Calling Cofty and others regarding evolution

by dubstepped 340 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  Old Navy

  Quote from Fred Frantzone:

  I've noticed that engineers have a propensity to belief in quackery.

  There is some truth in that. Engineers, like most anyone else, can be easily deceived about things which they do not fully comprehend. Most Engineers are too specialized in their education and experiences and therefore are vulnerable to many of life's traps.
  

  The search for Truth requires considerable effort and time. Not many are able to work this into their daily schedule of eking out survival in our dog eat dog world. Making ends meet is very challenging today for the majority; particularly those who are just beginning their professional lives under a mountain of debt.
  
• 

  cofty

  How is it that our eyes are able to convert images into electrical impulses and apply them to the proper areas of the brain to enable us to "see?" - ON

  The answer to that question is easily available to you if you care to make the effort.

  Every creationist objection can be reduced to 'complexity therefore Jesus'.
• 

  Old Navy

  Quote from Cofty:

  The answer to that question is easily available to you if you care to make the effort.

  Unfortunately, from the technical engineering perspective, the answer to the question is not easily available. The ingenuity of the system design; the efficiency of the system design; the spectral response of the system; the presence of two sets of sensors to accommodate daytime and night-time conditions; the ability of the system to effect certain repairs to itself; the electro-control links of the system to other parts of the brain which enable both voluntary and involuntary reaction to certain visual stimuli; etc; etc; etc... Do you see the problem here? The tiniest details of the system, and there are many, are so incredibly ingenious! Biological electro-chemistry all tied together with incredible precision, order, reliability and astounding performance potential. The kinds of specifications which make engineers drool.
  
• 

  Old Navy

  Quote from Cofty:

  Every creationist objection can be reduced to 'complexity therefore Jesus'.

  I'm not trying to make objections or to change beliefs. I am simply explaining why, from a technical viewpoint, certain things just cannot be assumed, hypothesized or theorized when strong evidence of cognizant design is in evidence. It bothers me not that many believe in evolution or other possibilities. We all have our reasons for believing what we find sensible. I have faith that one day we shall indeed have the answers to all of our questions.

  But what is it about non-creationism which many find so appealing? What is their heart-of-hearts motivation? Is it for the same reason that many (or should one say MANY?) xJws are turned off by the thought that there may really be a Creator and a Heavenly Family?
  
• 

  cofty

  Do you see the problem here?

  No I don't. All the details have been researched. I have explained some of them in my Evolution is a Fact Series here and here for example.

  Every stage of complexity of the eye can be found in the natural world. If the eye had been designed by a human engineer it would be better than it is.

  strong evidence of cognizant design is in evidence

  It only seems that way to you because you don't understand evolution.

  But what is it about non-creationism which many find so appealing? What is their heart-of-hearts motivation?

  A desire to know the truth about reality.
  
  

  xJws are turned off by the thought that there may really be a Creator and a Heavenly Family

  That's not true. Ex-JWs that reject the supernatural usually do so because they have followed the evidence.

  I have faith that one day we shall indeed have the answers to all of our questions.

  I have no confidence that you will ever learn anything new.
  
  
• 

  smiddy3

  what is it about non-creationism which many find so appealing? What is their heart-of-hearts motivation? Is it for the same reason that many (or should one say MANY?) xJws are turned off by the thought that there may really be a Creator and a Heavenly Family?

  My objection to an Almighty God Jehovah /Jesus Christ /Angels /Satan etc. is :

  1. The Bible and what it contains.And what it does not contain.

  2.Imperfect human beings are the ones who defined what was the word of God ,God had no say in it he was completely silent about it.

  3.God by all accounts in the Bible had no problem communicating with humans by means of visions ,angels ,dreams ,prophets ,etc.and their was no doubt that it was God communicating with them.

  4.No such claim can be made by any Christian religion today it is all down to the religions interpretation of the scriptures they want you to believe in.An interpretation of the Bible by imperfect human beings who have an agenda of their own .God has no say in it .

  And all of these reasons no doubt fit any other religious belief of Christendom.

  5. Having said all of that , forget the Bible and all of that ,I am not averse to the possibility that their are other life forms in the universe that may or may not have had involvement in the spread of life forms on this planet .

  6.That is to say if #5 were true {and I`m not saying it is } it does not mean they are or have been in any way involved in how events turn out here on earth.Nor are they involved in any way with what happens to humans on a day to day basis .

  7. It could be said that if a more advanced civilization in the universe sowed the seeds of life for this planet and left it to sort itself out then I suppose you could call it from our viewpoint a God ?

  But it certainly is not is the Christian or Jewish or Muslim book of faith or any other religious book of faith produced by imperfect humans.

  
  
• 

  notsurewheretogo

  Climbing Mount Improbable by Richard Dawkins answers very easily how an eye can see...he explains the many possibilities of the evolution of it.

  Just read an do research before spouting off nonsense or posting questions without researching the answer yourself.
• 

  redpilltwice

  Climbing Mount Improbable by Richard Dawkins answers very easily how an eye can see...he explains the many possibilities of the evolution of it.
  Just read an do research before spouting off nonsense or posting questions without researching the answer yourself.

  Notsurewheretogo, I am always intriguid by such claims that sound very, very convinced, but...

  Very easily? Because Dawkins explains the many possibilities of the evolution of it?

  What does he explain other than modern biology and anatomy? I've seen video's where he connects the dots with video's and animations of modern living species but at the same time he ignores vital parts such as the supposedly evolution of the eye's nerve system and how incredibly complex codes are processed..

  How are you sure that all those possibilities can be applied to real natural processes? We haven't observed it, we cannot reproduce it, fossils show already complex eyes during the cambrian, so how can someone really know the gradual evolutionary proces from bottom-up?. Why claim "fact" instead of "maybe" or "we don't know (yet)"?

  I believe there is much more time and observation needed before such evolutionary claims can be made with absolute certainty.

  I remain sceptical as more research needs to be done...
• 

  cofty

  how can someone really know the gradual evolutionary proces from bottom-up? - redpilltwice

  The very genes - in fact the very letters of DNA - that trigger the building of an eye and all of the individual processes are described in astonishing detail on the scientific press

  Every possible stage of complexity from a simple patch of light-sensitive cells all the way to our own complex eyes can be observed in the living world. How colour arose - and was lost - and was developed again is known, how the lens evolved from existing proteins is old news, how the eye came to focus light on the retina is understood.

  What exactly do you think still needs to be done before you give your assent?

  How much work have you done to research the current state of knowledge?
  
  
• 

  Old Navy

  Quotes from Cofty:

  It only seems that way to you because you don't understand evolution.

  I have no confidence that you will ever learn anything new.

  Does anyone at all truly comprehend the Theory of Evolution? With all theories there is a threshold of knowledge which exceeded renders them untenable. I've exceeded that threshold; I know too much to ever revert back to my younger years when, superficially, the possibility of evolution held some small merit.
  

  The Creation from my point of view is far too complex, too diverse, too beneficial to ever have been the result of a spontaneous coming into existence scenario. The evidence of design of "the living" from the smallest of their parts to the wondrous whole is ingenious. From whence does this genius arise? The beauty of our Planet in all its incredible aspects is ingenious as well. The eco-system of our Planet which nourishes and sustains life is quite remarkable.

  Once one knows too much there really is no going back.