Anti-Evolution Blather from Uncommon Descent

[jimboturner]

Mate I was looking forward to your response, e.g. some logical explanation for spontaneous generation or at least an attempt to defend yourself against the claims made in the article. I heard nothing nonsensical in the article, what was your point? You can’t just read something and laugh at it. Maybe you should enrol in uni if this is your thing; I’ve got a couple of science degrees now, you’ll learn to address yourself a little better.

[TehFarrokhBulsara]

@jimboturner he was laughing at the article because the author spent all of his time refuting spontaneous generation and occurrence without causation. he was right about that. typically, stuff doesn't just happen. but the intent of his article was to refute evolution, which is not spontaneous generation. it's caused by a huge mix of things, including molecular reproduction, organic reproduction, deoxyribonucleic mutation, and a gradual process involving the effects of all three. read more.

[wieldopdraaier]

dude wauw, you need to get some!

butt, you have some interesting points of interest

cheerios!

[prunt23]

oh the irony os that whole statement you read lol

[brando92346]

So besides spinning the comment as humor, what is your own argument against it? You don't appear to have given any.

[WanderingSeer]

Good refutation... :s

[gerontodon]

I have some sympathy with the view that sentience isn't physical, and therefore there can't be physical evidence for it in any process. However, I'd wager that the view (which I don't share) of a majority of opponents of ID, would be that it *does* have a physical explanation- at least in the case of human brains- so on that basis, why not in other systems?

[fireflygirl246]

the only unknown cause is what caused the big bang, and since time and space did not exist before the big bang causality as we know it would not apply. M theory says everything is made out of strings of energy, even space time is a stretched string that has formed what they call a Brane. were did all these strings come form, I don't know for sure but I have an idea. Imagine a reality were all these strings overlap each other because there is no space as we know it, and since there is no...

[fireflygirl246]

..time as we know it they also exist in every possible state they can exist all at the same time. So each string vibrates in every possible direction while occupying the same space as every other string. Since these strings occupy the same space they can not interact to form things like matter or travel like light. What they can do is form a membrane or brane that contains space and time. Since in this place each string exists in every possible form, they would also all form branes....

[fireflygirl246]

... These brane would suck all of the other stings into its own pocket of space and time were the strings are free to interact and form energy and matter. Each string would form its own universe (pocket of space time) and suck the same strings into it, so each string would exist in every one of these universe at the same time as well as that place they all came from. If this is what happened and the string the forms our space time exists in every state all at once then there would be no ...

[fireflygirl246]

... fist cause because if it was possible to form our universe it would have happened instantly in the place with no time and that is when time started for us, but the reality with no time is was and always will be unchanging and static. It also means that every sting in our universe has created a universe of its on were the sting that create our universe is just another of the countless stings that make up all matter and energy.

I should be clear that this is just my crack pot idea form ...

[fireflygirl246]

... my very limited knowledge of string theory. I have no evidence and no way of testing my idea, which dose not even make it a hypothesis. I just thought it was and interesting Idea worth sharing. maybe someone smarter them me can take it and come up with a working hypothesis and/or tell me why its flawed and dose not work.

[prschuster]

Creationism & intelligent design are basically the proposition that creation or design "just happened" by an agent that needs no explanation or cause. Then they have the gall to depict evolution as having the same flaws that their own theory has.

[TheEfkk]

Are you sure that the comment was not a Sokal Hoax? It seems to describe creationism perfectly and it was the first think i thought about when i read it.

[anavader9019]

scientifist fruitcake

[TheFallibleFiend]

This is the kind of spew one generates when one has a comic book understanding of science.

[sa612136]

Through use of large words and rational-sounding statements, I fear these commenters will cause the nonanalytical readers who stumble across it to seriously consider the "irrationality" of scientists instead of piecing through what is said. Language is a tool, but in their hands it is a weapon for the cause of ignorance.

[NaoTio]

Yes, that's a big fear of mine - that the smooth language of the ID proponent will convince people on that aspect alone, even though their arguments are utter crap.

[logicCplusplus]

Why don't you try refuting them? You have but you failed, like all Darwinian nutbags!

[medianfire]

"utter crap" according to your presuppositions

[BrianTheGoldfish]

That guy is the poster child for why well-spoken idiots are my least favourite kinds of people.

A step-by-step rebuttal isn't even necessary; his entire argument could be shut down simply by asking what caused God. The moment he says God is causeless, he shoots himself in the foot.

[oldcola]

funny stuff, but he doesn't beat Denyse's, she is way much more funny

[athywren]

I love the way they're looking at this...

"They don't know exactly how it happened, they don't think it was god, and since it is god or nothing, they must think nothing caused it!!"

[Politicimo]

Yup. You're right. For these people, God has become the place-holder for unanswered questions - and they hate it when real answers come along.

[medianfire]

@Politicimo

"real answers" are relative to what one has presupposed about reality and how we can know what we know.

-aphysicalist

[Politicimo]

Please spare me the post-modernist "everything is relative" bunk. By 'real' answers I mean those that have been repeatedly tested and are open to falsification - neither of which the supernatural is open to.