orthogonal dimensions; it would be rather arrogant of me to assume that our universe is unique.

There appears to be design in living things. Is it so impossible that there might be a designer.
Where is the design? There are plenty of odd bits and pieces left in all sorts of creatures that either serve little purpose or could have been designed far better -- and yet they weren't, even by a being supposedly far smarter than us.

We see a lot of organisms that seem to fit their environments because organisms that don't fit well DIE.

You will notice that I talked about the possibility of a creator. This is key. It's important to consider this because not all creators are the same, as they have a number of differences.
Except that a creator brings far more questions into this than it answers.

For one, would a creator not appear designed? If it is capable of designing everything on its own, clearly it is more complex and powerful than everything; why is it exempt from needing its own creator? This is more special pleading.

Of course evolution and creation may not be incompatable at all. If God created the first cell, which isn't (acording to evolutionists) part of evolution, and then 'steered' the evolution of life (remember this is the guy who invented the physical universe), there is no conflict with science and the bible.
There are people who believe this, but it still raises the same questions about God. In fact, it turns him into the god of the gaps.

I'll leave anyway. All I did was provide some answers (bas as they may have been) to some questions, but clearly I am incapable of being such a skilled debator as youself.
All I do is consider what I think and why.

You don't know me. You don't know what I'm like. You don't know what I mean. I spent half the homosexuality thread staring at inncorrect assumptions about me.
Emphasis mine.
Perhaps you should learn to better express yourself, rather than complaining that we don't understand you.



Anyway: Permit =/= condone. I have legal permission to drink as much alcohol as I want. This does not mean the government of my country condones binge drinking.
So what would you say if governments allowed slavery? Would that be okay, because they're not condoning it?

God created humans perfect for their purpose: Intelligent, free willed creature who served god willingly. Thing have gone wrong since then but if Adam and Eve hadn't gone down the path of rebellion humanity wouldn't have become imperfect. The problems are a result of Adam and Eve rejecting God. So, in short: It's our fault.
Funny. You just said it's Adam's and Eve's faults. What sort of benevolent creator punishes 10+ billion people for the actions of two?

See all this makes sense, and doesn't contradict evolution at all. I actually think something similar to this, only in my version God exist in a different reality and invented this one.
Where did the other reality come from?

If the organism stays the same, then it isn't evolving.
Organisms do not evolve. Populations evolve.

Also how does something which is almost universally harmful provide the basis of how life evolved? I don't care how many mutations occured; saying that enough beneficial ones happened for evolution is a cop-out.
No, it's not. Detrimental mutations generally kill the organism; beneficial ones naturally spread. It doesn't matter if there are a hundred million bad mutations and just one good one; the good one is still far better at replicating than all the bad ones combined. This is the very basis upon which evolution works.
 
Last edited:
If the organism stays the same, then it isn't evolving.

Looking at an individual level is both deceiving and wrong, since obviously the majority of organisms are not going to have genetic mutations, beneficial or harmful, and neither does evolution happen on an individual scale. Evolution is, simply put, the change in genetic makeup of a population over time; the key words here, of course, being "over time".

Also how does something which is almost universally harmful provide the basis of how life evolved? I don't care how many mutations occured; saying that enough beneficial ones happened for evolution is a cop-out.

You think that it is almost universally harmful because only major mutations are obvious, and these are, more or less, always harmful. Mutations on a smaller scale are not noticeable, but can still have an impact on the survival of the organism. Plus, the more harmful the mutation, the less likely it is to spread, so at a certain point harmful mutations stop being harmful, similarly to how viruses that are too lethal will eventually run their course, their hosts dying before the virus could be passed on.

Besides, there are other ways to achieve genetic variability.
 
Funny. You just said it's Adam's and Eve's faults. What sort of benevolent creator punishes 10+ billion people for the actions of two?

Original sin. I learned about it in Religion class. Apparently, because they sinned, we are all, by default, sinners, and should repent or be punished

^^ That just reminded me about another part of my theory about a deity:

Either they don't care about us or they are a dick
 
Treating both creation and evolution as fictional (to put them both on a level playing field) I see why evolution seems more logical - it was designed that way. Creation is about what we don't know, and a) it can seem fanciful and b) it can be scary. Evolution can only result in depression

... Let me get this straight. You're saying that the idea that all things have adapted to their environment, rather than be created by some ass hole in the sky, will only result in depression?
Do you actually even know what you're talking about any more?

2) I can demonstrate that this intelligence might exist, but you will just say 'that was evolution'

Likely because it is. Please give us this evidence.

Again, I call the parts where a lot of the evidence seems to rely on extrapolating what is shown at another level speculation, not evolution as a whole. And it's not hypocracy unless I say I am not speculating, which I haven't (intentionally)

No, it's hypocrisy when you claim that, and I can't emphasise this enough, a highly studied, supported, and tested theory is mere speculation, hand waving it away and claiming that your fairy tale is more credible than it.

I like the word 'more.' It seems to fit. There's still no absolute proof, however much evidence you have. If you want absolute proof, get a a time machine. Even a large amount of evidence doesn't make something correct, however.

Nothing in science can be 100% proven, and I'm sure you won't be claiming that gravity is 'just' a theory when stepping out of a twenty story window.

And if you're so much of a Nazi about evidence for evolution, why the fucking hell do you sit there and contently accept the magic man in the sky's existence despite there not being a shred of evidence to even remotely prove his existence!?

There appears to be design in living things.

Really? I hadn't noticed it. Please, show me this 'design'.

Of course evolution and creation may not be incompatable at all. If God created the first cell, which isn't (acording to evolutionists) part of evolution, and then 'steered' the evolution of life (remember this is the guy who invented the physical universe), there is no conflict with science and the bible.

... Except that then it isn't evolution; that's intelligent design.
Not to mention the fact that God isn't even needed there, evolution works fine without the hand of some neurotic deity controlling it.

You don't know me. You don't know what I'm like. You don't know what I mean. I spent half the homosexuality thread staring at inncorrect assumptions about me.

Maybe you ought to rush back to the Homosexuality debate to clear those up?

Or are you just going to come off as more of a homophobe than you already have?

Anyway: Permit =/= condone. I have legal permission to drink as much alcohol as I want. This does not mean the government of my country condones binge drinking.

Oh, so can I have a few slaves, then? I mean, I probably shouldn't have too many, I'm driving after all.
The fact it's permitted in the first place is hideous and disgusting.

Also you are supposed to look after your slaves.

Oh, that's a relief. T_T

Intelligent, free willed creature who served god willingly.

This is an oxymoron. Mainly the bold parts. Please fix it.

The problems are a result of Adam and Eve rejecting God. So, in short: It's our fault.

If one of my parents was a murderer or a rapist, I would not necessarily be a murderer or rapist myself, nor should I be blamed for their actions. This logic is retarded, and continues to prove God is an utter ass hole.

See all this makes sense, and doesn't contradict evolution at all. I actually think something similar to this, only in my version God exist in a different reality and invented this one. Also my God is tied to the bible (but not mainstream christianity, since they just made up a load of stuff)

since they just made up a load of stuff

I agree. In fact, I'd dare say they made it all up.

Can, not will. I say that evolution can only cause depression as opposed to other negative emotions such as fear. To be honest I didn't count positive emotions as they're basicly the same for [DON'T THROW AROUND THE WORD THEORY LIKE IT MEANS IDEA]

What the hell are you talking about?

If the organism stays the same, then it isn't evolving. It may evolve at another stage but for the time being it will not evolve. The real point is probably that when evolution of species takes place is random or something.

... I've had to repeat "Learn Yourself Some Science" how many times now?

Also how does something which is almost universally harmful provide the basis of how life evolved? I don't care how many mutations occured; saying that enough beneficial ones happened for evolution is a cop-out.

You know, I could make a long rant about how chance means nothing if you consider the fact that life has existed for billions of years, how the mutations that move adaption along are subtle, and whatnot, but I'm too busy laughing at how a theist just claimed science is using a cop out argument.

It's...

It's so ridiculous.

Wow.
 
Last edited:
You want this? Maybe you should have said that rather than mentioning about how slavery is relevent to a debate about the existance of God. I don't see anything between the lines very often.
It is completely relevant to the debate because the Bible allows slavery.

Anyway: Permit =/= condone. I have legal permission to drink as much alcohol as I want. This does not mean the government of my country condones binge drinking.
Also you are supposed to look after your slaves.
What the hell does this have to do with slavery?
We don't have legal permission to own slaves, nor do we have legal permission to own slaves in mass.



God created humans perfect for their purpose: Intelligent, free willed creature who served god willingly.
Well if he is truly omniscient he would know the epic failure of this plan.

Thing have gone wrong since then but if Adam and Eve hadn't gone down the path of rebellion humanity wouldn't have become imperfect.
Adam and Eve did not know right from wrong until "their eyes were opened" by the fruit of tree X. (sorry I can't recall its name as of now)

The problems are a result of Adam and Eve rejecting God. So, in short: It's our fault.
I am not Adam and Eve. Nor is anyone else on Earth.


(but not mainstream christianity, since they just made up a load of stuff)
And you haven't?



Can, not will. I say that evolution can only cause depression as opposed to other negative emotions such as fear. To be honest I didn't count positive emotions as they're basicly the same for both 'theories'
The Scientific Theory of Evolution likely has not depressed anyone other than those people who think it's the end of the universe to have come from "monkeys."
And honestly I don't see what strikes fear into the hearts of creationists.

evolutionist
This is not a word. Evolution is a scientific theory, meaning that it has been extensively and tested and not yet failed. "Creationist," however, is a word.

and re: irreducible complexity
Okay, let's define the level of complexity of humans to be of Complexity Level X. You say that since we are this complex, we must have come from a deity; in this example I will use the Christian God because that is the one you believe in.
Humans are at Complexity Level X. Therefore, we must have been created by something intelligent. You have said before that we as humans cannot understand God as a whole; therefore, he must be more complex and intelligent then us.
Let's define God's complexity level to be Complexity Level Y. As said before, Complexity Level Y is of a higher level than that of Complexity Level X. Referring to the first paragraph, things of at least Complexity Level X must have been created by a deity (the Christian God in this case). Since Complexity Level Y is more than (and effectively at least) Complexity Level X, God must have been created by a deity. What deity, though? You are a monotheist; that leaves the god-pool empty.
With your logic, there must have been an infinite chain of deities that created the next one down the line to be coherent. However, that is not the case, and your logic is faulted.
 
Perhaps you should learn to better express yourself, rather than complaining that we don't understand you.

Hence I'm going away and leaving you alone.

If I post in the debating hall again feel free to ignore what I say.

I agree. In fact, I'd dare say they made it all up.

But if they did that they invented a load of stuff, wrote a book about it and then added stuff, changed stuff and contradicted thier own book.

... I've had to repeat "Learn Yourself Some Science" how many times now?

I do know some science, actually. And it involves biology. See I'm half conviced that some people (prehaps not anyone on here even) assume that anyone who believes in God cannot know abot science
 
Last edited:
I'm quite frankly disgusting by the lack of scientific knowledge in this thread. It's not hard, people. Learn the fucking difference between a "hypothesis" and a "theory." And while we're at it learn to understand the words "over time."

[plus the world is not 10000 years old. It is much older, dickwads. Screw the Bible and its date.]
 
i'm christian.

god exists to me.

my life has been filled with benediction lately. let's see science explain that.
 
[plus the world is not 10000 years old. It is much older, dickwads. Screw the Bible and its date.]

At what point doest the bible say that 'Day' in Genesis 1 is 24 hours long.(in fact since adam was created 6000 years ago by bible chronology you apparently already accept this) The word day has two meanings in Genesis anyway, since it also refers to the hours of daylight. Hence the word day refers to a period which could be millions, billions or even trillions of years old (see one bible passage can conflict with science in more way than one if you want it to)

Oh and I have an intresting quote about theories and hypothosese and evolution. It's kind of 100 miles away from me though.

I'm going away because I'm clearly not qualified enough to debate with you guys.
 
if you want it to
Decide on one interpretation of the Bible and fucking stick with it.

Oh and I have an intresting quote about theories and hypothosese and evolution. It's kind of 100 miles away from me though.
Go get it.
This is not the "too lazy to do X" Hall.

edit:
also please respond to my argument
and if you're not coming back again then do not make regular posts.
 
1) I do, it's different people who have different interpretations. That's not my fault.

2) No I mean the paper it's written on is in another country.

I'll go now I promise
 
But if they did that they invented a load of stuff, wrote a book about it and then added stuff, changed stuff and contradicted thier own book.

Yeah so? You make up a lot of stuff when writing fiction. That's why it's fiction.

I do know some science, actually. And it involves biology. See I'm half conviced that some people (prehaps not anyone on here even) assume that anyone who believes in God cannot know abot science

I try not to judge people on what they believe, I prefer to judge people on what they say, do, and type. You have proven to everyone in this thread that you know little about evolution, little about science, and nothing about rational and critical thinking.

Oh and I have an intresting quote about theories and hypothosese and evolution. It's kind of 100 miles away from me though.

That's nice to know. Thanks.

T_T
 
1) I do, it's different people who have different interpretations. That's not my fault.
I must change my plan.
EvilCrazyMonkey said:
Decide on one interpretation of the Bible that doesn't reflect your bias and fucking stick with it.

2) No I mean the paper it's written on is in another country.
Oh, ignore my response to that then.

I'll go now I promise
I'm not forcing you to leave; you're stating that you will go, but you come back and post more.
Not that I mind, just pointing it out.
 
I do know some science, actually. And it involves biology. See I'm half conviced that some people (prehaps not anyone on here even) assume that anyone who believes in God cannot know abot science
It is very frequently the case that theists grossly misunderstand science at the very least.

my life has been filled with benediction lately. let's see science explain that.
Sometimes good things happen. Sometimes bad things happen.

There are people in Africa dying of AIDS because the Catholic Church is insisting that condoms have no effect on the spread of HIV. Let's see religion explain that?

At what point doest the bible say that 'Day' in Genesis 1 is 24 hours long.
At what point does the Bible say that "sky" is the big blue thing above you, or "good" means things you ought to do, or "the" is an article?
 
There are people in Africa dying of AIDS because the Catholic Church is insisting that condoms have no effect on the spread of HIV. Let's see religion explain that?

Easy. Religion explains it as, "Well, they are committing adultery, so there!"

^^ Well, that is probably their reasoning in the Church, anyways
 
my life has been filled with benediction lately. let's see science explain that.

I recently wanted to kill myself. I now feel better thanks to Prozac. I didn't pray to some God, even though churches clearly state that in these situations, one should pray to God.

Let's see religion explain that. +1 Science.

I must apologize for my recent descending debating points. I should be sleeping more before I set foot in Argument Land.
 
no really the earth is not 10000 years old. I'm completely serious.

oh plus the fact that there've been lots of good things doesn't mean anything. People tend to overlook the bad things that happen in favour of the good things. plus what vee said.
 
Back
Top Bottom