Evolution: Gender Cannot Be Explained

[Irreligious]

VladTheImpaler wrote

Have you seen this video?

http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...73048178434620

By the way, Vlad, thanks for the link. I thoroughly enjoyed it, learned a few things and, most improbably of all, am a bit inspired to investigate further. I don't think I'll be inspired to become a Christian any time soon, but it was quite novel to see Robert Beckford's sober approach towards examining the origins of his faith/religion and the motivations behind the many authors of the Bible.

That, and he has cool dreads.

Edited: Gotta add that it was disappointing to some Islamic group, which uploaded the documentary to GoogleVideo, trying to co-opt the video and use it dishonestly. See the synopsis on the sidebar, which is just propaganda aimed at trashing Christianity and Judaism while exalting Islam. After viewing the contents of the documentary, it is apparent that these Muslims have no association with Mr. Beckford and he, none with them.

I also viewed and enjoyed the video. I had read most of the origin stuff he covered before, but it was really enlightening to watch him go through the same discovery process, especially with his religious background and doctorate in theology. However, he came to obviously different conclusions when he stated that he felt that this "was the power of the spirit that makes it possible to see through all that has happened in the history of the bible to the true message". That was wooey bs. Come on, just admit that the bible was man made to make people behave and be done with it.

Lily wrote

Huh? What do I fight scientists about?

Whoops, got you and Missionary confused in this thread. You realize of course that one blithering jebus-jerker sounds just like another when you're skimming through the pages.

[Irreligious]

zer0 wrote

I also viewed and enjoyed the video. I had read most of the origin stuff he covered before, but it was really enlightening to watch him go through the same discovery process, especially with his religious background and doctorate in theology. However, he came to obviously different conclusions when he stated that he felt that this "was the power of the spirit that makes it possible to see through all that has happened in the history of the bible to the true message". That was wooey bs. Come on, just admit that the bible was man made to make people behave and be done with it.

Yeah, seems he just couldn't get off the Jesus juice. A little more than halfway through, I anticipated that that would be the case. Ironically, his "journey" led him to believe that he had gained a more nuanced understanding of his faith, while I interpreted it as him having acquired a taste for a less virulent and more watered-down brand of Jesus juice.

But hopefully a view that is much more open-minded, and less evangelical. I'm fine and dandy with the "to each his own" style faith-heads that are happy to leave everyone else the fuck alone with their god(s).

JU Mike wrote

A slow process of mutation and natural selection over a long period of time makes no sense to you. But a bearded man coming out of the clouds and zapping things into existence apparently makes a lot more sense to you. And you say scientists don't have a clue?

You really believe intelligence "evolved"? You tell me that principles of physics just simply exist? How is selection natural and unguided across life forms with no sets of instructions? They evolved for survival but we see extinction and degeneration of species? Where are the "super-unkillables" that should have evolved to such strength and numbers that they are unstoppable as the fittest of the fit?

Irreligious wrote

Accurate and factual in what way? Which parts of the New Testament have been confirmed as incontestable fact?

Pontius Pilate and Caiaphas had been considered mythical persons for centuries. They've found evidence proving they're historical persons. Jesus prophesied the destruction of the temple which took place in 70 CE. We know for a fact that churches were begun prior to 70CE in Athioch, Jerusalem, Corinth, Galatia, Ephesus, Philippi, Colossae, Thessolonica, and Rome as mentioned in the NT. We have Roman rulers mentioned by name.

Irreligious wrote

You look at it all and think an invisible man in the sky did it. I think you're dismissing a lot of evidence, too.

I'm dismissing no evidence of science. None. Only the interpretive hypothetical opinions pertaining to cause.

Mog wrote

Actually, if you've studied recent archaeology, we've found practically nothing that confirms the old testament view of history. The entire Torah is mythical.

Sure...Like Jericho and Nineveh were considered by the Enlightenment as myths that proved the bible wrong. The problem is they found them both in the 1800's.

antix wrote

The existance of the universe and all of its contents is evidence that the universe exists and has various contents. How that all origionated nobody knows. Those who claim to know how it happened, and give as their "proof" a fairytale answer that explains nothing, sometimes become Shitlords.

I agree the "how" is likely unanswerable since we're talking about specific mechanisms we can't observe or recreate.

The real question is "who and why" OR if a who and why exists. You claim that all this is caused by some explainable phenomena even though it can't be explained as to the origin of the original energy, matter, forces, principles, etc. that somehow set an unguided chain reaction of events in motion culminating in the universe, life, and intelligence.

I say that the very idea is preposterous and fantastically ignorant without even considering the insurmountable statistical odds of such an occurrence.

[psychodiva]

Missionary wrote

Don't want to comment or commit to the unknowable again? How many topics of science do you fear discussing out in the open? I bet it's all of them.

oh please- I'm willing to go head to head with you on neuroscience, psychiatry and psychology - or are they too 'soft science' for your brain to grasp?

[Barney]

Missionary wrote

You really believe intelligence "evolved"? You tell me that principles of physics just simply exist? How is selection natural and unguided across life forms with no sets of instructions? They evolved for survival but we see extinction and degeneration of species? Where are the "super-unkillables" that should have evolved to such strength and numbers that they are unstoppable as the fittest of the fit?

If you knew how much you are embarressing yourself with your utter lack of knowlage about evolution you would want to just hide forever. Although its very amusing for us, I really am cringing at your posts. Theyre like the little infant suddenly being dumped into a chair and being interveiwed about the economic prospects of East Timor.

You seem like a fair chap. Why dont you go off for 3 months, read science and evolution, get yourself a tiny bit of knowlage on the subject then come backj to argue from a position of strength and not a position of ridicule.

It pains me to see someone make such a tit of themself .
Honestly take my advice.

[Irreligious]

Missionary wrote

I agree the "how" is likely unanswerable since we're talking about specific mechanisms we can't observe or recreate.
The real question is "who and why" OR if a who and why exists. You claim that all this is caused by some explainable phenomena even though it can't be explained as to the origin of the original energy, matter, forces, principles, etc. that somehow set an unguided chain reaction of events in motion culminating in the universe, life, and intelligence.

I say that the very idea is preposterous and fantastically ignorant without even considering the insurmountable statistical odds of such an occurrence.

What about the odds that neither you nor anybody else really knows? I say it is preposterous and fantastically ignorant to assume that you do.

[Irreligious]

Missionary wrote

I'm dismissing no evidence of science. None. Only the interpretive hypothetical opinions pertaining to cause.

Well, you're not engaging anything that even looks like science. You're just making an assumption and running with it like gangbusters.

Not only do you assume such a thing as a creator, but you assume to know it's a singluar entity, as well as its intentions and its edicts. That's a ridiculous leap of faith.

[antix]

Missionary wrote

You really believe intelligence "evolved"? You tell me that principles of physics just simply exist? How is selection natural and unguided across life forms with no sets of instructions? They evolved for survival but we see extinction and degeneration of species? Where are the "super-unkillables" that should have evolved to such strength and numbers that they are unstoppable as the fittest of the fit?

Yes, yes we know already. You have no understanding of the scientific method. No need to advertise it in every post. You are clueless about what claims are being made, clueless as to the degree of accuracy they are believed to be, and even more clueless as to how the conclussions came about in the first place.

I know this fact about you with 100% certainty.