Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

The Origin of Specious Nonsense. Twelve years on. Still going. Answer soon.

Options
1…2526283031…106

Comments

  • Options
    #812
    Doctor Jimbob
    Registered Users Posts: 7,643 ✭✭✭Doctor Jimbob


    Ziphius wrote: »
    Something that looks like an amoeba =/= an amoeba.

    There's no point, you'd be as well debating quantum mechanics with a washing machine.


  • Options
    #813
    Turtwig
    Registered Users Posts: 26,578 ✭✭✭✭Turtwig


    Doctor Jimbob wrote: »
    There's no point, you'd be as well debating quantum mechanics with a washing machine.

    I lolled. I probably shouldn't but I did. I'm stealing this comparison for future uses. :)


  • Options
    #814
    obplayer
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,190 ✭✭✭obplayer


    Doctor Jimbob wrote: »
    There's no point, you'd be as well debating quantum mechanics with a washing machine.

    But can washing machines obtain qualifications in microbiology? Even if they won't tell us where from?


  • Options
    #815
    J C
    Registered Users Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    Ziphius wrote: »
    Something that looks like an amoeba =/= an amoeba.
    ... if it looks like a duck ... walks like a duck and quacks like a duck ... its effectively a duck.

    Ditto with an Amoeba!!!:D


  • Options
    #816
    Turtwig
    Registered Users Posts: 26,578 ✭✭✭✭Turtwig


    Now we know how the crocoduck was conceived.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #817
    Doctor Jimbob
    Registered Users Posts: 7,643 ✭✭✭Doctor Jimbob


    J C wrote: »
    ... if it looks like a duck ... walks like a duck and quacks like a duck ... its effectively a duck.

    Ditto with an Amoeba!!!:D

    What about a crocoduck?

    Edit: Beaten to it :(


  • Options
    #818
    Turtwig
    Registered Users Posts: 26,578 ✭✭✭✭Turtwig


    Doctor Jimbob wrote: »
    What about a crocoduck?

    SNAP!


  • Options
    #819
    J C
    Registered Users Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    Doctor Jimbob wrote: »
    There's no point, you'd be as well debating quantum mechanics with a washing machine.
    ... and there is no point in thinking that a washing machine ... or indeed anything else (other than God) could spontaneously generate life.:)


  • Options
    #820
    Doctor Jimbob
    Registered Users Posts: 7,643 ✭✭✭Doctor Jimbob


    J C wrote: »
    ... and there is no point in thinking that a washing machine ... or indeed anything else (other than God) could spontaneously generate life.:)

    Screw it, I'm not going out tonight anyway, might as well open up this can of worms. Why is god an exception? You can't just explain everything you see as impossible off by saying 'ah but god can do it'.


  • Options
    #821
    J C
    Registered Users Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    Jernal wrote: »
    Now we know how the crocoduck was conceived.
    ... as it doesn't exist it was never conceived.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #822
    Doctor Jimbob
    Registered Users Posts: 7,643 ✭✭✭Doctor Jimbob


    J C wrote: »
    ... as it doesn't exist it was never conceived.

    Or was jesus apparently but that doesn't stop you lot.


  • Options
    #823
    obplayer
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,190 ✭✭✭obplayer


    J C wrote: »
    ... and there is no point in thinking that a washing machine ... or indeed anything else (other than God) could spontaneously generate life.:)

    And where does God come from? Or is he / she / it not a form of life?


  • Options
    #824
    J C
    Registered Users Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    Doctor Jimbob wrote: »
    Screw it, I'm not going out tonight anyway, might as well open up this can of worms. Why is god an exception? You can't just explain everything you see as impossible off by saying 'ah but god can do it'.
    If its impossible by all known means ... and it is, in the case of life ... then only a Being of omnipotent and omniscient capacity could do it.

    Whether you call that Being, God, depends on whether you're an Atheist ... or not, I guess.:)


  • Options
    #825
    Doctor Jimbob
    Registered Users Posts: 7,643 ✭✭✭Doctor Jimbob


    J C wrote: »
    If its impossible by all known means ... and it is ... then only a Being of omnipotent and omniscient capacity could do it.

    Whether you call that Being, God depends on whether you're an Atheist ... or not, I guess.:)

    An omnipotent and omniscient being is also impossible by all known means though.


  • Options
    #826
    J C
    Registered Users Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    Doctor Jimbob wrote: »
    An omnipotent and omniscient being is also impossible by all known means though.
    You're correct ... however, such a Being would be outside (or transcendent) of all known means, by definition ... as He would be the creator of all known means.


  • Options
    #827
    Doctor Jimbob
    Registered Users Posts: 7,643 ✭✭✭Doctor Jimbob


    J C wrote: »
    You're correct ... however, such a Being would be outside (or transcendent) of all known means, by definition ... as He would be the creator of all known means.

    I find it genuinely difficult to believe that anyone who thinks about a statement like this for more than 5 seconds can fail to see the obvious logical holes.


  • Options
    #828
    J C
    Registered Users Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    Doctor Jimbob wrote: »
    I find it genuinely difficult to believe that anyone who thinks about a statement like this for more than 5 seconds can fail to see the obvious logical holes.
    ... and ... where are the logical holes?


  • Options
    #829
    Doctor Jimbob
    Registered Users Posts: 7,643 ✭✭✭Doctor Jimbob


    J C wrote: »
    ... and ... where are the logical holes?

    You state that something is impossible, then use something impossible to explain it. You then go on to defend your impossible assertation by pointing out that it doesn't need to follow our laws of reality. I could just as easily claim that the explanation for things we don't fully understand is a spectral goat that drifts around outer space, but considers home to be somewhere within the orbit of saturn. We can't see it though, because it occupies a dimension that we are incapable of percieving. You can't prove me wrong, but anyone who actually thinks about it is going to dismiss the idea as utter nonsense because it's a ridiculous claim with absolutely nothing other than my word to back it up.

    Most importantly in this case though is the fact that such debates certainly do not belong in scientific discussions.


  • Options
    #830
    obplayer
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,190 ✭✭✭obplayer


    J C wrote: »
    You're correct ... however, such a Being would be outside (or transcendent) of all known means, by definition ... as He would be the creator of all known means.

    So because you don't understand how life can come about spontaneously, and there are still gaps in the understanding of how it could have happened, it must have been this being you postulate? Don't you realise that this is the same argument that ascribed thunderbolts to Thor or Zeus? That because we don't understand something now we can never understand it so it must be a 'transcendent being'? This is the logic of the nursery.


  • Options
    #831
    J C
    Registered Users Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    obplayer wrote: »
    So because you don't understand how life can come about spontaneously, and there are still gaps in the understanding of how it could have happened, it must have been this being you postulate? Don't you realise that this is the same argument that ascribed thunderbolts to Thor or Zeus? That because we don't understand something now we can never understand it so it must be a 'transcendent being'? This is the logic of the nursery.
    Its outside of operative science (but it is within the competence of forensic science) ... as are all 'origins' explanations.

    We can compare and contrast the various 'origins' explanations ... but there are basically two general theories ... that life originated via an omnipotent omniscient Being ... or via deterministic processes unknown.

    Neither option is very satisfactory, if somebody wants to be certain of what happened ... or how it occurred.
    ... and it is quite legitimate for Humanity to pursue research into both ideas.

    Unfortunately, some Christians (who probably felt their faith in God under threat from the discoveries of science) tried to suppress research and the fruits of research into Evolution/Abiogenesis during the early part of the 20th Century (the Scopes Trial being an example) ... and now similar attempts at suppressing research and the fruits of research into Creation/ID is being carried out in the early part of the 21st century ... probably (and ironically) because of the threat that modern scientific discoveries represent to a belief in a spontaneous/naturalistic explanation for life. :)


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #832
    obplayer
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,190 ✭✭✭obplayer


    J C wrote: »
    Its outside of operative science ... as are all 'origins' explanations.

    :)

    The point is that everything was once outside of science, from thunderbolts to disease, and that these were ascribed to some god or other. I hope that you don't believe thunderbolts are from god, or disease either, although for the latter how could you? You are after all a qualified microbiologist. Gods were once used as the explanation for everything, now for very little. Why do you assume that that very little will not shrink further? Why do you have to always turn to a father figure in the sky?


  • Options
    #833
    J C
    Registered Users Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    obplayer wrote: »
    The point is that everything was once outside of science, from thunderbolts to disease, and that these were ascribed to some god or other. I hope that you don't believe thunderbolts are from god, or disease either, although for the latter how could you? You are after all a qualified microbiologist. Gods were once used as the explanation for everything, now for very little. Why do you assume that that very little will not shrink further? Why do you have to always turn to a father figure in the sky?
    I think it's somewhat of an over-simplification to say that disease and thunderbolts were ascribed exclusively to God when there always was an awareness that these were caused by natural forces. I'm not denying that some people ascribed these phenomena to God ... and indeed some people continue to do so.
    However, the point I would like to make, is that within science and philosophy it has always been recognised that disease and thunderbolts ... had natural (as distinct from supernatural) explanations.
    ... and the origins of life have always been accepted as having a potential supernatural origin.


  • Options
    #834
    Hotblack Desiato
    Registered Users Posts: 35,072 ✭✭✭✭Hotblack Desiato


    J C wrote: »
    ... something like like Biology being the study of complicated things that give the appearance of having been designed for a purpose ... but your faith prevents you from actually believing this.;)

    I have to laugh inwardly at this J C. Your use of it in your sig in the belief that it backs up your position only betrays your utter lack of understanding of what you are quoting.

    You are focused on the words designed for a purpose

    While ignoring the most important word in the sentence - appearance.

    It is only an appearance of having been designed for a purpose. It is not real. It is an artifact of our brains' overwhelming desire to impose order and meaning on things regardless of whether they are possessed of both, either, or none. It is the same urge that finds Jesus on a slice of toast or the Virgin Mary on a tree stump.

    What it certainly is not, is science.

    © 1982 Sinclair Research Ltd



  • Options
    #835
    [-0-]
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,981 ✭✭✭[-0-]


    What have I done.........


  • Options
    #836
    Turtwig
    Registered Users Posts: 26,578 ✭✭✭✭Turtwig


    [-0-] wrote: »
    What have I done.........

    Volunteered yourself to be a mod. :pac:
    Rob, Dades and I are taking a hiatus.


  • Options
    #837
    [-0-]
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,981 ✭✭✭[-0-]


    Jernal wrote: »
    Volunteered yourself to be a mod. :pac:
    Rob, Dades and I are taking a hiatus.

    Bring it on! :pac:


  • Options
    #838
    Turtwig
    Registered Users Posts: 26,578 ✭✭✭✭Turtwig


    [-0-] wrote: »
    Bring it on! :pac:

    Right first you got to complete the hazing ritual. Anyone got suggestions for that should be?


  • Options
    #839
    [-0-]
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,981 ✭✭✭[-0-]


    It better be tough. I don't do things in half measures. :)


  • Options
    #840
    pauldla
    Registered Users Posts: 2,247 ✭✭✭pauldla


    Jernal wrote: »
    Right first you got to complete the hazing ritual. Anyone got suggestions for that should be?

    So many evil ideas spring to mind....


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #841
    robindch
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 24,417 Mod ✭✭✭✭robindch


    Jernal wrote: »
    Right first you got to complete the hazing ritual. Anyone got suggestions for that should be?
    Read the Creationizm thread and take it seriously.


Advertisement