""You should trust it because evolutionary textbooks are backed up by hard
evolutionary facts and logical evolutionary reasoning." ...Hard
Evolutionary Facts?! My friend do you realize evolutionary theory has
undergone some SERIOUS overhauls in the past 100 years?" - whetstone
As has the Bible, you douche, and that's over two thousand years.
"Why should I believe in God?"
"Because the Bible says so!"
"But who wrote the Bible?"
"God did!"
"So why should I believe in God?"
"Because the bible says so"
And so on and so on.
Plus you're still a douche.
To put things in perspective and how! Thanks for reminding everyone on here just how insignificant this whole religion debauchle is. It's the only planet we've got, it's small, and it's alone. Now let's start getting along.
As such it's impossible to attribute any creation of the universe to a single point, because you're viewing it from the idea that time is a constant, which before the universe (and indeed time itself) would not have applied. It's been suggested that the universe does indeed have a beginning, but in the same sense it may also not have an end either (see the Big Crunch theory for more information on this).
QED. Or should that be NEDM?
Since bacteria and the like clearly possess no intelligence baring natural instinct, which is more a product of their phisiology rather than any nerve centre, it's possible to conclude that intelligence can indeed spring from non-intelligence. It merely takes time, not divine intervention.
Thirdly, the idea of causality cannot be attributed to the creation of the universe, since causality is a product of the laws of our universe (you did touch on this granted, but didn't fully explore it).
Secondly, the concept that intelligence cannot be made by non-intelligence. Again, flawed if you consider life that can be observed on our own planet. We are aware that evolution has been taking place on this planet for billions of years. This can be shown through our own DNA sequences, which not only share common characteristics with other organisms, but also hold redundant information that shows our biological past (for example we have DNA that technically allows us a dorsal fin).
Three major problems spring to mind;
Firstly, the statement that "life cannot come from non-life". If you knew even the basics about cellular life you would know that it's entirely possible for living organisms to be created from biological components. Basic amino acid/protein strings can form, under the right circumstances, to create very basic forms of life, but life none the less. It's theorised that this is how life on Earth might have began, the "primordial soup" theory.
It's not really a valid criticism when you purposefully go out of your way to call people playing the game, and as such without input into the game's content, a bunch of "pansy's", "queers" and "mindless otaku". This isn't a valid arguement, it's just a reason to hate on a group of people. Ergo you fail. Goodbye.
MaxxPower's recent comments: