Evolution debate

1:15am
David William Beck
Your right, Evo­lu­tion isn’t true.…. The truth is there is an old mag­i­cal man in the sky with mag­i­cal pow­ers who made us in the most extra­or­di­nary way. Some peo­ple wrote a few books about this guy with some rules you can pick and choose from. There’s no proof.… but we believe in the old mag­ic man any­how it’s so obvi­ous!

1:19am
IS-Evo­lu­tion A-Fraud
Whats your proof of evo­lu­tion sir? Telling me that I shouldn’t believe in God? IS that real­ly all you’ve got? Show me where the rub­ber hits the road. Show me a species turn­ing into anoth­er. Show me some infor­ma­tion gain­ing process.

1:25am
David William Beck
Hel­lo. I’m just try­ing to say that there is over­whelm­ing evi­dence for evo­lu­tion and none for God. 95% of Chris­tians in the UK believe in evo­lu­tion any­how. I’m very sor­ry to say that.… because you said ‘Show me a species turn­ing into anoth­er’ you clear­ly don’t have any clue about what the the­o­ry of evo­lu­tion is. It’s such a shame in an Eng­lish speak­ing coun­try you’ve had such a poor edu­ca­tion, I’m not blam­ing you for your beliefs, it’s more pity.

1:28am
David William Beck
I should answer your ques­tions if you want me to
Crea­tures are chang­ing all the time. You get around half your DNA (the code that affects so much of who you are) from your mum and dad. it’s basic but impor­tant.

1:29am
IS-Evo­lu­tion A-Fraud
Show me some proof, I should say it’s so sad that you are brain­washed into believ­ing macro-evo­lu­tion and can­not cite a spe­cif­ic exam­ple. How’s that?

1:29am
David William Beck
Ok, I can state exam­ples
do you believe in selec­tive breed­ing (like breed­ing a cow to pro­duce more milk or a pig to pro­duce more fat)
it’s been around for cen­turies. You should know the basic’s any­how.

1:31am
IS-Evo­lu­tion A-Fraud
Is cow breed­ing macro-evo­lu­tion, a species tur­ing into anoth­er and infor­ma­tion gain­ing?

1:31am
David William Beck
that’s an exam­ple of macro human lead evo­lu­tion, it’s hard to deny.
Yes it is
a sim­ple one,

1:32am
IS-Evo­lu­tion A-Fraud
You do NOT know what macro-evo­lu­tion is, my friend.

1:32am
David William Beck
Yes I do

1:32am
IS-Evo­lu­tion A-Fraud
Clear­ly you just proved oth­er­wise

1:33am
David William Beck
ani­mals take many years to change. small­er, faster repro­duc­ing ones change faster

1:33am
IS-Evo­lu­tion A-Fraud
Show me some proof

1:33am
David William Beck
Ok, what sort of proof would you like?
Do you believe human’s helped change wolves into dogs?
That’s an exam­ple of macro evo­lu­tion.

1:34am
IS-Evo­lu­tion A-Fraud
of a species gain­ing infor­ma­tion and gain­ing new nov­el fea­tures, like an ele­phant trunk, a long neck, com­plex eyes

1:35am
David William Beck
Ohh­h­hh of course I can. These things evolved over, nor­mal­ly mil­lions of years
You see a small change in a crea­tures DNA gives it an advan­tage, and over many years these changes, through tri­al and error add up
If hors­es with longer necks get more food, than the genes for long necks become more pop­u­lar
give it a few hun­dred thou­sand years and we have giraffe’s
Addi­tion­al­ly we gain new infor­ma­tion every day, with every cold, virus, etc.
BRB… 2 min­utes,

1:38am
IS-Evo­lu­tion A-Fraud
That is quite an unproven the­o­ry, you are refer­ring to vari­a­tion, dogs and wolves are from same species. There is no way a sin­gle cell bac­te­ria could gain info­ma­tion to turn into a human
I’ll catch up tomor­row if you care to debate, Regards

1:42am
David William Beck
In evo­lu­tion the idea is that we all share one com­mon ances­tor, so we are all in a way the same species, all life relat­ed
I’m back
Dog’s and wolves have diverged from each oth­er, but not by that much.
Oth­er crea­tures diverged at an ear­li­er time, but all life is relat­ed like I said
In Chris­tian­i­ty all human’s are relat­ed to Adam. In evo­lu­tion we are also all relat­ed to com­mon ances­tor. Tell me, Was Adam Black?… How did the human race gain so many vari­a­tions with­out evo­lu­tion? Was it *God’s mag­ic* or maybe God designed evo­lu­tion as part of his sys­tem.
**Also all the answers you seek are read­i­ly avail­able. If your gen­uine­ly inter­est­ed maybe have a look at some, or watch some TV shows about the nat­ur­al world.

1:59am
David William Beck
Mutation’s the clas­sic way that cells gain infor­ma­tion, every human has on aver­age 10 muta­tions. Think about mankind like a paint­ing, start­ing with a sin­gle brush stroke and the build­ing up.… in this case over 1 bil­lion years. Have a look: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_evolutionary_history_of_life

Time­line of evo­lu­tion­ary his­to­ry of life — Wikipedia, the free ency­clo­pe­dia
en.wikipedia.org
This time­line of evo­lu­tion of life out­lines the major events in the devel­op­ment of life on plan­et Earth since it orig­i­nat­ed until the present day. In biol­o­gy, evo­lu­tion is any change across suc­ces­sive gen­er­a­tions in the her­i­ta­ble char­ac­ter­is­tics of bio­log­i­cal pop­u­la­tions. Evo­lu­tion­ary process­es give…

2:04am
David William Beck
When you read this could you please tell me what your prob­lems with the the­o­ry of evo­lu­tion are and I will try and answer them. Addi­tion­al­ly what’s the alter­na­tive to evo­lu­tion? Do you think it’s pos­si­ble that some old nasty judg­men­tal God thing did all this? Is there any more proof that God did it that the sug­ar plumb fairy?
Decem­ber 18, 2012

4:19pm
IS-Evo­lu­tion A-Fraud
You are stat­ing that muta­tions are infor­ma­tion gain­ing? I hearti­ly dis­agree with you. Look all all the dis­eases caused by mutations/genetic dis­or­ders and tell me which rep­re­sent help­ful, infor­ma­tion­al gain­ing ones:
Achon­dropla­sia — most com­mon genet­ic cause of dwarfism
Achro­matop­sia — visu­al acu­ity loss, col­or­blind­ness, light sen­si­tiv­i­ty, and nys­tag­mus
Acid Mal­tase Defi­cien­cy — accu­mu­la­tion of glyco­gen stored in mus­cles caus­ing res­pi­ra­to­ry fail­ure
Albinism — lit­tle or no pro­duc­tion of melanin in hair, skin, and iris of the eyes
Alzheimer’s Dis­ease — most com­mon form of demen­tia
Angel­man Syn­drome — intel­lec­tu­al and devel­op­men­tal delays, severe speech impair­ment and prob­lems in move­ment and bal­ance, recur­rent seizures and small heads
Bardet-Biedl Syn­drome — obe­si­ty, poly­dacty­ly, dete­ri­o­ra­tion of rod and cone cells, men­tal retar­da­tion and defect in the gonads, and kid­ney dis­ease
Barth Syn­drome — muta­tions or alter­ations in the BTHS gene, heart defects, poor skele­tal mus­cu­la­ture, short stature, mito­chon­dr­i­al abnor­mal­i­ties, and defi­cien­cy of white blood cells
Bipo­lar Dis­or­der — high­ly ele­vat­ed moods due to genet­ic and envi­ron­men­tal fac­tors
Bloom Syn­drome — high fre­quen­cy of breaks and rearrange­ments in the chro­mo­somes
Cana­van Dis­ease — steady dam­age to nerve cells in the brain
Char­cot-Marie-Tooth dis­ease — touch sen­sa­tion and loss of mus­cle tis­sue
Col­or Blind­ness — inabil­i­ty of dif­fer­en­ti­at­ing among cer­tain col­ors
Cri-du-Chat Syn­drome — spon­ta­neous dele­tion of a seg­ment of chro­mo­some 5 dur­ing for­ma­tion of egg or sperm or dur­ing ear­ly stages of fetal devel­op­ment
Cys­tic Fibro­sis — auto­so­mal reces­sive dis­or­der secret­ing mucus and sweat
Down Syn­drome — abnor­mal cell divi­sion of chro­mo­some 21
Duchenne Mus­cu­lar Dys­tro­phy — rapid­ly grad­ual mus­cle weak­ness and dam­aged mus­cu­lar tis­sue in the pelvis and legs
Fat­ty Oxi­da­tion — inabil­i­ty to oxi­dize (break­down) fat­ty acids
Frag­ile X Syn­drome — inher­it­ed form of men­tal retar­da­tion
Galac­tosemia — body’s inabil­i­ty to break down galac­tose
Hai­ley-Hai­ley Dis­ease — blis­ter­ing rash­es on body folds
Hemo­phil­ia — body’s inabil­i­ty to con­trol bleed­ing (inte­ri­or or exte­ri­or, or both)
Huntington’s Dis­ease — pro­duc­tion of a faulty pro­tein instead of the nor­mal “hunt­ingtin” pro­tein
Jack­son-Weiss Syn­drome — foot abnor­mal­i­ties and pre­ma­ture fusion of bones in the skull
Kline­fel­ter Syn­drome — abnor­mal tes­tic­u­lar evo­lu­tion and decreased fer­til­i­ty
Krabbe Dis­ease — muta­tion in the GALC gene
Langer-Giedion Syn­drome — dele­tion or muta­tion of at least two genes on chro­mo­some 8
Lesch-Nyhan Syn­drome — defi­cien­cy of the enzyme hypox­an­thine-gua­nine phos­pho­ri­bo­syl­trans­ferase (HPRT)
Lowe Syn­drome — phys­i­cal and men­tal retar­da­tion
Mar­fan Syn­drome — genet­ic dis­or­der of the con­nec­tive tis­sue
Mus­cu­lar Dys­tro­phy — pro­gres­sive weak­en­ing and break­ing down of mus­cle fibers
Myoton­ic Dys­tro­phy — wast­ing of the mus­cles, cataracts, heart con­duc­tion defects, endocrine changes, and myoto­nia
Nail-Patel­la Syn­drome — lack of nail and knee caps
Neu­rofi­bro­mato­sis — devel­op­ment of tumors along the dif­fer­ent nerves and evo­lu­tion of non-ner­vous tis­sues, like skin and bones
Noo­nan Syn­drome — heart mal­for­ma­tions, short stature, char­ac­ter­is­tic facial fea­tures, impaired blood clot­ting, and inden­ta­tion of the chest
Osteo­ge­n­e­sis Imper­fec­ta — weak­ened mus­cles, brit­tle bones, curved spine, and impaired hear­ing
Parkinson’s Dis­ease — impair­ment of the cen­tral ner­vous sys­tem
Patau Syn­drome — non-dis­junc­tion of chro­mo­some 13
Phenylke­tonuria — men­tal retar­da­tion, seizures, or brain dam­age
Por­phyr­ia — accu­mu­la­tion of por­phyrin or its pre­cur­sors in the body
Prune Bel­ly Syn­drome — pres­ence of mass of wrin­kled skin on the abdomen
Retinoblas­toma — can­cer of the reti­na
Rett Syn­drome — decreased rate of head growth, small hands and feet, dis­abil­i­ties relat­ed to learn­ing com­mu­ni­ca­tion, coor­di­na­tion and speech
Rus­sell Sil­ver Syn­drome — poor growth, low birth weight, short height, and dif­fer­ences in the size of the two sides of the body
San­fil­ip­po Syn­drome — defi­cien­cy in one of the enzymes need­ed to break down the gly­cosamino­gly­can heparan sul­fate
Schizen­cephaly — abnor­mal devel­op­ment of the brain
Shwach­man Syn­drome — exocrine pan­cre­at­ic insuf­fi­cien­cy, bone mar­row dys­func­tion, skele­tal abnor­mal­i­ties, and short stature
Sick­le Cell Ane­mia — blood dis­or­der caus­ing sick­ling of the red blood cells
Smith-Lem­li-Opitz Syn­drome — dis­tinc­tive facial fea­tures, small head size (micro­cephaly), intel­lec­tu­al dis­abil­i­ty or learn­ing prob­lems, and behav­ioral prob­lems
Spina Bifidia — mal­for­ma­tions of the spinal cord
TAR Syn­drome — absence of the radius bone in the fore­arm and reduced platelet count
Tay-Sachs Dis­ease — dam­age of the nerve cells in brain and spinal cord
Turn­er Syn­drome — lack of either one whole or a part of an X chro­mo­some
Ush­er Syn­drome — deaf­ness and pro­gres­sive loss of vision
Von Hip­pel-Lin­dau Syn­drome — for­ma­tion of tumors and flu­id-filled sacs (cysts) in dif­fer­ent parts of the body
Waar­den­burg Syn­drome — vary­ing degrees of deaf­ness and changes in hair and skin pig­men­ta­tion
Wilson’s Dis­ease — body’s inabil­i­ty to get rid of excess cop­per in the body
Xero­der­ma Pig­men­to­sum — inabil­i­ty of the DNA to repair dam­age caused due to ultra­vi­o­let rays
XXXX Syn­drome — two extra copies of the X chro­mo­some in females
XXX Syn­drome — extra copy of the X chro­mo­some in females
XYY Syn­drome — extra copy of the Y chro­mo­some in males
I am amazed to see that an evo­lu­tion­ist as your­self is with­out hos­til­i­ty, your cohorts are full of it.
Decem­ber 18, 2012

11:46pm
David William Beck
hel­lo. That’s a good list of muta­tions you have there, proof in it’s self that ether God was incred­i­bly slop­py (or enjoys watch­ing us suf­fer) or that we evolved. There are indeed many ben­e­fi­cial muta­tions, infant every­thing about us evolved over time. I could of course give you many exam­ples of changes our species has under­gone through­out time (even back to the first ani­mal cell), but i’ll just focus on two for now. The miR-941 gene muta­tion very quick­ly gave the human race supe­ri­or intel­li­gence, a sig­nif­i­cant advan­tage.
A recent muta­tion that’s become very pop­u­lar is the abil­i­ty to digest dairy prod­ucts using lac­tase. There was a time when the entire human race couldn’t digest milk after the first few years of life. The muta­tion that allowed peo­ple to digest milk was of course very ben­e­fi­cial and allowed peo­ple with it to get more nutri­tion and sur­vive bet­ter. Near­ly all of us Euro­peans have the gene, but in parts of Asia like Chi­na and Japan where milk isn’t in the diet they don’t have it. (look it up)
Nat­ur­al selec­tion will gen­er­al­ly favor health­i­er crea­tures bet­ter able to sur­vive, and so their genes become more numer­ous. This isn’t the­o­ry, it’s cold hard fact being used on a dai­ly basis around the world on a dai­ly basis.
I’m going to be con­tro­ver­sial for a sec­ond here. If you look at ath­let­ic abil­i­ty around the world, parts of Africa, like Kenya pro­duce the worlds best dis­tance run­ners. Genet­i­cal­ly they are unpar­al­leled at dis­tance run­ning. In parts of the world, like Jamaica for­mer slaves were selec­tive­ly bread for pow­er and indeed these places have the best pow­ers run­ners in the world. You believe in genes, you believe in muta­tions, you believe in nat­ur­al selec­tion, What part of evo­lu­tion don’t you agree with?
**On a side note, you asked how we gain genet­ic infor­ma­tion, well you stat­ed above XXX syn­drome, I don’t know how good you are with math but it’s clear there are more than 2 X’s and it’s proof that the amount of genet­ic infor­ma­tion can change over time.

12:52am
IS-Evo­lu­tion A-Fraud
The ben­e­fits that you dis­cuss are sim­ply vari­a­tion and are not at all mol­e­cules to man evo­lu­tion, in fact, just the oppo­site. As for milk intol­er­ance, it is in fact nor­mal to be that way, when chil­dren are weaned off of milk is a gene not being switched off, not an exam­ple of new genet­ic infor­ma­tion. As for blacks being good ath­letes, I could go into a whole dia­tribe for rea­sons why it appears that way now, but per­haps not ear­li­er or in the future and much has to do with cul­ture. Why are some white ath­letes bet­ter then oth­er whites? vari­a­tion is all.
IS the mir-941 gene just one in a myr­i­ad that makes us dif­fer­ent from naked mole rats?
So what muta­tions do you cite that can give rise from a sim­ple cell to a com­plete crea­ture? Do you know the dis­as­trous nar­ra­tive about the fruit­flies?
-Best
Decem­ber 20, 2012

12:56am
David William Beck
Hel­lo, I’ll write some more tomorow.
for now have a look at this:
The basic time­line of a 4.6 bil­lion year old Earth, with approx­i­mate dates:
3.6 bil­lion years of sim­ple cells (prokary­otes),
3.4 bil­lion years of stro­ma­to­lites demon­strat­ing pho­to­syn­the­sis,
2 bil­lion years of com­plex cells (eukary­otes),
1 bil­lion years of mul­ti­cel­lu­lar life,
600 mil­lion years of sim­ple ani­mals,
570 mil­lion years of arthro­pods (ances­tors of insects, arach­nids and crus­taceans),
550 mil­lion years of com­plex ani­mals,
500 mil­lion years of fish and pro­to-amphib­ians,
475 mil­lion years of land plants,
400 mil­lion years of insects and seeds,
360 mil­lion years of amphib­ians,
300 mil­lion years of rep­tiles,
200 mil­lion years of mam­mals,
150 mil­lion years of birds,
130 mil­lion years of flow­ers,
65 mil­lion years since the dinosaurs died out,
2.5 mil­lion years since the appear­ance of the genus Homo,
200,000 years of anatom­i­cal­ly mod­ern humans,
25,000 years since the dis­ap­pear­ance of Nean­derthal traits from the fos­sil record.
13,000 years since the dis­ap­pear­ance of Homo flo­re­sien­sis from the fos­sil record.
What exact­ly don’t you under­stand? Ask Google.
You nev­er did state an alter­na­tive to the main steam theory’s.
Ok, just for you. (from mem­o­ry) One of the huge changes that hap­pened to cells chang­ing them from sin­gle cells to more com­plex cells was chance fusion of the Mito­chon­dria and plant cells. Mito­chon­dria pro­duced huge amounts of ener­gy and the plant cell could give sta­bil­i­ty. (see the time line above). The two worked real­ly well and allowed for more com­plex life to evolve.
Do you have any idea how long a bil­lion years is? It took a long time to hap­pen but it did hap­pen. Any more ques­tions?
I’ll write more tomorow.

1:50am
IS-Evo­lu­tion A-Fraud
radio­met­ric dat­ing and c-14 are prov­ing more unre­li­able with anomalys and dis­rep­an­cies and pos­si­ble false assump­tions so the bil­lions of years nar­ra­tive may not be so. Things that have been stat­ed to be mil­lions of years old and still hav­ing car­bon in them are prov­ing trou­ble­some. If radio­met­ric dat­ing fails to give an accu­rate date on some­thing of which we do know the true age, then how can it be trust­ed to give us the cor­rect age for rocks that had no observers to record when they formed? Mount St. Helens,Washington in 1986 formed lava rocks that were dat­ed up to 2.8 mil­lion years old !!! whats with that?
Any­way speak­ing of prokaryotes,eukaryotes where did the infor­ma­tion come from that we see in DNA?
Decem­ber 20, 2012

11:59am
David William Beck
I don’t real­ly care about dat­ing tech­nol­o­gy. I know the earth is ancient. Just look at, for exam­ple the Grand can­non, that’s got to be many mil­lions of years old. My own his­to­ry in the UK goes back past 60,000 years and there are still arti­facts from then, some on dis­play in the British muse­um. What about the move­ments of the con­ti­nents? they pro­vide some accu­rate dat­ing infor­ma­tion. What about the lay­ers of ice around the world that record many many thou­sands of years of his­to­ry. We can use Red shift tech to date the uni­verse as well as many oth­er tech­niques. We of often meet at Stone­henge once a year for a huge par­ty and that struc­tures 5000 years old.
When you deny our his­to­ry your insult­ing your ances­tors and their strug­gle. Do you have any proof the world isn’t as old as every­one thinks?
Decem­ber 20, 2012

4:27pm
IS-Evo­lu­tion A-Fraud
This seems to be get­ting hel­ter skel­ter as far as con­ver­sa­tion goes. What I want to know is the proof of mol­e­cules to man evo­lu­tion that makes evo­lu­tion a fact.
Decem­ber 24, 2012

2:10am
David William Beck
hel­lo, sor­ry I took so long to respond.
Proof of mol­e­cules to man evo­lu­tion that makes evo­lu­tion a fact? So your ask­ing me to give you 3.6 bil­lion years worth of data on the evo­lu­tion of life?
For a start sci­ence does not deal in facts, rather theory’s. There is over­whelm­ing evi­dence for evo­lu­tion, as there is over­whelm­ing evi­dence gravity’s real.
If you real­ly want to know more there is a lot of lit­er­a­ture on the sub­ject. I have not per­son­al­ly read it but I would rec­om­mend you read:
The Great­est Show on Earth: The Evi­dence for Evo­lu­tion
Give it a go!
The Great­est Show on Earth: The Evi­dence for Evo­lu­tion
www.amazon.com
Richard Dawkins trans­formed our view of God in his block­buster, The God Delu­sion, which sold more than 2 mil­lion copies in Eng­lish alone. He rev­o­lu­tion­ized the way we see nat­ur­al selec­tion in the sem­i­nal best­seller The Self­ish Gene. Now, he launch­es a fierce coun­ter­at­tack against pro­po­nents of “I…

2:12am
David William Beck
Maybe you can rec­om­mend a good book for me to read that’s sup­port­ing the case against evo­lu­tion, or oth­er theory’s.
Decem­ber 31, 2012

8:49pm
IS-Evo­lu­tion A-Fraud
Well, can macro evo­lu­tion be test­ed and observed as sci­ence requires?
As for mol­e­cules to man, As for the many thou­sands of gen­er­a­tions of bac­te­ria observed, cit­rate adap­ta­tion is about all you have to show that bac­te­ria is still just that, a bac­te­ri­am. Fruit­flies, the same thing, NO spe­ci­a­tion observed. How come?
Jan­u­ary 2

11:27pm
David William Beck
it’s late and I’m tired. I’ll write a bet­ter response tomorow. There is an extreme­ly strong case for macro evo­lu­tion.
Still, what’s the alter­na­tive to macro evo­lu­tion? Can you give sup­port­ing evi­dence for this view?
Jan­u­ary 4

11:39pm
IS-Evo­lu­tion A-Fraud
Well there, did you get your rest? Would you be awake enuf to ven­ture a guess as to why no spe­ci­a­tion has been observed with fruit­flies? Over thou­sands of gen­er­a­tions and muta­tions?

1:16am
David William Beck
some crea­tures like fruit flies, even when genet­i­cal­ly mod­i­fied can revert to nor­mal after some time, true. I’ve seen a fruit fly that’s been mod­i­fied to have about 20 eyes.
Look, if you believe genet­ics works than clear­ly so does macro evo­lu­tion. You also nev­er answered my ques­tion.
Has life always been the same? No, There is a HUGE amount of data that sug­gests life changes over time. Just look at the human fos­sil record: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_human_evolution_fossils
Could there be some mag­ic man in the sky who made all life, the plan­et and the uni­verse? No way! That’s ridicu­lous. Cer­tain­ly the blun­der­ing buf­foon described my most reli­gions is a joke. There is absolute­ly no evi­dence, to any objec­tive mind it’s mad­ness.
So what’s left? Macro evo­lu­tion so nice­ly describes how life came to be that it seems almost cer­tain. Is there anoth­er alter­na­tive?

List of human evo­lu­tion fos­sils — Wikipedia, the free ency­clo­pe­dia
en.wikipedia.org
The fol­low­ing charts give a brief overview of sev­er­al notable pri­mate­fos­sil finds relat­ing to human evo­lu­tion. As there are thou­sands of fos­sils, most­ly frag­men­tary, often con­sist­ing of sin­gle bones or iso­lat­ed teeth with com­plete skulls and skele­tons rare,[1] this overview is not meant to be com­ple…

3:21am
David William Beck
>Why have you changed top­ics from macro-evo­lu­tion to The­ol­o­gy?
As far as I can tell there are two mod­els of how life came to be. There is the ‘cre­ation myth’, that some pow­er­ful being cre­at­ed some or all of the world, and an evo­lu­tion based mod­el. I may have assumed, that if your argu­ing against one then you may be in favour of the oth­er.
Both the cre­ation the­o­ry and an evo­lu­tion based the­o­ry should be test­ed, and gen­er­al­ly speak­ing the evi­dence over­whelm­ing­ly sug­gests an evo­lu­tion based the­o­ry is far more like­ly.
I also strong­ly dis­agree with you about ‘The domain of super­nat­ur­al is out­side the scope of Sci­ence’. “How the uni­verse and life was cre­at­ed” is one of the biggest ques­tions in sci­ence and if it was cre­at­ed by an intel­li­gent enti­ty than of course its sci­en­tif­ic fact. If sci­ence seeks the truth then of course the exis­tence of God is a mat­ter for sci­ence. For exam­ple if it’s real then where does it exist? What is it? How did it build some­thing as com­plex as the uni­verse?
I would argue the petrol anal­o­gy is a good one. Aren’t you look­ing for a super­nat­ur­al expla­na­tion of how the
I also believe nature can be answered math­e­mat­i­cal­ly. There is a whole branch of sci­ence that deals with pat­terns and the struc­tures of life forms in nature. There is a real­ly good book on the sub­ject, I’ll try and find out what it’s called and get back to you. It’s a tru­ly amaz­ing and beau­ti­ful sub­ject.
Exis­tence can, and does exist with­out a God. (Unless God’s many of the forces that bind the uni­verse togeth­er like elec­tro­mag­net­ism and grav­i­ty). There are alter­na­tive theory’s that seem far more like­ly about how we came to be than ‘there was a mag­ic man in the sky who did it’. In the past the God the­o­ries were all we had, but I hope the human race is mov­ing on from that now.
Reli­gion seems to answer very few ques­tions. You even said ‘There is mys­ti­cal stuff we can’t under­stand’. Sci­ence is answer­ing more ques­tions every day about who we are and how we came to be whilst reli­gion stays alive by per­pet­u­at­ing igno­rance to main­tain its con­trol over most of the world’s peo­ple.
By proof I basi­cal­ly mean a rea­son to believe. Is there a rea­son to believe? I have nev­er found one. There are a few rea­sons like ‘I will suf­fer if I don’t sub­mit’ or ‘there is an old book that says…’, I would say per­son­al­ly I don’t find these argu­ments very per­sua­sive…. But some oth­ers do.
I have a great deal of respect for the ear­ly Mohammedan sci­en­tists. They did lead the world in sci­en­tif­ic thought at the time and I have read some of their work. I believe, based on what I read, that Islam should still be lead­ing the world in sci­ence and tech­nol­o­gy, you have to won­der why it’s not. Of course the ear­ly Mohammedan sci­en­tists also believed the Greeks were hell­hound.
DNA is of course a very beau­ti­ful code, one of the most beau­ti­ful and won­der­ful I have ever seen. If I ever have a child, it’s genet­ic code will be unique in the uni­verse. It’s real­ly noth­ing to do with God (Unless God hand crafts every sperm and egg and com­bines them, etc). It seems clear to me that even if God did start the uni­verse it’s cur­rent­ly run­ning with­out its inter­ven­tion. Sim­ple life has also been cre­at­ed from dead chem­i­cal com­po­nents:
http://voices.yahoo.com/scientists-create-artificial-life-living-organism-6070036.html
Don’t you think it’s pos­si­ble, in a sim­i­lar way the first life was cre­at­ed in a sim­i­lar way to how we cre­ate life today? And that, over bil­lions of years that life could change, adapt, mutate and evolve?
You also said that ‘com­mon ances­try can eas­i­ly mean com­mon design.’ If this is true then ani­mals can’t evolve from what they were cre­at­ed as. I have proof that macro evo­lu­tion does hap­pen, Please read the link below:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domesticated_silver_fox
In the link above, Humans phys­i­cal­ly and sig­nif­i­cant­ly altered the behav­iour, appear­ance and genet­ic code of the wild Sil­ver fox. We have changed their nature and almost every­thing about them. In a short space of time, through breed­ing for tame­ness we cre­at­ed a new species. Clear­ly God didn’t do this, this was human focused macro evo­lu­tion in action.
This means that, ether God made ani­mals so that macro evo­lu­tion is pos­si­ble, or that life was not designed, I hope you under­stand.
Well I would say human­ism was a sort of sci­ence, though you could argue it’s an art. Psy­chol­o­gy, soci­ol­o­gy, neu­rol­o­gy and biol­o­gy all seek to under­stand and explain human behav­iour using sci­ence. Even eco­nom­ics’ has a go at try­ing to under­stand human and pre­dict human actions.
The prob­lem is all those mes­sen­gers and prophets have had vary­ing opin­ions about what we should be doing. Even with­in Islam the Shia and Sun­ni fac­tions find things to dis­agree about.
I agree that Judaism, Chris­tian­i­ty and Islam are relat­ed his­tor­i­cal­ly, and all three are pop­u­lar, but with thou­sands of denom­i­na­tions in Chris­tian­i­ty alone it’s hard to say they all share a com­mon root. Also I don’t know if the poly­the­ist Hin­du faith’s share the same root. (am I right in say­ing the root is God)? I also wouldn’t count athe­ism as a faith because athe­ists sim­ply don’t believe in a God. There are many athe­ist reli­gions, for exam­ple Tao­ism and Shin­to­ism in Japan. Athe­ists also aren’t a group and don’t share any beliefs or ideology’s, oth­er than not believ­ing there is no God.
I real­ly don’t think it’s at all degrad­ing to acknowl­edge the past strug­gles of our species and our dri­ve to build a bet­ter world for our chil­dren. I’m sure you’ll agree Human tech­nol­o­gy has evolved, and that it’s not degrad­ing to use stone tools. In the same way, every gen­er­a­tion has bat­tled to do the best they can to sur­vive and it’s this fight to be bet­ter that has dri­ven us to where we are. The first humans were believed to be amaz­ing hunter gath­er­ers. They had to be fast and smart and strong, migrat­ing with the game to keep fed. Pro­tein gave us sig­nif­i­cant advan­tages, allow­ing for brain and mus­cle devel­op­ment over many gen­er­a­tions. The quest for land and food drove us out of Africa and around the word, Our large social brains and high intel­li­gence giv­ing us amaz­ing adapt­abil­i­ty in new envi­ron­ments. Lat­er human tech­nol­o­gy advanced and we dis­cov­ered var­i­ous farm­ing tech­nol­o­gy allow­ing us to build per­ma­nent towns and community’s. We domes­ti­cat­ed ani­mals and real­ly advanced from there. Intel­li­gence (espe­cial­ly ver­bal) is sexy and gave us sig­nif­i­cant advan­tages with­in the com­mu­ni­ty. Do you think it’s degrad­ing to be an ath­lete? We were nev­er ‘monkey’s, we were and still are a kind of Ape. ‘Human even means ‘wise ape’. I don’t think being a human is degrad­ing in the least bit.
» Actu­al­ly the so called “issue” of resources is one of mas­sive mis­man­age­ment (by humans). The earth pro­duces far more resources that can be con­sumed by 10x the num­ber of the cur­rent glob­al pop­u­la­tion.
I agree, if every human was to live in slums and farm, we could have a very large pop­u­la­tion, but what’s the point?
Still for many thou­sands of years before fos­sil fuel technology’s the glob­al pop­u­la­tion was pret­ty stag­nant. When these resources are exhaust­ed is there any rea­son why we won’t return to the pre­vi­ous state: Only with a deplet­ed bios­phere and many oth­er prob­lems?
»Why? why not just destroy every­thing? if you want to be an intel­lec­tu­al­ly ful­filled athe­ist then you need to fol­low it to its log­i­cal con­clu­sion which is nihilism, that is “no pur­pose, no mean­ing, no right, no wrong, no mind, no beau­ty, just noth­ing­ness”.
I dis­agree with your con­clu­sion. With­out reli­gion we would still have cul­ture, plea­sure and pain, law (if only man­made), we cre­ate mean­ing and must search hard­er for what we want to do with our lives. Real­ly noth­ing changes with­out God, peo­ple would still believe in reli­gions and every­thing would be the same.
Beau­ty is in the eye of the behold­er, and the uni­verse is full of it. Just look at the beau­ti­ful frac­tal (and oth­er) pat­terns in nature, the beau­ty of look­ing up at the stars, of a sun­rise and sun­set, and so much else.
Also all the research I’ve read says that athe­ists have a stronger sense of right and wrong, and are just as well behaved, even though they fol­low the law of man and not the law of God.
Thank you for the link, I will have a good read of the web­site.
Kind regards
David Beck

Sci­en­tists Cre­ate Arti­fi­cial Life — a Liv­ing Organ­ism from Bot­tled Chem­i­cals
voices.yahoo.com
Using four bot­tles of chem­i­cals and a com­put­er, sci­en­tists at lab­o­ra­to­ries in Mary­land and Cal­i­for­nia, led by genome pio­neer Craig Ven­ter, suc­ceed­ed in cre­at­ing life — a bac­te­r­i­al organ­ism. Ven­ter and his teams of sci­en­tists cre­at­ed what they call…
Jan­u­ary 9

12:05am
IS-Evo­lu­tion A-Fraud
David, that was a LONG post, I had to read twice to fol­low but time does not allow to address every point. The rea­son I say sci­ence does not explain every­thing beca­sue God is not “up in the sky” as you like to say, but in anoth­er dimen­sion out of reach to us all mor­tals and sci­ence. You would dis­pute the exis­tence of oth­er realms? You are that sure of your­self that all you can sense is all that exists? Noth­ing more, you are cer­tain?
So can macro evo­lu­tion be test­ed and observed as sci­ence requires?
Have you seen a fruit­fly turn into some­thing oth­er then a fruit­fly? Even after thou­sands of gen­er­a­tions, you get JUST THE OPPOSITE! A 20 eyed fruit­fly has prob­lems, this is de-evo­lu­tion. How does macro-evo­lu­tion clear­ly work, as you say, when nev­er been observed?
Jan­u­ary 19

12:09am
David William Beck

Time­line Pho­tos
Mem­ber Quote: “Even if such a crea­ture many call god did exist I would not wors…See More
By: Athe­ist Quotes Of The Day

12:14am
David William Beck
it’s cool if you want to ignore the evi­dence, I won’t be doing so. Still, if I had to wor­ship one of those mon­strous Chris­t­ian Gods I would go with Lucifer, the light bringer, over Yah­weh any day. I hope you don’t believe in ether, but if you must believe in them, you should give your patron­age to the smarter, less vio­lent, less big­ot­ed one. Chris­t­ian God’s killed bil­lions of peo­ple and has no doubt inspired the most mon­strous acts in the his­to­ry of the world.

12:14am
David William Beck
Today

11:32pm
IS-Evo­lu­tion A-Fraud
I’m back after los­ing my pwd, but oh well.
So you are an athe­ist and you use evo­lu­tion to try to explain and jus­ti­fy not believ­ing in God?

12:37am
David William Beck
I’m sor­ry you lost your pwd, no I was an athe­ist from about age 6 onward. My first school was reli­gious and the head mis­tress loved teach­ing the old tes­ta­ment to the kids. The idea this all pow­er­ful thing was read­ing my mind all the time, read­ing my thoughts made me crazy. It’s awful to tell a small child that if he thinks the wrong thing he could end up in hell. I enjoyed the sto­ries and the reli­gious songs we sung, but we were also taught to fear God. I just nev­er real­ly thought such an awful thing (god) could be real. Of course at that age I had nev­er con­sid­ered the ori­gin of species.

12:40am
David William Beck
even if I were reli­gious I would of course believe in evo­lu­tion because it’s such a beau­ti­ful idea with over­whelm­ing evi­dence.