What real benefit is a larger brain for survival.:shrug: Taken at face value our larger brains dont exactly benefit life in general and i dont see how it enabled us to survive. The only possible argument would be for constant expansion and reproduction to harsher environments. I hardly believe nature made provisions for us to one day have nice clothes and plasma screens.
Let's all have a big fight over my mortal soul.
- Thread starter redarmy11
- Start date
What real benefit is a larger brain for survival.:shrug: Taken at face value our larger brains dont exactly benefit life in general and i dont see how it enabled us to survive. The only possible argument would be for constant expansion and reproduction to harsher environments. I hardly believe nature made provisions for us to one day have nice clothes and plasma screens.
I'm sorry but this is not a reply to the improbability of the existence of a creator. Do you have one?
i will be the judge of that
20000+ posts and q is still arguing with you
something is amiss here
oh
presenting as an opinion, whatever it that you claim you not be doing, will still require, at the very least, a modicum of reason and rationality underlying it
the same for any goddamn expression allowed in via the vbulletin code
20000+ posts finds you and god tight like that eh?
we'll see about that
more
convert to a vegan
convince to stop murdering
wait, you think larger brains don't favour survival? what about more/faster sinapsys? the ability to form strategies, to articulate complex forms of comunication, to learn what things are made of and how to use them? you don't think these abilities would favour expansion and reproduction to harsher environments?
:bugeye:
It is to me; I'm assuming that the natural is the plane of reference we can access right now. There is no reason for there not to be more than that. To a bacterium, I am an improbability.
I agree with Varda, S.A.M., this is shit.
You would seem to be an agnostic theist. Have you considered becoming an agnostic atheist?
How do you arrive at that conclusion?
but hang on a second, you can't use what YOU believe in an argument, that's not science
And it has to be me?:bugeye:
Of course, but that approaches the question, if it is rational to me, do you accept it as rational to you?
Bah, idjits
Vegan? /shudder/
*murders Gustav*
I'm not the one confusing my beliefs with science.
What I believe is separate from what I consider empirical observation.
Principally by reading your words and and fitting them to established concepts.
looky here kiddo
go read up on some particle physics
shit pops up from seemingly nowhere
how hard is it to extend that courtesy to any conceptual formulation?
I'm not the one confusing my beliefs with science.
What I believe is separate from what I consider empirical observation.
your beliefs are no evidence whatsoever
pretty hard, we're talking about something very complex
I'm not offering them as evidence of anything except my beliefs.
there was this comedy (loser movie)
couple of guys pitch to investor
"blah blah blah....it is complicated"
all bought it and got funded
very funny
lemme identify
I would like the courtesy of at least having the freedom to define my own beliefs.