Forums | MacLife

NokX wrote:

yup - until science can fill in all the holes with facts instead of assumptions - looks like evolution is stuck

Congratulations - you just made my lesson plan for the logic 101 class I'll be teaching this summer quarter at the local CC.  Would you like proper credit for your stunning thinking process or should I just refer to you as Nokx?

Troutski wrote:

NokX wrote:

yup - until science can fill in all the holes with facts instead of assumptions - looks like evolution is stuck

Congratulations - you just made my lesson plan for the logic 101 class I'll be teaching this summer quarter at the local CC.  Would you like proper credit for your stunning thinking process or should I just refer to you as Nokx?

just credit Flamer Gregory

NokX should have wrote:

yup - until religion can fill in all the holes with facts instead of blind faith - looks like creationism is stuck

Last edited by freakoutjackson (2005-06-14 12:52 pm)

Let's talk of evolution, please.



Very well. Perhaps we can speak of evolution while keeping the slicing and dicing still firmly in mind. In that spirit. I present:

Cox G. De virginibus puerisque: the function of the human foreskin considered from an evolutionary perspective. Med Hypotheses 1995 Dec;45(6):617-21.

Dr. Guy Cox wrote:

The functional significance of the human male foreskin is considered in evolutionary terms. It is postulated that there is a lifetime's reproductive advantage in delaying the age of first coitus, and hence of first childbirth, for some years after puberty, until the parents are better established as providers. Phimosis and preputial adhesions are common in human males because they have selective advantage, tending to impede and therefore delay the onset of sexual activity. The physical signs of female virginity have an analogous function, and have been selected for in the same way. This hypothesis also provides a consistent explanation for the worldwide tradition of circumcision and for the common practice of masturbation by human males.

source (free, full text pdf)

There's so much to talk about-- evolution, morality, premarital sex, masturbation...  Even Nominative Determinism. I do apologize in advance for the lack of pictures, but quite frankly, medicalized pictures of cocks are a bit of an acquired taste.

Last edited by jerwin (2005-06-14 2:27 pm)

resedit wrote:

The Dr. Cox guy - what he wrote is purely speculative, absolutely no evidence whatsoever to back it up.

<-----

Well I'm SORRY Molly Menstrual that my article didn't come to your full compliance. If you'll excuse me, I'll comply with your wishes, fold up my article, stick it in my lab coat, have all the neighborhood children beat a straw man wearing my lab coat with article neatly folded inside and then have them set fire to it. IT'LL BE A GRAND OL TIME.

Donovan Osaya wrote:

resedit wrote:

The Dr. Cox guy - what he wrote is purely speculative, absolutely no evidence whatsoever to back it up.

<-----

Well I'm SORRY Molly Menstrual that my article didn't come to your full compliance. If you'll excuse me, I'll comply with your wishes, fold up my article, stick it in my lab coat, have all the neighborhood children beat a straw man wearing my lab coat with article neatly folded inside and then have them set fire to it. IT'LL BE A GRAND OL TIME.

Bravo!  an "A" for style, for sure.

(Scrubs rules)

bedstuy wrote:

Troutski wrote:

NokX wrote:

yup - until science can fill in all the holes with facts instead of assumptions - looks like evolution is stuck

Congratulations - you just made my lesson plan for the logic 101 class I'll be teaching this summer quarter at the local CC.  Would you like proper credit for your stunning thinking process or should I just refer to you as Nokx?

just credit Flamer Gregory

That's T. Gregory.

T. Gregory Nokx.

resedit wrote:

cocoamix wrote:

The Bible is the one with talking snakes, whales that swallow people and then spit them out, people riding up into the sky in golden chariots, and Evolution is the fairy tale?

How disturbing.

All three of those examples clearly specify that supernatural was involved.
Evolutionists claim something magical happened all by itself.

Think about it.

I did. That's why I wrote what I did.

resedit wrote:

cocoamix wrote:

The Bible is the one with talking snakes, whales that swallow people and then spit them out, people riding up into the sky in golden chariots, and Evolution is the fairy tale?

How disturbing.

All three of those examples clearly specify that supernatural was involved.
Evolutionists claim something magical happened all by itself.

Think about it.

Who created God?

When you can answer that without supernatural explanations or without saying "he always was here", then you'll be able to accuse evolutionists of claiming that something magical happened all by itself.

How did your God come into existence? What created him? Did God evolve? Was he created by another something else?

The creationist explanation creates more questions than answers, and doesn't provide any backing for the answers it does provide.

Evolutionists don't try to explain the origin of the process. They just look at the process and acknowledge that it's happening.

matt wrote:

Who created God?

When you can answer that without supernatural explanations or without saying "he always was here", then you'll be able to accuse evolutionists of claiming that something magical happened all by itself.

How did your God come into existence? What created him? Did God evolve? Was he created by another something else?

I've never accused evolutionists of anything but searching for answers, but regardless, I believe "God" was brought about through his creation, even if he always existed.

Even so, asking about anything that happened before the begining of the universe is going to be outside normal reason. Was there space or time before the creation of space-time? How can we place something as temporally previous, if time doesnt exist? If there is a "before" the origin of the physical universe, what nature is the non-physical? But anyhoo, what sort of being, beside if we assume spiritual, could exist as a god before creation? Because, what is a god? Does this not indicate a relationship or position of authority? If I call myself an artist, does it not follow that this word comes from an ability to make art? What is an artist who makes no art? What is a god with no one to worship or nothing created?

God created "God," causa sui. Before creation, there was no such thing as language, communication, time, space and so forth. There was no such thing as authority either, or relationship. So God's person may have been omnipotent, but without authority; he may be the definition of love, but there is no recipient. Creation is like a self actualization, if God is love and power and so forth like in the bible.

And even the name of the biblical God means "He who causes to become" or "I am what I shall choose to be."

Last edited by StaticAge (2005-06-14 10:44 pm)

evolution is at least science. bad science is still science.

mahakali wrote:

resedit wrote:

cocoamix wrote:

The Bible is the one with talking snakes, whales that swallow people and then spit them out, people riding up into the sky in golden chariots, and Evolution is the fairy tale?

How disturbing.

All three of those examples clearly specify that supernatural was involved.
Evolutionists claim something magical happened all by itself.

Think about it.

Corrected: Evolutionists claim something 'magical' must have a scientific explanation.

Ah - an assumption. Assumption that supernatural does not exist.
That's making science into a god, to be frank - a faith. Fairytale.

Glad you finally realize it. Now stop teaching your faith in public schools! I don't want your religion shoved down my throat!