Re: Money. Bored. Evolution.
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

What created the creator?


[/ QUOTE ]


How did evolution evolve?

[/ QUOTE ]

Why would evolution evolve?

It's besides the point anyways. I was merely pointing out that the argument of, "well the universe had to get here somehow, it can't have just sprang up from nothing," is faulty. Any argument you make about our existence like that necessarily applies to a creator also.

Re: Money. Bored. Evolution.
 

[ QUOTE ]

It's besides the point anyways.


[/ QUOTE ]

It is the point.

Re: Money. Bored. Evolution.
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

What created the creator?


[/ QUOTE ]


How did evolution evolve?

[/ QUOTE ]

This question doesnt even make sense.

Re: Money. Bored. Evolution.
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

It's besides the point anyways.


[/ QUOTE ]

It is the point.

[/ QUOTE ]

Stop being so cryptic. I'm not even sure what your "how did evolution evolve" comment was supposed to mean. If you're using it to argue against my point to Inso, then just make an argument saying so instead of just making a statement that doesn't make any sense.

Re: Money. Bored. Evolution.
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

What created the creator?


[/ QUOTE ]


How did evolution evolve?

[/ QUOTE ]

This question doesnt even make sense.

[/ QUOTE ]
It makes sense from NR's perspective. Of course the answer is "It didn't," but that doesn't stop people with little understanding of evolution from posing it.

Re: Money. Bored. Evolution.
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Ok, but no one said anything about the universe. Do you believe it to be the best explanation for the creation of Earth, or the creation of life, or the creation of the diversity of life?

[/ QUOTE ]

The universe and ALL that is contained within it.

[/ QUOTE ]

God is the best explanation for the horrible screenplay I'm working on?

Re: Money. Bored. Evolution.
 

[ QUOTE ]
the problem isnt the number of years or days, but the fact that the universe is finite directly contradicts evolution.

[/ QUOTE ]

....WHAT?!?!

Re: Money. Bored. Evolution.
 

[ QUOTE ]

How did evolution evolve?
This question doesnt even make sense.


[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]

What created the creator?


[/ QUOTE ]
And this one does?

Re: Money. Bored. Evolution.
 

[ QUOTE ]

I'm not even sure what your "how did evolution evolve"


[/ QUOTE ]

If it's ok to ask where the absolute, eternal, uncreated Creator of the universe came from it's ok to ask where evolution came from.

Is that uncryptic enough?

Re: Money. Bored. Evolution.
 

Inso...
I don't literally mean the entire site...I would look at the posts of whoever ends up doing this, and choose a large amount of info (but still a subset) that I felt most addressed their general objections.

All 'rules' would be laid out ahead of time, along with the 'course requirements'.

As I mentioned above, I will deposit the money with another poster (assuming someone will agree to that) or individual...I'm sure we can find someone we mutually agree upon.

As to 'level of mastery'...in general, you should be able to understand the evidence presented. Serioiusly, it's just like college. You certainly don't have to believe any of it.

I don't intend this to be easy. I'm not being tricky, but I'm not just tossing out money to someone who wants to claim they read the site. (If you look at the feedback section, eg, there's a lot of "Hey, I read this whole site, and how come there's horses? Huh? Huh? where are the monkey men? Huh? Yeah...thought so..."

If I reach agreement with someone, It will be fair, impartial, clear ahead of time, and secured by someone we can trust. But not mindlessly easy.

So far I see SOME interest from you and KUJustin...I'm out of touch for a few days, so I'll let this thread run and see what develops, and also think about the logistics of 'testing'.

Edit - Actually I see there are some others with possible interest too...didn't mean to neglect you guys.

Re: Money. Bored. Evolution.
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

I'm not even sure what your "how did evolution evolve"


[/ QUOTE ]

If it's ok to ask where the absolute, eternal, uncreated Creator of the universe came from it's ok to ask where evolution came from.

Is that uncryptic enough?

[/ QUOTE ]

Evolution is just our best attempt at describing what has already happened. It didn't come from anywhere. The species that we see today are the ones who could survive various environmental conditions.

I think the who created the creator argument is kind of dumb too though. It shouldn't really matter. We observe this universe and from that we might posit a creator God. Something might have created that God, but that isn't necessarily relevant to this universe's existence. A better argument would try to show why we have no sound reason for positing this creator God in the first place.

Re: Money. Bored. Evolution.
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Also, I'll let the various longtime smp posters decide who is most worthy of this experiment in education should there be multiple takers...

[/ QUOTE ]

You should spend your 5k educating kids who still have a chance at becoming an intelligent, rational human being. Why waste time and money with lost cases such as NR?


[/ QUOTE ]
You are almost certainly right, and you've made me feel a little guilty, and rash. Nonetheless, I don't retract offers, I still think it will be interesting, we all waste money sometimes, etc. And hey...trickle down, right...I'm paying hard-core christians, after all...surely some will go to charity [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img].
[ QUOTE ]

Of course then again if it's just an experiment I don't know why you used the word "worthy".

[/ QUOTE ]
Because I sometimes choose my words poorly. Perhaps 'most appropriate for this experiment'. It's interesting, actually, the range of possibilities...

Re: Money. Bored. Evolution.
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'm a creationist because I believe it to be the very best explanation of our universe. Not because God will smite me if I don't.

[/ QUOTE ]

All of this created in 6 days = best explanation

All of this created over billions of years = not best explanation

Really? [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

Not created over billions of years. Manifested on its own out of nothingness. To create something would require a creator. Evolution denies a creator of any kind.

[/ QUOTE ]

What created the creator?

[/ QUOTE ]

Why would a creator God need to be created? It's above time.

Re: Money. Bored. Evolution.
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
the problem isnt the number of years or days, but the fact that the universe is finite directly contradicts evolution.

[/ QUOTE ]

....WHAT?!?!

[/ QUOTE ]

If you agree with the kalam argument, then for evolution to be true you would need an eternal, infinite universe. We know that the universe is finite, so it breaks down the very foundation of evolution's view of the universe.

Re: Money. Bored. Evolution.
 

I think the main point of the anti-evolution crowds is that things like social-darwinism, ie killing people or letting them die, is given scientific credibility, paradoxically enough.

On the other hand the church as done a lot of killing.

I think the point that can be taken from all this is that people and organizations are pretty rotten and anything that can mitigate the evil in human beings is probably better than nothing.

I mean really, evolution is pretty meaningless in and of itself, it just takes on importance in relation to other things that it has no direct relationship to. (morality stuff mostly)

Re: Money. Bored. Evolution.
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

I'm not even sure what your "how did evolution evolve"


[/ QUOTE ]

If it's ok to ask where the absolute, eternal, uncreated Creator of the universe came from it's ok to ask where evolution came from.

Is that uncryptic enough?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes thank you.

Evolution isn't a thing, it's a process that we've given a name to, so I don't think your point holds. However I think that you're trying to say that it's not ok to ask where the creator came from and I agree with that. It's also not ok to ask where our existence came from as an argument for a creator. But now as I look back at the originall Inso0 post that I was responding to, I see I misread his post and he wasn't actually arguing that. I apologize for the confusion I have created.

Re: Money. Bored. Evolution.
 

[ QUOTE ]

We observe this universe and from that we might posit a creator God. Something might have created that God, but that isn't necessarily relevant to this universe's existence.


[/ QUOTE ]

Huh?

Re: Money. Bored. Evolution.
 

[ QUOTE ]

Evolution isn't a thing, it's a process


[/ QUOTE ]

But why this process? It isn't logically required, it's contingent, so how did it get here, evolve, come into being? If it's always existed, why is it there and not some other process? Or any process?

Just a hint on all this - if God is absolute, eternal Creator who created the laws of nature then the laws of nature don't apply to Him and so He doesn't need a creator Himself since He wasn't created.

Or stated differently, God doesn't need an explanation because He is the explanation for everything else. Difficult to make that case for evolution.

Re: Money. Bored. Evolution.
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Evolution isn't a thing, it's a process


[/ QUOTE ]

But why this process? It isn't logically required, it's contingent, so how did it get here, evolve, come into being? If it's always existed, why is it there and not some other process? Or any process?

Just a hint on all this - if God is absolute, eternal Creator who created the laws of nature then the laws of nature don't apply to Him and so He doesn't need a creator Himself since He wasn't created.

Or stated differently, God doesn't need an explanation because He is the explanation for everything else. Difficult to make that case for evolution.

[/ QUOTE ]


Didn't Boro make a post (since often quoted) demonstrating to you how evolution is actually logically required?

Re: Money. Bored. Evolution.
 

[ QUOTE ]

Didn't Boro make a post


[/ QUOTE ]

Who?

Re: Money. Bored. Evolution.
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Didn't Boro make a post


[/ QUOTE ]

Who?

[/ QUOTE ]
I like you better when you just ignore me.

Re: Money. Bored. Evolution.
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Didn't Boro make a post


[/ QUOTE ]

Who?

[/ QUOTE ]

uhhh you know who Borodog is

i'm game for $4k.
still probly won't buy any of this "evolution" crap.
AIM / posting / test of some kind - it's all good.

praise jesus

holla

Re: Money. Bored. Evolution.
 

[ QUOTE ]

uhhh you know who Borodog is


[/ QUOTE ]

Never heard of him.

BTW, I'm suing for copyright infringement and sending your name in to the FBI's fraud department for impersonating a Christian.

Re: Money. Bored. Evolution.
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Evolution isn't a thing, it's a process


[/ QUOTE ]

But why this process? It isn't logically required, it's contingent, so how did it get here, evolve, come into being? If it's always existed, why is it there and not some other process? Or any process?

[/ QUOTE ]
Make NotReady take a physics primer first. He needs to learn to think in a rational way about the mechanisms behind current cell biology (God created or not) before he'll have a hope of understanding this stuff. For most people this stuff is intuitive but apparently not for NR. His brain would go put-put and die when confronted with implications of the phylogenic tree.

Re: Money. Bored. Evolution.
 

[ QUOTE ]

Make NotReady take a physics primer first


[/ QUOTE ]

I'll do it for a measley 10K.





In advance, of course.

Re: Money. Bored. Evolution.
 

I guess you can make do without. Just had a look at talkorigins and there's some decent cell physics snippets buried in there.

Re: Money. Bored. Evolution.
 

Now that Not Ready has accepted, it would be a travesty of justice if he didn't get the first shot at your 5k. If it is true that he needs to learn basic physics to pass your final exam he could do that in a week. I have spoken.

Re: Money. Bored. Evolution.
 

[ QUOTE ]

I guess you can make do without. Just had a look at talkorigins and there's some decent cell physics snippets buried in there.


[/ QUOTE ]

Since I don't have to buy a book I'll reduce my rate to 9.5K.

Re: Money. Bored. Evolution.
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

I guess you can make do without. Just had a look at talkorigins and there's some decent cell physics snippets buried in there.


[/ QUOTE ]

Since I don't have to buy a book I'll reduce my rate to 9.5K.

[/ QUOTE ]
Ugh. 5K is very generous for the amount of material at talkorigins + whatever side reading you'd need to do [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

If you can think in a rational way and can understand basic engineering concepts, then the material should be digestable to you without any physics or other reading. It's all written for laymen. Even Sklansky could grasp it. I just figured you'd have some trouble with the above based on your comments in this thread.

Please ignore me and carry on.

Re: Money. Bored. Evolution.
 

[ QUOTE ]

then the material should be digestable to you without any physics or other reading


[/ QUOTE ]

U sayin i gotta unnerstanit? fergitit.

Re: Money. Bored. Evolution.
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Evolution isn't a thing, it's a process


[/ QUOTE ]

But why this process? It isn't logically required, it's contingent, so how did it get here, evolve, come into being? If it's always existed, why is it there and not some other process? Or any process?

Just a hint on all this - if God is absolute, eternal Creator who created the laws of nature then the laws of nature don't apply to Him and so He doesn't need a creator Himself since He wasn't created.

Or stated differently, God doesn't need an explanation because He is the explanation for everything else. Difficult to make that case for evolution.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with parts and disagree with parts but it's unimportant because I screwed up and hijacked this thread that's about something else so I'll say no more.

Re: Money. Bored. Evolution.
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'm pretty sure there is no empirical evidence for speciation through natural selection



I'm pretty sure you're wrong.

[/ QUOTE ]

ok post it. The fruit fly thing said that after 1/2 flies fed sugar and 1/2 flies fed starch for generations they preferred to mate with their "own" kind, but it didn't say that it was impossible for a sugar to reproduce with a starch, so I don't think that qualifies as speciation.

[/ QUOTE ]
There were many, many experiments cited in the book I was lent more than just one fruit fly thing - it's true that the definitions of speciation were different for many of them and that some were stronger than others. There were also broader discussions of speciation in general.

If you're interested I'll send you the title and author - I found it quite heavy going and didnt have the background knowlegde to fully digest it but it came highly recommended.

Re: Money. Bored. Evolution.
 

The trouble with discussions such as this is having to wade through the often belligerent ignorance of the religious types. As usual this extends to even the most basic terminology.

First of all, the universe did not EVOLVE. The things that exist in the universe DEVELOPED through various physical processes, of which the most important is SYNCRETION. ‘Evolution’ refers always and only to ORGANIC processes, that is to say, processes where matter reaches a level of complexity both in its constitution and behaviour that we ascribe to these types of matter the quality called ‘life’.

The RTs also need to learn the difference between ‘assertion’ and ‘demonstration’. The evidence for evolution is in, it is enormous and it is demonstrated. The vast bulk of that evidence is of two types – palaeontological and biological (since Watson & Crick additional genetic evidence is increasing daily).

The palaeontological evidence is the fossil record, and it is complete. The ‘Tree of Life’ has had the vast bulk of its features described in such detail that when modern palaeontologists discover new species in the fossil record, it is the equivalent of adding leaves to a gigantic tree.

The biological evidence is likewise gigantic, starting from Darwin’s original observations of finches on the South American mainland and on the Galapagos Islands. The Galapagos finches had originated on the mainland, but had evolved in such a different direction that they were no longer able to mate with mainland finches. They had become new species. Biological observations and experiments since then are now up into the millions.

As I say, all this evidence is demonstrated and is available for anyone to inspect and reproduce. Mere assertion that all this evidence is wrong won’t be enough.

If you want the $5K, you will have to refute each and every piece of evidence one by one. I suggest you allow yourself some time.

Re: Money. Bored. Evolution.
 

[ QUOTE ]


The palaeontological evidence is the fossil record, and it is complete. The ‘Tree of Life’ has had the vast bulk of its features described in such detail that when modern palaeontologists discover new species in the fossil record, it is the equivalent of adding leaves to a gigantic tree.






[/ QUOTE ]

What about the Cambrian explosion and it's impact on Darwinian theory in the fossil record?

Re: Money. Bored. Evolution.
 

[ QUOTE ]
it's true that the definitions of speciation were different for many of them and that some were stronger than others.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well it seems to me that if the fruit fly study found that after n generations that group A and group B could no longer interbreed successfully then I think that would be total proof of speciation and really a proof of evolution because it would show two different species coming out of a "mother" species.

I am pretty confident that nothing of the sort has ever been observed but if I am wrong I would really like to see it. If I am wrong I would expect it to be because of the new genetic engineering tech, btw.

Re: Money. Bored. Evolution.
 

Just to be clear with the OP intent. Are we debating all forms of evolution or just macro-evolution, and allowing micro-evolution?

Re: Money. Bored. Evolution.
 

Am I still up for this or was I displaced by more interesting candidates?

For the record I'm still broke and a "fundamentalist" Christian.