These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Bible bashing

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Kievan Arakyd
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#201 - 2012-07-17 21:02:07 UTC
This thread is just another example of the brain rot brought on by the inability of the human race to leave some aspects of the stone age behind. Precisely why EVE will remain science fiction and not science fact for some time to come.

Got my Dust514 key...
Corina Jarr
en Welle Shipping Inc.
#202 - 2012-07-17 21:02:25 UTC
Kievan Arakyd wrote:
Corina Jarr wrote:
Kievan Arakyd wrote:

1. the only worthy human endeavor is science. it is the only thing that will save this terrible species.
2. Except that, it doesnt seek to just do that for its adherents, but for everyone else too.
3. I agree with this.
4. Marriage is a legal contract. You should be allowed to marry whoever you want, even multiple people, without persecution.
5. The majority of religious groups do just that today, state that science is all wrong. see, climate change deniers, antievolutionists. We should throw these people into a volcano, because gravity and plate tectonics are just theories right?
6. Not just some, but most.
7. All associations of people seek power, not limited to religions.


5) some do not have a problem with all science, just the theories (and they are just theories) that conflict with their beliefs. Whats wrong with not believing a theory that you have an alternate explanation for?


The problem with theories is just that, the word theory. In common usage the word theory means something quite different than the scientific term theory. When you say theory, you make it seem like it was something someone pulled out of their ass. In science, a theory is something that has had DECADES of thought, experiment, and other research poured into it, including peer review. On alternate explanations: this is where it gets twisted, as these are the ones that are usually pulled from the ass, and are designed to explain a preconceived notion, ie religion.

Scientific theory is NOT up for debate or subject to your opinion.

Except they are. Even the best scientific theory has yet to be completely proven.

Take gravity for example. We (general public) accept it as proven.
However, it hasn't been. The force that holds massive objects together cannot be seen, only its effects. Until we identify what directly causes the attraction between massive objects, the theory of gravity as a whole is incomplete. And what causes that attraction is of continuous debate.
Kievan Arakyd
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#203 - 2012-07-17 21:03:17 UTC
Simi Kusoni wrote:
FloppieTheBanjoClown wrote:
Fiona Tsero wrote:
Corina Jarr wrote:
Simi Kusoni wrote:

Trans-species evolution? I'm actually afraid to ask.

I think he means a significant enough change to allow for the formation of a new species, likely referring to more complex organisms that bacteria.

just a guess.


Or any one species going to another species at all.


Did you know there are some breeds of dogs which cannot produce viable offspring when mated? Beagles and Irish Setters, for example, almost never produce puppies at all. As one of the more common definitions of species involves the ability to reproduce, it seems we're looking at the beginning of a divergence in the species. It's quite possible that the artificial selection placed upon dogs has driven their evolution fast enough that we can actually document the start of an divergence in the past few hundred years.

Evolution generally takes millenia. We only came up with the idea less than 200 years ago. Just what are you expecting? A chimp to have a human baby? That's not how it works.

By the sounds of it Fiona isn't talking about speciation, we've witness that and even forced it to occur in the past.

I presume she is either trolling or genuinely believes evolution involves a point at which one species gives birth to another.


There are several different species concepts.

Got my Dust514 key...
Kievan Arakyd
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#204 - 2012-07-17 21:05:24 UTC  |  Edited by: Kievan Arakyd
Corina Jarr wrote:
Kievan Arakyd wrote:
Corina Jarr wrote:
Kievan Arakyd wrote:

1. the only worthy human endeavor is science. it is the only thing that will save this terrible species.
2. Except that, it doesnt seek to just do that for its adherents, but for everyone else too.
3. I agree with this.
4. Marriage is a legal contract. You should be allowed to marry whoever you want, even multiple people, without persecution.
5. The majority of religious groups do just that today, state that science is all wrong. see, climate change deniers, antievolutionists. We should throw these people into a volcano, because gravity and plate tectonics are just theories right?
6. Not just some, but most.
7. All associations of people seek power, not limited to religions.


5) some do not have a problem with all science, just the theories (and they are just theories) that conflict with their beliefs. Whats wrong with not believing a theory that you have an alternate explanation for?


The problem with theories is just that, the word theory. In common usage the word theory means something quite different than the scientific term theory. When you say theory, you make it seem like it was something someone pulled out of their ass. In science, a theory is something that has had DECADES of thought, experiment, and other research poured into it, including peer review. On alternate explanations: this is where it gets twisted, as these are the ones that are usually pulled from the ass, and are designed to explain a preconceived notion, ie religion.

Scientific theory is NOT up for debate or subject to your opinion.

Except they are. Even the best scientific theory has yet to be completely proven.

Take gravity for example. We (general public) accept it as proven.
However, it hasn't been. The force that holds massive objects together cannot be seen, only its effects. Until we identify what directly causes the attraction between massive objects, the theory of gravity as a whole is incomplete. And what causes that attraction is of continuous debate.



It is still called a theory precisely because it can't be proven. That doesn't mean that if i drop a brick on your head that it wont crush your skull. You can believe in all the voodoo and magic you want, but it doesn't change the facts of the universe around us. Seriously, put down the bible and go watch Cosmos with Carl Sagan. The wonder and excitement of knowing about the reality of our universe is far greater than whatever a imaginary boogyman and pyramid schemers can conjure up.

Got my Dust514 key...
FloppieTheBanjoClown
Arcana Imperii Ltd.
#205 - 2012-07-17 21:05:37 UTC
Ezra Tair wrote:
The only issue I see is evolution being propped up as fact when the fossil record does not support the theory behind it. If evolution was the result of millions of minor changes over a long stretch of time. You would expect to see millions of variations of humans and animals in the fossil record. Currently we have only found steps that require a leap of faith to connect as related to one another.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Punctuated_equilibrium

Basically, species experience long periods of stability with few apparent changes. Mate selection tyipcally favors same-ness, so most radical changes would be bred out as undesirable. Evolutionary change is driven by adaptation. Adaptation isn't necessary if you're well-suited for your environment. Sharks, for example, haven't had significant changes in hundreds of millions of years. Change happens fast because it MUST happen fast. (and by fast, I mean on the order of tens or hundreds of thousands of years, compared to potentially millions of years of "stasis")

Founding member of the Belligerent Undesirables movement.
Micheal Dietrich
Kings Gambit Black
#206 - 2012-07-17 21:06:38 UTC
Ezra Tair wrote:
Quote:



I give you exhibit A...Ginseng. All joking aside, again, you are looking for something tangible to reflect upon. There is no law saying that a non religious man is less capable of performing the same act and heaven forbid that I would ever make a claim as such. I try to think of teachings as a tool of guidance. Its like instructions, they may be right there but it doesn't necessarily mean you have to use them.



Expect that you can be 'good' without religion. And it's been happening everywhere for some time. The re-ocurring theme in Christianity is "You can never be good enough, because even your good deeds are based on selfish desires"


Also props to the OP for creating a religious discussion with his whine about containers in space.



Thank you for reiterating what I just said in that post but it saddens me that you follow up with bad information right after. I am not above you and I do not understand you why feel I would think that. I appreciate you for who you are and I hope that one day you would do the same. God Bless you.

Out of Pod is getting In the Pod - Join in game channel **IG OOPE **
Kievan Arakyd
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#207 - 2012-07-17 21:07:46 UTC
FloppieTheBanjoClown wrote:
Ezra Tair wrote:
The only issue I see is evolution being propped up as fact when the fossil record does not support the theory behind it. If evolution was the result of millions of minor changes over a long stretch of time. You would expect to see millions of variations of humans and animals in the fossil record. Currently we have only found steps that require a leap of faith to connect as related to one another.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Punctuated_equilibrium

Basically, species experience long periods of stability with few apparent changes. Mate selection tyipcally favors same-ness, so most radical changes would be bred out as undesirable. Evolutionary change is driven by adaptation. Adaptation isn't necessary if you're well-suited for your environment. Sharks, for example, haven't had significant changes in hundreds of millions of years. Change happens fast because it MUST happen fast. (and by fast, I mean on the order of tens or hundreds of thousands of years, compared to potentially millions of years of "stasis")


The preservation of fossils requires very specific conditions, otherwise organism wont be fossilzed.

Got my Dust514 key...
Simi Kusoni
HelloKittyFanclub
#208 - 2012-07-17 21:08:57 UTC
Kievan Arakyd wrote:

There are several different species concepts.

I generally use the term to describe the point at which one subset of a species loses the capacity to reproduce with another (or with an ancestor), this does not happen in a single generation.

[center]"I don't troll, I just give overly blunt responses that annoy people who are wrong but don't want to admit it. It's not my fault that people have sensitive feelings"  -MXZF[/center]
FloppieTheBanjoClown
Arcana Imperii Ltd.
#209 - 2012-07-17 21:09:05 UTC
Ezra Tair wrote:
FloppieTheBanjoClown wrote:
Fiona Tsero wrote:
As for 'antievolutionists', I suppose I would be one, but not because the Bible tells me so. I have yet to see enough evidence of trans-species evolution...However, there is enough evidence to support the idea that change over time does happen within populations of single species.


Either evolution happens, or God has perpetrated a MASSIVE hoax on us by creating a consistently-layered fossil record all over the world that has convinced thousands upon thousands of people who actually STUDY these things that evolution has been going on for billions of years.

So which is it? Evolution, or God the Deceiver?


Been awhile since I've seen the either/or fallacy. Its neither.


Right. So, what's your explanation of the fossil record, then? Because there's a rather massive scientific consensus on the subject, with almost no dissent except from religious people who don't like that it conflicts with their texts. If the fossils aren't legitimate nor a plant by a deceitful god, what are they?

Founding member of the Belligerent Undesirables movement.
Viktor Fyretracker
Emminent Terraforming
#210 - 2012-07-17 21:10:44 UTC
All I know is that religion is the fuel for many flamewars both on the internet and with actual fire in real life...


What I can confirm is a well placed Disco Battleship can make anybody meet their dear and fluffy lord really fast. XD

EVE is like swimming on a beach in shark infested waters,  There is however a catch...  The EVE Beach you also have to wonder which fellow swimmer will try and eat you before the sharks.
Kievan Arakyd
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#211 - 2012-07-17 21:11:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Kievan Arakyd
Simi Kusoni wrote:
Kievan Arakyd wrote:

There are several different species concepts.

I generally use the term to describe the point at which one subset of a species loses the capacity to reproduce with another (or with an ancestor), this does not happen in a single generation.


What if a single species is separated by an obstacle, say a mountain range. Depending on the definition they could be 1 or 2 species.

http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evosite/evo101/VA1BioSpeciesConcept.shtml

Got my Dust514 key...
Simi Kusoni
HelloKittyFanclub
#212 - 2012-07-17 21:12:15 UTC
FloppieTheBanjoClown wrote:
Ezra Tair wrote:
The only issue I see is evolution being propped up as fact when the fossil record does not support the theory behind it. If evolution was the result of millions of minor changes over a long stretch of time. You would expect to see millions of variations of humans and animals in the fossil record. Currently we have only found steps that require a leap of faith to connect as related to one another.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Punctuated_equilibrium

Basically, species experience long periods of stability with few apparent changes. Mate selection tyipcally favors same-ness, so most radical changes would be bred out as undesirable. Evolutionary change is driven by adaptation. Adaptation isn't necessary if you're well-suited for your environment. Sharks, for example, haven't had significant changes in hundreds of millions of years. Change happens fast because it MUST happen fast. (and by fast, I mean on the order of tens or hundreds of thousands of years, compared to potentially millions of years of "stasis")

It honestly never occurred to me that evolution slowed down to that extent in the absence of significant selection pressures, I assume mate selection kept it going to some degree.

Thanks for the interesting read!

[center]"I don't troll, I just give overly blunt responses that annoy people who are wrong but don't want to admit it. It's not my fault that people have sensitive feelings"  -MXZF[/center]
Mallak Azaria
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#213 - 2012-07-17 21:12:16 UTC
Akirei Scytale wrote:
If you want to make the world a better place, you have to learn to get along - not try to make everyone agree with you. Getting offended by something like this is pointless and just plain stupid. It accomplishes nothing.


Interestingly enough, countries with the highest ratio of atheists also have the lowest rates of crime.

This post was lovingly crafted by a member of the Goonwaffe Posting Cabal, proud member of the popular gay hookup site somethingawful.com, Spelling Bee, Grammar Gestapo & #1 Official Gevlon Goblin Fanclub member.
ISD TYPE40
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#214 - 2012-07-17 21:12:20 UTC
I'm going to lock this thread now since it seems to have gone completely off topic.



[b]ISD Type40 Lt. Commander Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs) Interstellar Services Department[/b]