Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
crookedspiral

Atheism is incompatible with science

3,143 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

Essan
2 minutes ago, Will Due said:

 

Alright but it would seem that a theory that's based on evidence would have to conclude that given all the institutional research done in the field, and because there isn't evidence that there are links between species and that evolution occurs without them.

Problem with that is, it shoots down that natural selection is the thing that drives the evolution of species and implies something else is at play.

Of course scientifically, that's an elephant in the room. 

 

 

On the contrary.  A scientific theory is based wholly on the evidence.  That's why it is a theory!   But it can be falsified in the light of new evidence.  Should any be forthcoming.

As opposed to religion which ignores the evidence ;) 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Will Due
Posted (edited)
25 minutes ago, Essan said:

On the contrary.  A scientific theory is based wholly on the evidence.  That's why it is a theory!   But it can be falsified in the light of new evidence.  Should any be forthcoming.

As opposed to religion which ignores the evidence ;) 

 

But if the search for evidence continues and it keeps being unfound, when does one come to the realization that Donald Trump is not the devil? :D

 

 

Edited by Will Due

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Aquila King
33 minutes ago, Will Due said:

Alright but it would seem that a theory that's based on evidence would have to conclude that given all the institutional research done in the field, and because there isn't evidence that there are links between species and that evolution occurs without them.

Problem with that is, it shoots down that natural selection is the thing that drives the evolution of species and implies something else is at play.

Of course scientifically, that's an elephant in the room. 

There are so many things wrong with this that I don't even know where to begin...

I already said, there are numerous - actually more like countless - links between species, because every single species of living creature on earth IS A LINK between species.

You can't just keep saying "there is no link between species" when literally everything alive is a link. A missing link does not mean there are no links, it just means that one link out of the countless links out there is missing. That's it.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Aquila King
30 minutes ago, Will Due said:

when does one come to the realization that Donald Trump is not the devil? :D

Severe brain damage should do it.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Will Due
1 minute ago, Aquila King said:

Severe brain damage should do it.

 

You mean to keep looking for the evidence that isn't there till kingdom come? :lol:

If it isn't brain damage yet, it will be if it keeps up.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Aquila King
5 minutes ago, Will Due said:

You mean to keep looking for the evidence that isn't there till kingdom come? :lol:

 

89f90a040fec37ba1cbcc5662b5a9189507f39c9650dbfcb55c7d44a68adf25f.jpg

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Nuclear Wessel
3 minutes ago, Aquila King said:

 

89f90a040fec37ba1cbcc5662b5a9189507f39c9650dbfcb55c7d44a68adf25f.jpg

 

  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Will Due
3 minutes ago, Aquila King said:

 

89f90a040fec37ba1cbcc5662b5a9189507f39c9650dbfcb55c7d44a68adf25f.jpg

 

jussie-smollett-mugshot-1.jpg

  • Confused 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Aquila King
2 minutes ago, Will Due said:

 

jussie-smollett-mugshot-1.jpg

How is this dude in any way related to anything we've been discussing whatsoever?... :huh:

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Will Due
1 minute ago, Aquila King said:

How is this dude in any way related to anything we've been discussing whatsoever?... :huh:

 

It's about the evidence isn't it?

Mysteriously, sometimes evidence is ignored. Same thing with the evidence that the lack of evidence suggests.

What the lack of evidence sometimes confirms is that "there is no there there". Like with missing links. 

Sadly though, that's not the case with Smollett. However the DA wants to pretend otherwise.

I know, I know. Wrong place for this but is it?

My contention is that there's a reason why anthropologists invented the term "missing link".

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Aquila King
2 minutes ago, Will Due said:

It's about the evidence isn't it?

Mysteriously, sometimes evidence is ignored. Same thing with the evidence that the lack of evidence suggests.

What the lack of evidence sometimes confirms is that "there is no there there". Like with missing links. 

Sadly though, that's not the case with Smollett. However the DA wants to pretend otherwise.

I know, I know. Wrong place for this but is it?

My contention is that there's a reason why anthropologists invented the term "missing link".

It's often difficult for me to decipher nonsense like this, but I'll do my best...

You're continuing to assert that "there is no evidence of missing links" despite it being explained to you how your entire premise is wrong there multiple times at this point, so I don't feel the need to repeat myself again and again. Keep denying basic facts to your heart's content.

As for whatever the **** you're trying to say regarding Jussie Smollet, I can only assume it has something to do with that Donald Trump statement you made earlier which itself was completely out of nowhere. Not sure how Smollet has anything to do with Trump apart from some right-wing idiots like yourself using it as an excuse to ignore the rise in right-wing hate crimes under Trump, but again the connection to Trump is very loose, and the connection of Smollet to the main topic we were discussing (Darwinian Evolution) is non-existent. So I'll just ignore it completely.

I don't really know why I'm wasting my time arguing with you over anything at all really. It's like talking to a brick wall. Was just bored I guess. Though now it's irritating, so keep believing whatever bulls**t you want. I'm out.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Horta
10 hours ago, Will Due said:

 

No. You didn't get it.

 

Because when you type "butterflies?" as a one word response to "evolution vs created by god", any other points become so self explanatory :rolleyes:.

Quote

You said that the theory of evolution is the "reasonable standard of knowledge" right?

No, I said it was one example of how we can know things to a reasonable standard (good enough to be considered a general fact in this instance)...

Quote

You said "The theory of evolution... versus the claim that each individual species was created fully formed."

Butterflies emerge from their cocoons "fully formed" do they not?

There's a bit more to it than that though, isn't there...egg>larvae>pupa>butterfly.

You have also taken what I said out of context ie. evolution/common descent vs god created each species fully formed. This doesn't have that much to do with the life cycle of any particular species, more to do with how and why it exists as a species in the first place.

Quote

Where's the missing link between a caterpillar and a butterfly?

The pupa/chrysalis. Lot goes on in there. There is no "missing link." 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Horta
Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, Will Due said:

Alright but it would seem that a theory that's based on evidence would have to conclude that given all the institutional research done in the field, and because there isn't evidence that there are links between species and that evolution occurs without them.

So you are really saying that there are no biological links between different species, despite the obvious (what do you think underlies the idea of "common descent"?) and at least one whole branch of science devoted to studying exactly that (evolutionary genetics/biology)?

Not even sure the underlined makes any basic sense. I'm not a biologist either, though at least I ask real biologists. It might be worth doing that Will. 

Quote

Problem with that is, it shoots down that natural selection is the thing that drives the evolution of species and implies something else is at play.

No it doesn't, but let me guess where you're going here...

"God"?

So you have gone from ignoring what the theory is based on, to proposing a "mythical being" that is itself devoid of evidence as to its very existence to begin with, as an explanation.

Quote

Of course scientifically, that's an elephant in the room. 

Care to explain this?

 

 

Edited by Horta
  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Will Due
1 minute ago, Horta said:

Why do you believe that there is no such evidence? If you are unaware of it, does that mean it doesn't exist?

 

That sounds like a good arguement for the existence of God.

 

1 minute ago, Horta said:

So you are really saying that there are no biological links between different species, despite the obvious (that all biology is related) and at least one whole branch of science devoted to studying exactly that (evolutionary genetics/biology)?

 

All biology is related. Just not with "missing links ".

 

1 minute ago, Horta said:

I'm not a biologist either, though at least I ask real biologists. It might be worth doing that Will. 

 

I can think for myself. I'm not Einstein but isn't that what he did?

 

1 minute ago, Horta said:

No it doesn't, but let me guess where you're going here...

"God"?

So you have gone from ignoring evidence, to proposing a "mythical being" that is itself devoid of evidence, as an explanation.

 

You said: "If you are unaware of it, does that mean it doesn't exist?" This applies inversely to the fact that there's no evidence of missing links. 

 

1 minute ago, Horta said:

Care to explain this?

 

The reputations of scientists are at stake. They're invested heavily in the existence of the missing links. It's fundamental to the theory of natural selection. That there are transitory individuals between one species and another. They haven't found evidence of these individuals. So if they were honest, they would consider that something else is at work. Of course, then they'd have to find another way to make a living if they were to go against mainstream anthropology.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Horta
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Will Due said:

That sounds like a good arguement for the existence of God.

That which you claim doesn't exist is available physically in natural history museums. The relationship between living things is also supported via experiments.

Unlike god.

Quote

All biology is related. Just not with "missing links ".

Evolutionary biology isn't a study of fossils. While relevant for sure, that would be more broadly covered under palaeontology. You seem to be conflating different fields of study. At any rate all fossils are transitional fossils (some more obvious than others though).

While plenty of obviously transitional fossils have been found anyway (leaving alone currently existing species such as the platypus), it won't matter to the religiously inclined because then not everything has an obvious transitional fossil, and even if it did, we would still need to find the transitional fossils between the transitional fossils lol...

You seem to be after something like the crocoduck lol?

Quote

I can think for myself. I'm not Einstein but isn't that what he did?

Einstein wasn't a biologist. Even in his own field he consulted and collaborated with others.

Quote

You said: "If you are unaware of it, does that mean it doesn't exist?" This applies inversely to the fact that there's no evidence of missing links. 

I was being to kind with the "unaware of" part, "personally ignorant of" would have been better (intentionally so or otherwise).

Quote

The reputations of scientists are at stake. They're invested heavily in the existence of the missing links. It's fundamental to the theory of natural selection. That there are transitory individuals between one species and another. They haven't found evidence of these individuals. So if they were honest, they would consider that something else is at work. Of course, then they'd have to find another way to make a living if they were to go against mainstream anthropology.

When your belief relies on a conspiracy theory requiring basically whole overlapping fields of science around the world to be knowingly dishonest, it could be a good time to re evaluate that belief. 

What else is at work? God? If so, can you explain why your particular unsupported personal delusion has any merit as part of a scientific explanation?

Edited by Horta
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Will Due
3 minutes ago, Horta said:

can you explain why your particular unsupported personal delusion has any merit 

 

That's what they tried to say about Donald Trump. He got elected anyway.

And the missing link of why this happened is painfully on display now. 

Haven't you seen it on the faces of the Demoncrats? :lol:

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Will Due
Posted (edited)
18 minutes ago, Horta said:

You seem to be after something like the crocoduck lol?

 

Found it. The missing link.

 

Crocoduck.jpg

Edited by Will Due

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
psyche101
6 hours ago, Will Due said:

Yes I know. Darwin's theory is just that. A theory.

No Will. Its both fact and theory. 

Evolution as fact and theory

6 hours ago, Will Due said:

But his theory requires missing links between species. 

They are there. What do you think is missing? 

6 hours ago, Will Due said:

I'm no expert too, but my understanding is that missing links between the progressing species of man have not been found. That's evidence isn't it? Evidence that species evolve without progressive links between them.

No its not. There was no first giraffe, no first hippopotamus and no first modern man. Its a series of subtle mutations over many generations. 

I've explained this to you before. Is there something that you have forgotten or did you not understand the first time around? 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
psyche101
6 hours ago, Will Due said:

 

Alright but it would seem that a theory that's based on evidence would have to conclude that given all the institutional research done in the field, and because there isn't evidence that there are links between species and that evolution occurs without them.

Problem with that is, it shoots down that natural selection is the thing that drives the evolution of species and implies something else is at play.

Of course scientifically, that's an elephant in the room. 

 

 

There's plenty of examples of modern evolution even, both driven by nature and man in a variety of species, the peppered moth, dogs, humans who have adapted to local conditions and Darwins finches. 

It all strongly supports evolution. It's proof of evolution. 

There's no elephant in the room. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Will Due
5 minutes ago, psyche101 said:

What do you think is missing? 

 

It's not what I think is missing. It's what scientists know is missing.

The transitional individuals between one established species and another.

Why do you think they coined the term "missing links"?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
psyche101
6 hours ago, Will Due said:

But if the search for evidence continues and it keeps being unfound, when does one come to the realization that Donald Trump is not the devil? :D

The missing link nonsense is creationist claptrap. It's a myth. There's no such thing. 

The devil doesn't exist, Trump does. He's not the devil, just a horrible man who acts the fool and has changed the worlds outlook on the US. 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
psyche101
6 minutes ago, Will Due said:

It's not what I think is missing. It's what scientists know is missing.

What scientists say there are missing links? 

6 minutes ago, Will Due said:

The transitional individuals between one established species and another.

They exist and plenty of them. Mutations eventually leave a new species suited for their niche. They are well documented. 

6 minutes ago, Will Due said:

Why do you think they coined the term "missing links"?

That's a creationist myth, not science. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Will Due
12 minutes ago, psyche101 said:

There's plenty of examples of modern evolution even, both driven by nature and man in a variety of species, the peppered moth, dogs, humans who have adapted to local conditions and Darwins finches. 

 

Dogs, moths, and humans are all single species. Although there are variations in species, like Darwin's finches. But they are all the same species of finches. Just like a bulldog and a great dane are both members of the same species. Dogs.

 

12 minutes ago, psyche101 said:

It all strongly supports evolution. It's proof of evolution.

 

"Organic evolution is a fact; purposive or progressive evolution is a truth"

- the UB

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
onlookerofmayhem
7 minutes ago, Will Due said:

The transitional individuals between one established species and another.

I am the transition between my parents and children, if I had any.

No "missing link."

We find individuals of any given species. We do not have a direct line of evidence through every generation. 

So finding subtle changes through multiple branches evidence shows us that creatures evolve.

Just how most offspring are not an exact clone of their parents. If every generation there is change occurring, would that not paint the picture that over many billions of years creatures have simply evolved with different attributes?

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Will Due
7 minutes ago, psyche101 said:

The missing link nonsense is creationist claptrap. It's a myth. There's no such thing. 

The devil doesn't exist, Trump does. He's not the devil, just a horrible man who acts the fool and has changed the worlds outlook on the US. 

 

Thank God! :lol:

That's why the members of NATO have lined up to pay their share. Don't you love it!

I do.

And just wait until the Trump administration puts the screws to those traitors who tried to oust him in a failed and pathetic coup. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.