Fa-Q wrote:But Evolutionists boast the "factual" evidence of the tree of life. That would mean what I said, we all came from one-celled organisms. Of course now we all reproduce sexually and asexually, but back when amino acids and slowly evolved into one-celled organisms, we produced asexually. This speaking from an Evolutionist's standpoint.
Who the fuck 'boasts' about it
You're generalizing and making up this character-type to make your arguments / side look more fair and reasonable. Or attempting to. Shitty tactic, try another.
Science is the OPPOSITE of fucking arrogant. People like you think that if you assert anything with confidence... when you have VERY good reason to, such as with Evolution, that you are 'arrogant'. Evolution is as accepted a fact as any in science, and you thinking you've personally spotted holes in it, implying thousands upon thousands of minds have missed is arrogant as fuck. And the fact you don't realize that shows how ignorant you are.
Science embraces information, science embraces new information. Science embraces challenges, that's how it keeps progressing. If it wasn't for the constant humility in science, in admitting it's wrong and updating its information, we wouldn't have all this wonderful, mind-blowing technology and luxury we use around us. If we relied on the stale, stagnant, never-moving, never-evolving, always-arrogant attitude of religion say, we'd still be stuck in the fucking dark ages.
So maybe you should go live in a fucking cave with a candle you arrogant cunt.
Fa-Q wrote:I love how you immediately come in with such condescension. "One and a million is a hyperbole that means "its a long shot," which also a hyperbole. I used it to make my point. Did you really want me to pull out a fuckin' scientific calculator and say, "actually its more of an One and 156,891 chance?" In a true argument, they would deduct points for a diversion argument. That's minus ten for Team EminemBase.
But with such an important point, ie. the point which is the basis for your entire argument, you can't afford to just hang it on a vague and meaningless hyperbole. If you can't be specific or speak in factual terms, and need to use a broad analogy, then you don't have a great point as you think you have. We all use analogies and hyperboles, but you were emphasizing a very specific thing within Evolution. What you said was wrong and it just proves you haven't read into Evolution enough.
Once again, it's so unbelievably arrogant of you to think thousands of geniuses within science have missed what you've suddenly thought of. Hilariously ignorant too.
And you have the fucking CHEEK to call ME arrogant? how dare you, you little cocksucker. You open your paragraph by saying "I can disprove Evolution very easily." and IIIIII am arrogant?
fucking hell, that is ridiculous. You can 'disprove' one of the most solid theories ever presented in science, the explanation for life and something which has only strengthened in validity in the 100+ years it's been poured over and debated - but YOU, Mr. Astute, can disprove this, all of this... as you have spotted something noooobody else has?... and, I'M arrogant?
Permanent minus status for team Fa-Q.
Fa-Q wrote:First off, let me start by pointing out the ignorance in believing they are smarter than 91% of the world. By saying perfect logic, you are saying in a very passive yet condescending way, that anyone that does not agree with you is lower than you. I do know how natural selection works. I also know that if there were "billions of years" there would be one of two things. Either we would have a massive amount of intermediate, middle-staged evolutionary animals/species; or we would have very little amounts of species and have more intelligent creatures inhabiting this planet. As far as the scientific community is concerned, we have ONE truly "intelligent" creature that can make 100% of his choices, and that is homo sapiens. The next smartest animal, according to scientists, is the dolphin. But from sunrise to sunset, they follow a strict pattern of instincts, not choices. We are the only creature on Earth that has been "selected" to make 100% of their decisions. How did other animals not get "selected."
First off, let me start by pointing out the ignorance in you thinking that me calling Evolution by natural selection 'perfect logic' is ignorant.
A basic definition of ignorance:
Lack of knowledge or informationSo, for my statement, which was that Evolution by natural selection is 'perfect logic' to be 'ignorant' - I would have to be speaking with a lack of knowledge, or that statement would have to be informed or backed up by a slither of information...
Evolution by natural selection being a scientific fact as we know it isn't my opinion. I didn't come up with it, and I've contributed nothing to its acceptance. It has however been poured over and studied since Darwin first introduced it well over 100 years ago.
Since then, science has proven its validity and reality way beyond a reasonable doubt. It is proven by multiple angles and there is no longer a debate within science that evolution is true. Only a debate on how certain specifics of it happened. But absolutely no debate on the basic logic on which it is founded. That's just the reality of it, deal with it.
So me saying that Evolution by natural selection is 'perfect logic' is not actually ignorant of anything. As I'm taking into account the wealth of knowledge and confirmation science has accumulated over the years. The statement is said BECAUSE of knowledge and information, not because of a lack of.
If you choose to disregard all of that, and the mountains of evidence which prove it beyond a sensible consideration and which supersedes any individual or personal input, that's up to you. But it is in fact THAT standpoint, which is ignorant. And you are also ignorant for thinking it's not.
Why is that so? because you're placing your own personal opinion and distaste for Evolution (or whatever other reasons, religious I suspect from your later comments) above facts and repeatable theories of logic and... reality. You're placing yourself above all of that, your own personal feelings, above all of that. Which again, is not only ignorant, but incredibly arrogant.
Therefore you have absolutely zero right to call me arrogant. You're the most arrogant by default. And the most ignorant, offensively and stupidly ignorant in fact.
As for humans being the only species able to make a choice...
Well actually, let's start with what you said about only having one 'intelligent' creature. We actually have plenty of intelligent creatures. I realize by intelligence, and by emphasizing it like that you're probably implying intelligence to be defined by the ability to reason and make choice, and consciousness, but that's not a very good definition.
It's actually been shown that Elephants for example have empathy. I think empathy and self-awareness go hand in hand which would appear so as... there was a 'mirror test' done whereby, a mark would be placed on an animal, and then the animal shown a mirror. The mark was only visible in the mirror. And they concluded that if the animal looked in the mirror and did nothing but try to touch the mark ON the mirror, that the animal thought it was seeing another... dog, cat, X...
Where as if the animal looked in the mirror, saw the mark and then touched it on themselves, they knew that the mirror was showing a reflection of them and therefore they had self-awareness. Most animals such as dogs and cats did the expected and touched the mirror.
Which although not totally definitive makes it unlikely these animals are aware of themselves.
Elephants however touched the mark on themselves. Showing they are actually aware of their own existence. How much more they know we don't know, we don't even understand our own brains that well let alone the brains of other species.
Elephants have also been seen to morn over the death of family, showing that they feel some kind of emotional hurt and awareness of life and death. Beyond that, they have also helped out humans and other species, which shows they can extend their empathy outside of their direct family, and even outside of their own species. Which is fairly incredible.
This shows they are not only aware of themselves, but that they can reason to a degree which allows them to extend their emotional kindness to other living things, as humans can. As it's the ability to see yourself as something else, feel their struggle or pain, and try to rectify it.
You also mentioned Dolphins. Dolphins actually engage in play, they'll play with humans for example... you say they can't make choices? but isn't it a choice to play? as I doubt it's an instinct. It's an indulgence and a way of producing internal pleasure, indulging in fun is a very conscious attribute. That's just to name but two species which have at least some attributes of consciousness.
Most other animals cannot or appear not to be able to act outside of instinct, likely because they are not aware of themselves and are therefore more like machines. Machines of DNA doing nothing but repeating behaviour and instinct programmed into them to survive.
You say why would nature select just one species to be as intelligent as we are... ? I don't know what that means, why you're asking that or how you think that disproves or questions anything. For all we know we could be the only life in the Universe, that doesn't mean that we don't exist, or that we're silly, or that we can disprove our own existence.
How is something being rare disproving it? evolution shape-shifts and improves over time by only selecting, by definition, things that work. Therefore after billions of years of evolution of intelligence, it would make sense to see a very intelligent species such as ourselves. And since positively affecting mutations would be rare, and only good changes would take effect, it would make sense for there to be only one or a handful of truly intelligent species.
As it would follow a line of improvement...
We didn't get 'selected to make choices' - our brains expanded over time which eventually gave birth to self-awareness and consciousness. And empathy. It's through these things we're able to reason our own existence, reason with others, choose between options. But I think even the appearance of choice in humans is amplified, by us, and I think we think we have more control than we do.
If you go into the fridge because you feel thirsty, and you see milk and orange juice. And you're trying to decide which to drink, and let's say you eventually settle on milk... you may feel as if you made a totally free and conscious and random decision there but what if your subconscious and your body had already decided right when you had the choice. And you just had the illusion of a privilege due to the fact you're aware of your process.
Maybe you were always going to choose milk as your body wanted certain things contained in milk and your brain craved that exact taste etc.
Also, a lot of the time we react on instinct too. Like, if we wish to kill ourselves, anybody who has ever killed themselves - a normally functioning, emotional, aware, human being - would of felt a mental resistance to doing so as they were about to do it. Which is why it can be so hard to kill yourself. As it's your natural instinct not to.
I think it's more-so we can choose our choices. Rather than do exactly what we like. We have that illusion but in reality, we're still bound by our genes and limitation. What doesn't appear to be limited is our thought, and imagination. As trillions of new connections can be made in the brain and we can think and invent things which the prior generation couldn't conceive of.
However, even our innovation evolves in an incremental fashion. We didn't just come up with the computer as we see it now, out of the blue for example. Technology is a perfect replication of evolution in fact, and shows that we repeat nature, we emulate it. Because we were built by nature.
It started with a computer chip, something to hold information. Then as we understand that, we expand the amount of information, then we think of different kinds of data a computer chip can hold, then we build multiple chips, then we realize we can use a computer to perform tasks... and so on. But it's a huge incremental process over time.
But if you were to show an iPod to somebody in the stone age, it would look like actual magic. As they would have absolutely no idea what the fuck it is, how it works, how it can function the way they see it functions. It would be the illusion of instant design.
Which is what we see with species. If you think of a human as nature's iPod, to ourselves, we look incredible. And we haven't seen the huge incremental process which led up to us, so we can be overwhelmed with this idea of instant design, which is why some choose to think it was god. But the difference is, we have now uncovered the path which led to us.
Just like if a cave man was to dismantle an iPod, figure out how it works and eventually figure out the incremental thought processes which led to its eventual design and function. We've done that with life, we've reverse-engineered it and there is no need to induce a creator. It's not needed.
Other animals didn't get 'selected' as that wasn't their strength or line of evolution. I don't get your point here. Other animals can't think like us just like we weren't 'selected' to fly or run 70mph, because our strong attribute is our brains. So once we started to stand out in that region, that's where we kept excelling and expanding through selection, rapidly.
Other animals excelled in other areas, that's what makes them different species. They didn't need massive brains or consciousness as other species survive in other ways and do just fine without the kind of brains we have. We don't have other incredible attributes such as speed, flight, incredible strength etc. though. So actually, it would be more weird and more of a point if other animals did have the brains we have.
If a cheetah could reason and choose and had the power of speech, that would be more a point in your court. As it wouldn't necessarily need that to survive and already has these other incredible attributes which make it what it is. The fact we are defined by our brains is a point in evolution's court, everything is how it should be if what we think happened happened. Which it did.
Fa-Q wrote:Have you ever noticed that most Evolutionists are just about the same character type. Very arrogant and boastful and make you feel stupid for believing in something as ridiculous as a god. The fact is, Evolutionists don't want to believe Evolution. No, they want to not NOT believe in a god. Triple negative to prove a point. They are arrogant people, thus wanting to believe that they created themselves, indirectly of course. Instead of approaching my idea with open-mindedness and eagerness to engage in an argument in a civilized and equal manner, you choose to demean me. If Evolution was true, it wouldnt have selected assholes like you.
No, I think the only people who have 'noticed' that are people like you who think that people who base their opinions on sense, and fact, and knowledge are arrogant.
All I've done is pointed out what is accepted by science. All you've done is think you're smarter than all of that and have seen holes nobody else has ever seen. Which is about as arrogant as it can get. I don't believe in god because it's illogical, unnecessary and unproven. That's not arrogant, no more than it'd be arrogant for you to deny me the right to say I can fly.
'They' - so you're essentially generalizing and summarizing ANYBODY who disagrees with you or ANYBODY who accepts Evolution as fact, which it has been proven and accepted as... as arrogant? the irony of that is hilarious. That is childish, ignorant and arrogant, as
fuck.
Approaching what idea with open-mindedness? nothing you have said is new or throws evolution into question. The fact you think it does shows you're ignorant of the information available. But what, you want me to do your fucking homework for you now? you'll find hostility from people like myself because you're being totally arrogant and pug-faced.
Open, fucking, mindnedness? are you kidding me. You plea this kind of stance after you've been shot down. You opened your argument by saying you could 'disprove evolution very easily', that's about as closed-minded and stupid as it gets. You think you can disprove over a hundred years of incredible evidence, proven from so many angles it's not funny, you think you can disprove that with some basic ideas you've had sat in your bedroom, based on a very limied knowledge of everything...
If you had said "okay, I realize Evolution is accepted as fact, but this is what I don't get about it..." that would be totally different. You however open by saying you can DISPROVE it,
very easily, then get annoyed when you're faced with logical opposition to such stupidity?
And, that closing statement, you may think it's a clever little sound bite but it not only makes no sense, it adds nothing to your argument. Firstly, you're the asshole you smug, arrogant, deluded little prick. Secondly, evolution is a process, not a conscious mind or 'thing' which 'chooses things'. That's just what nature has done as we can define it...
And there's no morality or opinion in that. So assholes very much still would be produced through this process, that's not a factor which enters into it. It's something we later define, and you were created through evolution, or are here because of that process.
I don't think, and people who understand and accept Evolution do not think that we created ourselves either. What does that even mean. How could I have created myself? that makes absolutely no sense. I didn't create myself, I was created by my mother and father, and they were created by their mother and father, and so on and so on. We were all created in this same repeatable way because we're programmed by nature to reproduce in this way.
Nobody created themselves. Humanity is one species of millions, that was not created, but which just happened, a life form that was shape-shifted, by nature. We've explained it perfectly and adding a creator is not needed, doesn't explain anything and then you need to explain the creator. We know how life came to be, and it involved no creator. If you wish to believe it did and have been brought up to believe that and can't out think it, bad luck. But don't expect me to take it seriously.
It's also pretty sad that you can't see beyond that and are so indoctrinated in your line of thinking that you go as far as to deny actual fact because it contradicts your personal belief. It's not just sad, it's fucking scary. Believe what you want, but don't come in here mouthing off, saying you can 'easily' disprove something that is bigger than you, and which is a scientific fact. You idiot.
