Hooray for Evolution and Organized Religion!
This is one of those deep philosophical/scientific type posts. People uninterested in philosophy, sociology, or the two camps mentioned in the title should probably go play their PS2 now...
For anyone else, here's an open note to any hypocritical, pompous evolutionary types and the equally hypocritical, pompous religious types that mock them. Not picking on anyone, I just freaking crack up when evolutionists talk all their unbased, unproven scientific jargon and think they're any better, more intelligent, or more correct about life than creationists. *grin* (Yeah, the chicken/egg post got me laughing and thinking...sorry...it's not like you've gotta read this.)
Evolution as theory has a little base to it. So does organized religion as a theory. I'd hardly call either of them a truth or a fact in the scientific sense. Neither of them even come close to qualifying for that status. But people preach both schools like they were fact and believe they are right while everyone else is wrong. (Different instances of christianity seem to believe that other instances of christanity are all going to the same hell as evolutionists, for that matter, but on the whole, they band together in hating evolution rather equally.) Human nature and sociology at its best. How I love it!
For the record, in college I once helped knock the scientific blocks out from under the old famous "I think, therefore I am" arguement about existance from the very end all the way back to the beginning, so any philosophers out there can rest easy knowing that scientifically, I and others have proven that there is no actual scientific proof yet that we exist at all. ROFL!
I'm not interested in a debate over how evolution is still just a fledgling theory without a great deal of *objective* proof. I'm not terribly interested in why one camp thinks they are more right than another. That's been done and you can read about it all over the internet if you so choose. Theory is everywhere. One for any taste. All presented as total fact when they are not. You will find very few facts in these matters that aren't subjective or easily argued against.
Someone has a theory that we came from monkeys or from some mysterious being that never sees fit to speak with us in person or perform miracles to get recruits anymore? I could come up with an equally argueable theory that we came from semi-petrified dinosaur poop. All one has to do is invest time, a little bit of scientific method, and case-specific tweaked reasoning to create a workable theory.
Once you get a few devoted followers, it's only a matter of time before you blow up big. If you make something with a loose enough base that it can't be disproven any more than it can be proven, you're golden. That's why the biggest beliefs in life are so largely followed. They can't be proven now...(or likely ever)...but noone can disprove them entirely for the same reasons that they can't prove them. Lots of people believe em', though, so they've got to be on to something, right?
Right?
Look how many believe in religion and evolution. In a sense, the sci-fi idea that we were created by little grey alien men and dumped here as a nifty ant farm to study is just as valid a theory as either of the two mainstream ones. Less people believe in that possibility due to the fact that it's considered "whacky" right now. News for ya...Evolution was considered "whacky" in its day too. Just like organized christianity was before it really took off. It just took time, charisma, a few minor facts, and a few unprovable theories on the parts of a few devoted believers to build them into into what they are today.
Fascinating.
--------------------------
If I'm a chemical engineer and I tell a garbage man that hydrogen's atomic weight is 246, there's a pretty good chance he would believe me outright and never argue that fact with me because I'm an "authority" on the subject. Anyone with experience in the field, however, knows that the weight is, not 246 and would promptly shoot me down for suggesting it. The trouble comes with non-provable things.
Like bigfoot. People would *swear* they saw him somewhere.
Prove to me he doesn't exist.
One person saying they saw it often leads to plenty of others backing them up and you end up with a group of outsider goofballs all believing something that wasn't there, but couldn't be disproven, either.
Fundamentally it is much harder to prove something doesn't exist than to claim it does. A claim is all you need to produce a theory, whereas opponents to that view must produce proven fact against it to kill the theory/belief. The best part is it all might just be some single person's whacked out idea or claim as a fun hoax. Aren't science and sociology fun?
There's someone out there who will believe anything. For any belief, there is generally a sympathetic ear who will share it.
It's the same with subjective research. If I'm researching something many of you have never looked into at all, I can forward a *theory* and present it as proven fact when in all truth, it is not a proven fact at all, but an opinion. By the time someone starts pointing out that I have been stating opinions instead of facts, I will already have a crew of followers who totally believe my opinions as fact in spite of what anyone would say or prove to the contrary.
There's no way to prove me right, but since there is also no way to prove me wrong, people would swear by something unprovable like it's truth and fact. Too funny.
-----------------------
If you weren't keeping up on current astrology, the supposedly "well documented and essentially proven" theoretical "big bang" theory was changed not long ago due to the fact that "for reasons unknown" the galaxies are not, in fact, slowing down, but actually speeding up on their movement away from each other. That defies all scientific logic to this point, thus crushing the old school theory that it blew up starting all life and could be proven will collapse on itself eventually again in a cycle.
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
so when Animals of the Wild started to have the Chicken as a Main Dish they then had to Replenish and up their Growth and EVOLVED into what we Now Know as the Chicken! Thus the Chicken Came before the Egg! The Egg is a Product of Evolution!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm sure that was a joking reply, but it embodies a more real theory that many people hold. People who suggest that senseless beasts like cows or chickens managed to survive to this day because of their "l33t 3v0luti0n skillz" just crack me up. By that theory the roach is the most equal of all species. They don't even think. They can live without their own head for over a week. Evolution = dumb luck, then?
If I were born as a highly healthy, intelligent, and strong Swedish person in a highly radioactive area and died of radiation poisoning, the theory of evolution would suggest that the sickly, uneducated, and starving African people which out-lived me by a week were more equal and thus are a process of evolution. Nevermind the fact that the African people might have fared no better than me in my area of birth or that I *might* have fared better than they did in their situation. There's no way to prove they were the most equal...it is simply assumed that the people left behind are 'most equal' or 'fitest' because they remain.
Just because you're alive doesn't mean you're the best man/woman. Better men than me have died in wars and I'm still here by dumb luck. Not because I'm some super ninja or was superior to them or some mother nature chosen anomaly. I'm alive because I was 2 steps to the left in some cases...or because someone was there to catch me...
In other words...the African folks weren't alive because they were the fitest, but simply because they were lucky enough to not be born in an irradiated location.
To put it in a more fun way, if a rich evolutionist genius is hit by a truck before he has any children and dies at the age of 23 while a retarded person in a 3rd world country lives to be 100 with 30 kids who all grow up as retarded as him, yet live just as long; that dense little group of people is more equal than the highly intellectual evolutionist by their own theory. None of them could survive on their own in the world, yet nature deems them the most worthy of continuance.
They have been chosen by nature to survive while the evolutionist was taken by nature? Must be. He's a process of evolution, because if the evolutionist was meant to survive, he'd have long before now developed "anti-truck" defenses to adapt to his environment as the retarded 3rd world family has adapted to their environment, right?
With that logic, humans should be slowly but surely devoloping on a genetic level to become bulletproof and natures critters should be uniting on a baser level to eliminate us...their common natural enemy and biggest threat. Our leading cause of death is war...we should be adapting to not get killed so darn easily. (And that's not talking tools...monkeys didn't turn into humans by that theory thru use of tools or weapons.) Oh...it takes billions of years? War is just a process of eliminating the weak? It's God's will? How convenient for you that you have such an ambiguous theory it can adapt to any need. I bet President Clinton loved evolution and religion both...he made a living out of changing himself constantly to fit the needs of the moment. LOL!
-------------------------------
That's not scientific elimination of the weak, sorry. Faulty logic based on what many simply consider dumb luck. Actually, it's darn close to what religious people claim is an "Act of God" and what others would describe as that mysterious force known as "Fate". Who is to say that any of those 3 is a more correct way of viewing things? Are any of them right?
What is there to believe if it's only dumb luck? Why would it matter if things evolved if there was no real set path of what would evolve and how? That's like worrying about how flat you'll be if a steamroller is crushing you. There's nothing you can do about it, why worry about the why or how when there's already the technology to clone and engineer a human in order to essentially skip the entire process of Darwin's evolutionary theory? (But Darwin's theory will morph to include that, won't it...? *grin* Nevermind that the entire base of the theory is on "natural evolution" and not technological achievements or advancements of a species thru tools and scientific knowledge.)
Any time there's not a clear or factual answer, religious people say "God's will" and evolutionists say "process of evolution". That's English for "I dunno...", because both statements are essentially worthless trite on a scientific level.
If I were going to believe in something as silly as a theory based on minimal facts and seemingly dumb luck, I'd sooner believe in God, I'd imagine. At least in organized religion there's a theoried reward for your belief. If you're wrong about God, I suppose you wasted some of your life in church and reading a bible or something. If you're wrong about evolution, there's a fair chance you might burn in some version of hell along with the fact that you wasted your life. lol I guess organized religion still has that on evolutionists, at least.
Most beliefs regarding the "how" and "why" of life are are pretty silly, honestly. Anyone who claims organized religion is daft and believes evolution, themselves, is as much a hypocrite as the religious person who claims God defies all possibility of evolution.
What it comes down to is this...
From the evidence of both theories on the table, there's more of a scientific possibility that both sides are partly right than there is that either side is totally right. That means that to date, noone's really right about anything...including me, because I can't be more right than anyone else or the world would revolve around me and there would be countless "Slug Shrines" around the world...
And for that matter, we all might not even exist...so who cares who is right in that light?
Fun stuff. Now...if anyone actually read all that, I await your "Evolution own0rz j00!" or "Phear the Unknown, you heathen!" or "WTF?!?!" posts.
All in all, it really doesn't matter, does it? Haha!
Your life is futile...now send me your money and women. Thanks.
"God creates dinosaurs, God destroys dinosaurs, God creates man, man destroys God, man creates dinosaurs."-- Jeff Goldblum as Ian Malcolm in "Jurassic Park"
Kaer PROBE
Fortunes of War (17:7) BF
Networth: 295,729gc
Acres: 2009
Honor: 1466
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm sure that was a joking reply, but it embodies a more real theory that many people hold
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
i Meant what i said & i Believe it too!
__________________
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
01-05-2003 06:12 PM [edit]
Quote:
BaLLooN NoT
Kaer PROBE
Fortunes of War (17:7) BF
Networth: 295,729gc
Acres: 2009
Honor: 1466
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If I'm a chemical engineer and I tell a garbage man that hydrogen's atomic weight is 246, there's a pretty good chance he would believe me outright and never argue that fact with me because I'm an "authority" on the subject. Anyone with experience in the field, however, knows that the weight is, not 246 and would promptly shoot me down for suggesting it. The trouble comes with non-provable things.
Like bigfoot. People would *swear* they saw him somewhere.
Prove to me he doesn't exist.
One person saying they saw it often leads to plenty of others backing them up and you end up with a group of outsider goofballs all believing something that wasn't there, but couldn't be disproven, either.
Fundamentally it is much harder to prove something doesn't exist than to claim it does. A claim is all you need to produce a theory, whereas opponents to that view must produce proven fact against it to kill the theory/belief. The best part is it all might just be some single person's whacked out idea or claim as a fun hoax. Aren't science and sociology fun?
There's someone out there who will believe anything. For any belief, there is generally a sympathetic ear who will share it.
It's the same with subjective research. If I'm researching something many of you have never looked into at all, I can forward a *theory* and present it as proven fact when in all truth, it is not a proven fact at all, but an opinion. By the time someone starts pointing out that I have been stating opinions instead of facts, I will already have a crew of followers who totally believe my opinions as fact in spite of what anyone would say or prove to the contrary.
There's no way to prove me right, but since there is also no way to prove me wrong, people would swear by something unprovable like it's truth and fact. Too funny.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
i Agree Completely....
When i get talking to people about differant things i bring up Aliens..... Prove to me they DON"T Exist.... once you Prove it you will have HAD to Find one to Prove anything! thus Proving they DO Exist! same goes with almost anything! unless you can Prove somthing did or didn't Happen who to say is right? its all Opion! Nothing is Fact until its Proven!
ok back to reading the rest....
__________________
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
01-05-2003 06:18 PM [edit]
Quote:
BaLLooN NoT
Kaer PROBE
Fortunes of War (17:7) BF
Networth: 295,729gc
Acres: 2009
Honor: 1466
Re: Hooray for Evolution and Organized Religion!
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by The_Slug
If I were born as a highly healthy, intelligent, and strong Swedish person in a highly radioactive area and died of radiation poisoning, the theory of evolution would suggest that the sickly, uneducated, and starving African people which out-lived me by a week were more equal and thus are a process of evolution. Nevermind the fact that the African people might have fared no better than me in my area of birth or that I *might* have fared better than they did in their situation. There's no way to prove they were the most equal...it is simply assumed that the people left behind are 'most equal' or 'fitest' because they remain.
Just because you're alive doesn't mean you're the best man/woman. Better men than me have died in wars and I'm still here by dumb luck. Not because I'm some super ninja or was superior to them or some mother nature chosen anomaly. I'm alive because I was 2 steps to the left in some cases...or because someone was there to catch me...
In other words...the African folks weren't alive because they were the fitest, but simply because they were lucky enough to not be born in an irradiated location.
To put it in a more fun way, if a rich evolutionist genius is hit by a truck before he has any children and dies at the age of 23 while a retarded person in a 3rd world country lives to be 100 with 30 kids who all grow up as retarded as him, yet live just as long; that dense little group of people is more equal than the highly intellectual evolutionist by their own theory. None of them could survive on their own in the world, yet nature deems them the most worthy of continuance.
They have been chosen by nature to survive while the evolutionist was taken by nature? Must be. He's a process of evolution, because if the evolutionist was meant to survive, he'd have long before now developed "anti-truck" defenses to adapt to his environment as the retarded 3rd world family has adapted to their environment, right?
With that logic, humans should be slowly but surely devoloping on a genetic level to become bulletproof and natures critters should be uniting on a baser level to eliminate us...their common natural enemy and biggest threat. Our leading cause of death is war...we should be adapting to not get killed so darn easily. (And that's not talking tools...monkeys didn't turn into humans by that theory thru use of tools or weapons.) Oh...it takes billions of years? War is just a process of eliminating the weak? It's God's will? How convenient for you that you have such an ambiguous theory it can adapt to any need. I bet President Clinton loved evolution and religion both...he made a living out of changing himself constantly to fit the needs of the moment. LOL!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
your Points about Humans Adapting to differant things in Nature..... well we have! we have Evolved into more "Knowledgabe" beings! we have Learned over time that for our Best Interest is to Live in a Building.... not a Cave..... with that we have made a More Civil Society! we know how to Do Many Many More things then we did in the Time of the "Cave Man" so how can you say we Havn't Evolved? now your point about us "Evolving" to be more Bullet Proof..... Honestly.... We Have! not with our Skin but have built our Own Armor! now just as all Prey have a Predetor... All Predetor's have to become Prey to continue the Cycle of Life! so Yes things don't take Over Night to Happen.... but in this Modern Day we can do more and more! we are Fighting Desiease that not more then 50 years ago can Kill You! like Small Pox..... we now have a Vaccine that can make you Immune to it..... thus Relating to Evolution..... may not be Physical.... but its there!
Eveloution don't mean to adapt with physical changes such as the "Humans Evolved From Monkeys" ! it has more to do with the Evloving of how you think and Adapt to your Surroundings..... Humans became more Knowledgable! we have adapted to alot! so it may not be what some call "Evolution" to be... but indeed it is just that!
ok now for the Rest of it......
__________________
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
01-05-2003 06:35 PM [edit]
Quote:
BaLLooN NoT
Kaer PROBE
Fortunes of War (17:7) BF
Networth: 295,729gc
Acres: 2009
Honor: 1466
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
That's not scientific elimination of the weak, sorry. Faulty logic based on what many simply consider dumb luck. Actually, it's darn close to what religious people claim is an "Act of God" and what others would describe as that mysterious force known as "Fate". Who is to say that any of those 3 is a more correct way of viewing things? Are any of them right?
What is there to believe if it's only dumb luck? Why would it matter if things evolved if there was no real set path of what would evolve and how? That's like worrying about how flat you'll be if a steamroller is crushing you. There's nothing you can do about it, why worry about the why or how when there's already the technology to clone and engineer a human in order to essentially skip the entire process of Darwin's evolutionary theory? (But Darwin's theory will morph to include that, won't it...? *grin* Nevermind that the entire base of the theory is on "natural evolution" and not technological achievements or advancements of a species thru tools and scientific knowledge.)
Any time there's not a clear or factual answer, religious people say "God's will" and evolutionists say "process of evolution". That's English for "I dunno...", because both statements are essentially worthless trite on a scientific level.
If I were going to believe in something as silly as a theory based on minimal facts and seemingly dumb luck, I'd sooner believe in God, I'd imagine. At least in organized religion there's a theoried reward for your belief. If you're wrong about God, I suppose you wasted some of your life in church and reading a bible or something. If you're wrong about evolution, there's a fair chance you might burn in some version of hell along with the fact that you wasted your life. lol I guess organized religion still has that on evolutionists, at least.
Most beliefs regarding the "how" and "why" of life are are pretty silly, honestly. Anyone who claims organized religion is daft and believes evolution, themselves, is as much a hypocrite as the religious person who claims God defies all possibility of evolution.
Religion and evry thing is just somthing to help others get along and help settle Differances..... no one is to say i'm right your wrong! it can't be proven! f it can i'll then look at it and view my thoughts!
From the evidence of both theories on the table, there's more of a scientific possibility that both sides are partly right than there is that either side is totally right. That means that to date, noone's really right about anything...including me, because I can't be more right than anyone else or the world would revolve around me and there would be countless "Slug Shrines" around the world...
And for that matter, we all might not even exist...so who cares who is right in that light?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Acctually if, as you said before, can get a "Following" of a small group of people you can have your own "Slug" Empire.... its Called a "Cult"
but for the part of we may not even Exist..... well anything can Exist! so thats Wrong! you don't have to "Think" to Exist..... you just have to "BE" i know i'm here and i know all of you are..... you can't prove you Don't Exist because once you Prove it you will see it and thus Proving it DOES Exist! all in relation to what i said about the Aliens!
YOU CANNOT PROVE SOMTHING DON'T EXIST UNTIL YOU FIND IT....
Thus Proving its Existance!
Hooray for Evolution and Organized Religion! 
Email This To a Friend
Topic Commands
Click to receive email notification of replies
Click to stop receiving email notification of replies