everything getting...better?

[life777]

Ok, so Natural Selection and Evolution say things get better over time but doesn't human nature itself show it's just getting worse?

[twobitsmedia]

How is it hopeless. Getting better isn't the idea. It is staying alive and having offspring. Some changes help. Most don't.

Umm, maybe I just don't get the warm fuzzies over your explanation.

It isn't meant to give you warm fuzzies. It is meant to explain. It is , however,
the precise mechanism by which natural selection works. Those that live to be
able to reproduce pass their characteristics off to their offspring. There will be
some variation in those Characteristics. Many times, those variations won't mean
much. Sometimes, it will let an individual survive/breed better. Sometimes,these
variations won't mean much until the environment changes.

The explanation offers no comfort, just hoplessness, don't get lost in the sarcasm.
I am quite aware that when the evoltuinist dies he has no idea where he goes or if he goes anywhere/. That issue is NOT my problem.

[Undertow]

How is it hopeless. Getting better isn't the idea. It is staying alive and having offspring. Some changes help. Most don't.

Umm, maybe I just don't get the warm fuzzies over your explanation.

It isn't meant to give you warm fuzzies. It is meant to explain. It is , however,
the precise mechanism by which natural selection works. Those that live to be
able to reproduce pass their characteristics off to their offspring. There will be
some variation in those Characteristics. Many times, those variations won't mean
much. Sometimes, it will let an individual survive/breed better. Sometimes,these
variations won't mean much until the environment changes.

The explanation offers no comfort, just hoplessness, don't get lost in the sarcasm.
I am quite aware that when the evoltuinist dies he has no idea where he goes or if he goes anywhere/. That issue is NOT my problem.

What about Christian evolutionists. They know where they go. Or are you too preoccupied with the whole us vs. them mentality to even blink when thinking about what you type?

[twobitsmedia]

How is it hopeless. Getting better isn't the idea. It is staying alive and having offspring. Some changes help. Most don't.

Umm, maybe I just don't get the warm fuzzies over your explanation.

It isn't meant to give you warm fuzzies. It is meant to explain. It is , however,
the precise mechanism by which natural selection works. Those that live to be
able to reproduce pass their characteristics off to their offspring. There will be
some variation in those Characteristics. Many times, those variations won't mean
much. Sometimes, it will let an individual survive/breed better. Sometimes,these
variations won't mean much until the environment changes.

The explanation offers no comfort, just hoplessness, don't get lost in the sarcasm.
I am quite aware that when the evoltuinist dies he has no idea where he goes or if he goes anywhere/. That issue is NOT my problem.

What about Christian evolutionists. They know where they go. Or are you too preoccupied with the whole us vs. them mentality to even blink when thinking about what you type?

Us and them? Where did that come from? What about Christian evolutionists? And what about Christian pedophiles? And Christian sex addicts? And Christian mormons and catholics and baptists? And Christian homosexuals? Your case just means Christiains suffer from relativism. No news. Are you more impressed with Christian evolutionists who worship the dictator known as God? Does the word make those who adhere to the God you arent even sure exist seem more pallatable? If evolution "is," than who cares what the "Christians" think? You seem far more imprssed with them then I am even....

[Undertow]

I said nothing of being impressed about anything, I was just saying that your point is flawed. In my experience people like you revel in the term 'evolutionists' and neglect the fact that it's not a mutually exclusive group.

[twobitsmedia]

I said nothing of being impressed about anything, I was just saying that your point is flawed. In my experience people like you revel in the term 'evolutionists' and neglect the fact that it's not a mutually exclusive group.

Whose point is not flawed? You mena there is someone out there who is all knowing with all reason and flawless??? Sounds like a case for God. (Or a really smart guy with a test tube)

[Undertow]

I said nothing of being impressed about anything, I was just saying that your point is flawed. In my experience people like you revel in the term 'evolutionists' and neglect the fact that it's not a mutually exclusive group.

Whose point is not flawed? You mena there is someone out there who is all knowing with all reason and flawless??? Sounds like a case for God. (Or a really smart guy with a test tube)

Losing interest... gone.

Sorry, twobits, your style of discourse is just so uninteresting.

[twobitsmedia]

I said nothing of being impressed about anything, I was just saying that your point is flawed. In my experience people like you revel in the term 'evolutionists' and neglect the fact that it's not a mutually exclusive group.

Whose point is not flawed? You mena there is someone out there who is all knowing with all reason and flawless??? Sounds like a case for God. (Or a really smart guy with a test tube)

Losing interest... gone.

Sorry, twobits, your style of discourse is just so uninteresting.

I am aware that the lack of bible scriptures and the "God said" and lack of links to enforce my assertion with evidence (for no evidence?) is totally unchallenging for the nontheist. I will get over it.

[Undertow]

I said nothing of being impressed about anything, I was just saying that your point is flawed. In my experience people like you revel in the term 'evolutionists' and neglect the fact that it's not a mutually exclusive group.

Whose point is not flawed? You mena there is someone out there who is all knowing with all reason and flawless??? Sounds like a case for God. (Or a really smart guy with a test tube)

Losing interest... gone.

Sorry, twobits, your style of discourse is just so uninteresting.

I am aware that the lack of bible scriptures and the "God said" and lack of links to enforce my assertion with evidence (for no evidence?) is totally unchallenging for the nontheist. I will get over it.

That's got nothing to do with it, although all your rhetoric about evolution would actually mean something if you had any evidence to back up what you proclaim so fervently. It's your total disregard for ever being wrong (probably why you don't actually come up with any tangible arguments or evidence which can be argued against?) or for actually answering a question or responding with a straight answer. All your word spinning and rhetoric to take the emphasis off of you must make you feel great. It's that little sense of satisfaction you get from knowing you've put your ideas out on an internet forum and dodged others with your meaningless words that goes a way to rationalising your us vs them mentality and your side of the divide as the superior. The feeling of totally disregarding something like evolution without even critically analysing the evidence or science behind it by going so far as to call evolution and science religions, the god of atheists and at all times distancing yourself from the 'nontheists' and 'evolutionists' among countless other snide remarks must make you feel great.

You know exactly what I'm talking about. I can see through your rhetoric like a pane of glass.

[QED]

OK guys! Let's not get into personal attacks. We've got some ideas we can sink our teeth into instead.

I'll continue to work on the basis that you just don't "get it" rather than assume that you're just hoping that people will take your word for it that Natural Selection is bunk.

That's all you have to work with. The nonthiest seems to think they have a corner on intellectuality and reality and at the same time condemns the theist for the same. It's all circular. Evolution is bunk. You are preaching to the antithe-choir...but nice try.

So, from your statement you seem to be saying that theists too deserve to be granted intellectuality for the purposes of establishing a reality. I've got no problem with that at all, but there seem to be precious few intellectual arguments coming from that camp. If you disagree then perhaps you would like to mention a few.

But I think you'd rather have us accept that there are other equally valid paths to "truth" and that one of these truths is that Natural Selection is bunk. The big problem with this is that we can "walk" anyone through the model I outlined in my previous post and show how it can work -- just like we can describe how a pawl can prevent rotation in one direction and not another. Usually people "see" how the model will work and accept it as a possibility. If not, we can make one and demonstrate it. In the case of Natural Selection, many people "see" it straight away. But it has also been modelled -- not to demonstrate how it works to those who don't "see" it -- but because it's a very useful mechanism (like the pawl).

I think this shows that the alternative path to truth that you would have us accept is unreliable because it doesn't elaborate on anything we can argue about. A real intellectual challenge might be "Oh, but that model isn't being replicated in biology" and then we could get into the specifics. Look at all the interesting stuff your methodology leaves out

Anyway, I'm glad you appreciated my "try". You now have a model you can refer to if ever you need to think about how things can adapt without any outside help.