BoatBanter.com - Yacht Clubs--a mistake

BoatBanter.com (https://www.boatbanter.com/)

- ASA (https://www.boatbanter.com/asa/)

- - Yacht Clubs--a mistake (https://www.boatbanter.com/asa/19780-yacht-clubs-mistake.html)

Yacht Clubs--a mistake

"Wally" wrote in message
...
Donal wrote:

Wally, take a minute to study your own thumb.

Ask yourself "How many genetic mutations were needed to make a working
thumb?".

How many generations did this small development take?

How old is the planet?

How am I supposed to get from a rock, a plant, the genetic history of my
thumb, or a planet that's been around for a while..., to god?

If you would ask yourself the questions that I posed, then "God" becomes an
inescapable conclusion.

The current theory ... that we "evolved", is simply not possible in the
timeframes that are available. Scientists have argued that intense periods
of radiation have resulted in periods of "accelerated" mutation. However,
we have now had the opportunity to see the results of increased radiation
..... and it certainly does not result in rapid advancement of our species.

Your thumb could not have "evolved" in the history of the planet.

I've considered all the available options. Only one makes sense.

Regards

Donal
--

Yacht Clubs--a mistake

Some UFO buffs think that intergalactic aliens brought humans to earth,
and nurtured them while they were developing from primitave savages to
an "enlightened " human society. I think enlightnement may have run
out with the death of Socrates, however. Now the intergalactic aliens
are checking us out to see if their experiment went awry.

.."Donal" wrote in message
...

"Wally" wrote in message
...
Donal wrote:

Wally, take a minute to study your own thumb.

Ask yourself "How many genetic mutations were needed to make a
working
thumb?".

How many generations did this small development take?

How old is the planet?

How am I supposed to get from a rock, a plant, the genetic history
of my
thumb, or a planet that's been around for a while..., to god?

If you would ask yourself the questions that I posed, then "God"
becomes an
inescapable conclusion.

The current theory ... that we "evolved", is simply not possible in
the
timeframes that are available. Scientists have argued that intense
periods
of radiation have resulted in periods of "accelerated" mutation.
However,
we have now had the opportunity to see the results of increased
radiation
.... and it certainly does not result in rapid advancement of our
species.

Your thumb could not have "evolved" in the history of the planet.

I've considered all the available options. Only one makes sense.

Regards

Donal
--

Yacht Clubs--a mistake

Are you actually claiming that God must exist because evolution isn't possible.
That's pretty lame.

And while you might have made an interesting claim that humans couldn't evolve
in the rather narrow time period they seem to have, you're claiming that the
full age of the Earth is not sufficient. Its pretty clear that there's been
plenty of time. Mammals have had roughly 100,000,000 generations to evolve.
That's a real long time - we've only had a 100 generations since Biblical times.
And mammals have only been around for the last few percent of the timeline.

I find it odd that some people try to use "science" to prove the existence of
God. Belief in God should be an absolute act of faith. Arguing for the
existence of God on scientific or logical grounds is accepting the possibility
that someone could simply provide a stronger argument the God doesn't exist. If
you want to believe, fine - but don't try to prove that your faith is justified.

"Donal" wrote in message
...

"Wally" wrote in message
...
Donal wrote:

Wally, take a minute to study your own thumb.

Ask yourself "How many genetic mutations were needed to make a working
thumb?".

How many generations did this small development take?

How old is the planet?

How am I supposed to get from a rock, a plant, the genetic history of my
thumb, or a planet that's been around for a while..., to god?

If you would ask yourself the questions that I posed, then "God" becomes an
inescapable conclusion.

The current theory ... that we "evolved", is simply not possible in the
timeframes that are available. Scientists have argued that intense periods
of radiation have resulted in periods of "accelerated" mutation. However,
we have now had the opportunity to see the results of increased radiation
.... and it certainly does not result in rapid advancement of our species.

Your thumb could not have "evolved" in the history of the planet.

I've considered all the available options. Only one makes sense.

Regards

Donal
--

Yacht Clubs--a mistake

Donal wrote:

If you would ask yourself the questions that I posed, then "God"
becomes an inescapable conclusion.

Why does it become an inescapable conclusion?

The current theory ... that we "evolved", is simply not possible in
the timeframes that are available. Scientists have argued that
intense periods of radiation have resulted in periods of
"accelerated" mutation. However, we have now had the opportunity to
see the results of increased radiation .... and it certainly does not
result in rapid advancement of our species.

Are the types of radiation whose effects we have studied the same as the
type that they suggest caused mutations in the past?

Your thumb could not have "evolved" in the history of the planet.

Fascinating.

I've considered all the available options.

What makes you think that the real explanation has been covered by any one
of the available options?

Only one makes sense.

The god hypothesis might be a good way of attempting to explain how the
universe came about, but without evidence to show that god actually exists,
it remains a hypothesis. I could hypothesise that it was made by
hyper-intelligent, pan-dimensional beings, but people that don't choose to
support my hypothesis will have a hard time believing me if I don't show
them some evidence. I don't see why the god hypothesis should be treated any
differently.

--
Wally
www.forthsailing.com
www.wally.myby.co.uk

Yacht Clubs--a mistake

Donal wrote:
"Navigator" wrote in message
...

Donal wrote:

3) It was created in a single event which resulted in equal amounts of
"matter" and "anti-matter".

Which option do you believe in?

None of the above. I'm partial to evidence for the idea that expansion
of the universe is accelerating.

Isn't that covered by No. 3?

If it's matter and antimatter no. You are not considering the "vacuum
energy".

Cheers

Yacht Clubs--a mistake

Donal wrote:

The current theory ... that we "evolved", is simply not possible in the
timeframes that are available.

Says who, God?

Cheers

Yacht Clubs--a mistake

Donal

Children are born every day with altered hands. Some even have thumbs
that are not properly opposable. Imagine if one of those children were
considered to be prime breeding material for all the women in the tribe.
Now wouldn't that thumbless mutation spread rapidly?

Please think about it.

Cheers

Donal wrote:

"Wally" wrote in message
...

Are you for real? Do you realise that there are people who don't believe

in

god, and for whom all the 'proof' that every believer tried to cite has

not

made them change their minds? The rocks and plants prove *nothing* about

the

existence of god.

Wally, take a minute to study your own thumb.

Ask yourself "How many genetic mutations were needed to make a working
thumb?".

How many generations did this small development take?

How old is the planet?

Regards

Donal
--

Yacht Clubs--a mistake

Wally wrote:

EdGordonRN wrote:

You can't define god into existence.

I'm just saying that if indeed there is a God, ontologically speaking
(that is, by the very nature of the word "God"), we wouldn't be able
to find evidence in nature that would stick out from nature. In other
words, the very existence of a rock, or a plant, or anything else
would be overwhelming proof of God's existence.

IF there is a god, then some arbitrary bit of 'evidence' would prove he
exists?!?

Are you for real? Do you realise that there are people who don't believe in
god, and for whom all the 'proof' that every believer tried to cite has not
made them change their minds? The rocks and plants prove *nothing* about the
existence of god.

Are you saying God copied plants DNA?

Cheers

Yacht Clubs--a mistake

However,
we have now had the opportunity to see the results of increased radiation
..... and it certainly does not result in rapid advancement of our species.

Not true, we have no way presently to plot mutation via changes in solar
radiation, let alone millions of years ago. And there's tons of evidence that
the planet's radiation curves changed dramatically many times.
Try again.

RB

Yacht Clubs--a mistake