Why is the Religion forum so popular on a Science Board?

S.A.M. said:
You either believe there is a universal force underlying it or you believe its all random chance which just happens to fall into the patterns we observe. And then spend your time using trial and error to prove theories on the basis that the randomness is only in the beginning of it.
Click to expand...
BULLSHIT. YOU KNOW BETTER THAN THIS!

This is an outright lie by you and I will not tolerate it from someone who appears generally rational (at times).

The "random chance" argument is the worst, most disingenuous argument of all time. No one who has even a shred of understanding of physics or evolution claims it's "random chance".

This is so stupid a position to take in an otherwise intelligent discussion that I'm embarrassed to be a part of it.
 
superluminal said:
BULLSHIT. YOU KNOW BETTER THAN THIS!

This is an outright lie by you and I will not tolerate it from someone who appears generally rational (at times).

The "random chance" argument is the worst, most disingenuous argument of all time. No one who has even a shred of understanding of physics or evolution claims it's "random chance".

This is so stupid a position to take in an otherwise intelligent discussion that I'm embarrassed to be a part of it.
Click to expand...

By inductive reasoning it has to become either random or incomprehensible at some point. Either that or you have to come up with a reason for it.

Btw, mutations are random.
 
S.A.M. said:
By inductive reasoning it has to become either random or incomprehensible at some point. Either that or you have to come up with a reason for it.
Click to expand...
NOT RANDOM!

Incomprehensible? Yes! The universe (as you well know) works according to some fairly simple laws that we think we understand pretty well. At some point, you cannot discover, in a demonstrable way, the "root" of a thing. At least currently.

- Where did the matter in the universe come from?
- What is the exact momentum and location of a particle?
- Why are particle described by probabilities (wave functions)?

Don't know. Does that mean there's a god? Of course not!

But what if we find the the "root" of these things is simply "that's the way the universe is"?

Who decreed that the ultimate nature of the universe would be open to us?

Leaping to an anthropomorphic god in the face of the unknown is about as primitive and ignorant as one can get.
 
S.A.M. said:
Btw, mutations are random.
Click to expand...
Duh.

I well know that the opportunities offerd up by nature in the form of genetic mutation and environmental stress are "random". The process of natural selection however (as you well know) is highly deterministic.
 
superluminal said:
NOT RANDOM!

Incomprehensible? Yes! The universe (as you well know) works according to some fairly simple laws that we think we understand pretty well. At some point, you cannot discover, in a demonstrable way, the "root" of a thing. At least currently.

- Where did the matter in the universe come from?
- What is the exact momentum and location of a particle?
- Why are particle described by probabilities (wave functions)?

Don't know. Does that mean there's a god? Of course not!

But what if we find the the "root" of these things is simply "that's the way the universe is"?

Who decreed that the ultimate nature of the universe would be open to us?

Leaping to an anthropomorphic god in the face of the unknown is about as primitive and ignorant as one can get.
Click to expand...

So "thats the way the universe is" != shit happens?

Hmm thats how I define random.
 
superluminal said:
Duh.

I well know that the opportunities offerd up by nature in the form of genetic mutation and environmental stress are "random". The process of natural selection however (as you well know) is highly deterministic.
Click to expand...

Thats just chance. Its the culling thats deterministic.
 
S.A.M. said:
Natural selection means the slowest deer gets caught, not the fastest deer gets away.
Click to expand...
Really? These are mutually exclusive?

But no, that's not what it means at all.

What it really means is that, on average, an organism better suited to survival in a given environment will tend to leave more offspring, thus tending to preserve the "favorable" trait.

The slow deer may capitalize on an advanced ability to remain camoflaged or hidden in an environment of tall brush, while the skittish fast deer gets eaten by long-legged but contrast deficient predators.

It's not simple at all.
 
superluminal said:
Really? These are mutually exclusive?

But no, that's not what it means at all.

What it really means is that, on average, an organism better suited to survival in a given environment will tend to leave more offspring, thus tending to preserve the "favorable" trait.

The slow deer may capitalize on an advanced ability to remain camoflaged or hidden in an environment of tall brush, while the skittish fast deer gets eaten by long-legged but contrast deficient predators.

It's not simple at all.
Click to expand...

Slow deers use camouflage? :bravo:

I agree, but what are you saying different?
 
S.A.M. said:
So the entire post was meaningless?

Oh what a surprise!
Click to expand...
No I said, I qualified the statement.

How about:
We 100% Atheists are almost certain there are no Gods we yet lack a belief in such anyway, while our sciforum-99.999% Atheist-counterparts (whom also lack a beleif in most Gods) still retain a beleif in one, or two.

:)

now about that possibility existing....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top