Boeing 747s and Other Misunderstandings about Evolution

by cofty 89 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

  • snare&racket

    Millions of mutations happen in every human all day long..... approx 350,000 happen a minute.

  • adamah

    SNR said- Cancer requires at least 4 mutations for it to be malignant, be careful what you assign your god Kate x

    Yeah, that's a great point: and now that some believers are accepting evolution due to overwhelming evidence that makes it undeniable to most, they want to claim that God the "Intelligent Designer" planned life around evolution from the start. Of course believers largely want to take credit for it since they think of evolution as "intelligent", and they've accept the meme of "evolution always results in greater complexity and step-wise improvements"; however, the reality is that evolution is far from intelligent OR perfect.

    So if "God Dun It!" by baking the process of evolution into his creations, then God's got some 'splaining to do, since evolution is basically as far-from-intelligent-design as it gets! It's more like building tons of prototypes without any pre-thought whatsoever and throwing a few random variations into the batch, and then seeing what actually is able to work in the field via beta-testers, and then using all those units that actually make it back to the factory as the basis for building more, creating more random variations using those.

    Of course, genetic diseases account for MANY diseases (eg cystic fibrosis, Down syndrome, sickle cell disease, Huntingtons chorea, Alzheimer's disease, various cancers, etc, etc), so God has to take the blame for all of these conditions, since they're ALL the result of mutations:

    SNR said- Millions of mutations happen in every human all day long..... approx 350,000 happen a minute.

    Yup, I always remember a guest lecturer (an oncologist who taught at UC Irvine Med School, and was in private practice) from my undergrad days in an elective 'biology of cancer' class who said this:

    "I've had three cancer cells form today: once in the morning in my liver, once in the skin of my face, and another inside my brain."

    (The class was )

    "But why am I standing here before you now? Well, fortunately, my immune system did its job and detected the aberrant cancer cells and managed to kill them before they could replicate and form tumors."

    Obviously he was being so specific in the details for dramatic effect, but it stuck with me....

    Oh, on this:

    Cofty said- I started this thread to make a very very simple point to counter a common cannard. It could have been a useful thread but you decided to shit on it.

    1. Very complex things do exist.

    2. Creationists are right that these very complex things could not appear by chance alone.

    3. Understanding cumulative selection is the answer.

    4. Dawkins computer programme, his ratchet and Mount Improbable are useful analogies in this LIMITED context.

    Then you should've just SAID THAT back on the first page, rather than simply repeating the same ol' tired myths of evolution that have long-since been discarded precisely becuase they JUST AREN'T TRUE, and worse, they actually INTERFERE with understanding how evolution actually operates.

    And as pointed out by SNR, believers who want to work evolution into their theology should understand that the process of evolution is quite aloof and doesn't care about what happens to the individual organisms: that message is quite inconsistent with the "God is love, and He wants to have a personal relationship with you" claim of Xianity.

    Besides, you don't want to perpetuate falsehoods, do you? It's so much easier to learn evolution correctly, rather than relying on bad teleologically-driven analogies and myths.

    However, you kept insisting that you were right and I was "all wet" and that I didn't know what I was talking about, etc, when you could've saved us both alot of typing by just SAYING that was your goal, rather than obstinately and dogmatically sticking to your guns. Instead, you're likely adding fuel to those who say "belief in evolution is a religion, requiring faith", since you're not actually "preaching" what IS known to be the case.

    On this:

    Cofty said- Adam I can honestly say I have never learned anything from you that I didn't know already.

    Oh, I'm sure that's true in more ways than one, since isn't that exactly what someone who tells themselves they know-it-all would be likely to say?

    Cofty said- The problem is you don't do conversation. You assume you know what people might mean and then without asking questions you attack things they never said.

    OK, so you're accusing me of "strawmanning" you, and I agree, that would be a foul, if I DID. So please point out in THIS thread where I've straw-manned you, and I'll apologize (and I note you apparently agreed with the commonly-accepted definition of 'teleogy' that I provided Kate, so that couldn't be it; Kate asked while I was on-line too, and I thought I'd respond, rather than her having to wait for a response from you).

    On second thought, don't bother. If you think I've straw-manned you, then I apoligize for your perception, even if it's a misperception. I recently pointed out how telling others to deny their feelings is wrong, and I in turn shouldn't discount your feelings, either. So here you go:

    But regardless, I see evidence of 'shot-gunning' and making up accusations, simply to see if any of it sticks (which ironically is EXACTLY how the process of evolution works, too: populations throw a bunch of "stuff" out there to see what 'sticks'; then it gathers the ones that 'stuck' and modifies a few of them, and throws at the wall once again. It's ironic that creationists DON'T understand and/or accept evolution, since it's exactly how many of them debate).

    You threw out factually-incorrect information (even ironically saying that facts don't change, which you should let Sam Arbesman know, since he wrote a layperson's book on the subject, and delivered a TED talk on the subject).

    However, you've repeatedly gotten your nose bent out of shape by claiming that others were chasing you around the forum (when it seemed you chased them) trying to bully them so you could claim your territory. I'm not playing that game with you.

    Speaking of which:

    Cofty said- You were a self-important pain in the arse before you got banned as King Solomon and you are even worse now.

    Yet more ad hominems?

    Cofty, I don't say this to just anyone, but your continued verbal tirades and ad hominems means I won't post to this thread, so you win! If extrapolation means anything here, I think that means your male member IS bigger than mine!

    (Although I'll still be reading, but won't post unless to respond to someone who comments on my posts (eg as Kate did, above)).

    No hard feelings, Cofty, but if what you've said above that you haven't learned anything I've written is true, then the odds are quite high that there's no point (and how you can speak for everyone else reading the thread is a question for another time).


  • Ruby456


    "Survival of those who survive (and thus pass on their genes to offspring)".

    I agree with the above.

    On infanticide - It is highly controversial and was practiced in many settled cultures - the greeks the romans for example. Adamah I would argue though that they were probably following socio economic and political imperatives just as much as religious ones (and this not to deny that religion has caused much bloodshed and controversy). But how do people mediate between life and death and killing for socio economic/political purposes - they call the priest, the shaman, the holy man who endeavour to normalise violence for the sake of the community often under political coercion. Taking an agnostic approach I would not attempt to judge ancient cultures but in our present culture debates re abortion and euthanasia still rage - we call the priest the psyc the doctor the surgeon. meanwhile we wait to see what evolutonary effects result.

  • cofty

    FFS Adam why use 10 words when you could use 1000?

    Everything I wrote on this thread is correct. I just chose to kept it simple. You should try it.

    I even pointed out the possibly misleading element of the illustration long before your first self-agrandising rant. If you wanted clarification just ask.

    The sad thing is that you probably do know interesting things about evolution that I could learn from you. If only you learned how to do conversation.

  • KateWild

    Kate, with the greatest respect do you know much about mutations?-snare

    Thank you for showing great respect, I must admit I know more about Chemistry than Biology, and more about sub-atomic particles than evoltionary mutations. So you make fair comments, my conclusion that the order is divine, is based on all my knowledge not just evolution, but I respect your conclusions too. After all, it's not wrong to believe in an intelligent creator and the process of evolution is it?

    Thanks snare for your input

    Sam xx

  • KateWild

    Cancer requires at least 4 mutations for it to be malignant, be careful what you assign your god Kate x-snare

    This analogy is something that cofty has asked us not to refer to. I would like to respect his wishes.

    Let's look at my personal mutation instead. I was born with ASD, this is a developmental disorder, my brain did not develop the way many brains do, hence it was a mutation. In as far as the gene pool mutations go, ASD is heriditary, and over the generations the mutation has become more prevelant. My son suffer's with ASD also.

    So your point is very good, would God in an orderly way, deliberately cause mutation's in my family's brains?

    Answer, I don't think God care's about anyone really. So allowing these mutations to happen is like a man who starts a small family business, and then retire's lives his life and his business suffer's in some ways and thrives in others, over the generation's the owner has no concern for how his business is doing or for that matter the employee's.

    But your point is valid snare, love Sam xx

  • cofty

    This analogy is something that cofty has asked us not to refer to.

    No problem. I was only referring to casual use of the word to refer to anything negative.

    Cancer does require a cascade of mutations. On the one hand the cell has a mutation causing it to reproduce out of control AND the mechanism that should cause it to self-destruct is also broken. Its a bit like a car having a throttle jammed open AND faulty brakes at the same time.

  • KateWild

    I am sorry for your ordeal, and the suffering your family is dealing with. It is things like this that make my relationship with a Personal God, as Einstein and Spinoza put it, diminish.

    I just can't seem to stop praying, or shouting at Him though. I want to express my displeasure, but I guess I am just thinking things through in my mind, or talking to myself.

    I don't think Science will be a reason for me to stop believing in God, but if I did become an atheist, it would be becuase there is too much suffering.

    Sam xx

  • rawe

    Hi Sam,

    "If I did become an atheist, it would be becuase there is too much suffering."

    That dogs get, suffer then die from cancer in the same way as humans does not square with explanation of why-death at Romans 5:12.



  • prologos

    because the Romans 5:12 argument is based on the original sin, instant genetic defect- , dented baking pan idea, with

    the vengeful, perhaps caring G_O_D, but not

    the perhaps plausible, success-loving creator, that loves good adapting survivors.

    re: Boeing works:

    Evolution is generous with time and resources.

    Picture the folks in Seattle TESTING the better RANDOM Batteries in the Dream-liner by flying one after another to destruction, to see which is the fitting model?

Share this