Evolution vs. Creationism

^ sorry, but there's a character limit on the choices. Obviously what I meant was "evolution with natural selection as the main driving force, and without divine intervention".

I removed "only" from the choice ... I doubt that it changes the outcome of the poll though.


Edited by Mr ProgFreak - December 01 2009 at 08:55

I'm an atheist; the closest I can get to agnosticism is equating the entire matter, energy and time with some sort of divinity; or with 'sky mechanism' to be more precise.

I won't even state my opinion about the subject -- I can not comprehend how someone in modern era can deny evolution. (I can understand believers that believe in evolution+god).

But there's something else. It's not only that I'm not embracing divine intervention...I don't like the idea.

I feel proud being of descent of some string of animals that evolved, enhanced intelligence and stood up from the mud - this is what I am - we are - a living example what life on Earth had achieved, and it still developing.

The idea of being created by some god, and obliged to show eternal gratitude and kneel is not for me.

The believer might throw the argument's of God's love, but that won't help much because humans remain a priori inferior to him.

This may sound antropochauvinistic , but I have no problem acknowledging some alien species, or dolphins, or ants being superior to humans - if evidence provided.

As creatures of knowledge, emotions, technology and art we're alone on this little planet. All our wonderful achievements are ours, all the horrific things are our mistakes (we can blame evolution and our reptilian brain cores but that's only an excuse). We are on a way of becoming a deity. If we fail, that will be our original way to hell (figuratively speaking).


A hypothetical God-That-Will-Walk-On-Earth-One-Day-Again, speaking from the point of personification, deserves to be convinced for imprisonment for the eternity. I don't like the idea of god, much less so various religions envisioning him/her/it.

I feel sympathetic for people who believe in whatever -- if they're benevolent and willing to share their beliefes as messages of kindness and love. Unfortunately, there's no method for these folks to argue with myself (and people who share my (dis)belief) without touching the nerve of each other and sounding nasty.

jampa17 wrote: Well, I didn't read the whole thread because you are using too much technical and quemical knowledge that I don't understand, at least in english... well, what I have to say is that I refuse to believe that we are only a lucky step, followed by other lucky step followed again by other lucky step... I think evolution is a little more complicated that just natural selection process, and BTW, I believe we are special because we havee porpuse, meaning... we don't come here to mess around -funny, i'ts just what we're doing right now- but I believe in the existence of a perfect essence who guide us... so, I believe in evolution guided by a holy hand...

It's a shame you didn't read the whole thread because I tried to show that luck has nothing to do with it. Just becuase a series of steps looks lucky to you it is simply because they happened. If they never happened none of us would be here to say "Coo, that was lucky". It's not luck, chance, fate, kismet or destiny, it's just things that happened.

Only the genes are passed on - experiences are accumulated in the mind, not in eggs and sperms. Every new animal starts as a single cell, so I fail to see how experiences should reach the offspring by any other means than learning.

Edited by Mr ProgFreak - December 01 2009 at 09:43

Dean wrote: jampa17 wrote: Well, I didn't read the whole thread because you are using too much technical and quemical knowledge that I don't understand, at least in english... well, what I have to say is that I refuse to believe that we are only a lucky step, followed by other lucky step followed again by other lucky step... I think evolution is a little more complicated that just natural selection process, and BTW, I believe we are special because we havee porpuse, meaning... we don't come here to mess around -funny, i'ts just what we're doing right now- but I believe in the existence of a perfect essence who guide us... so, I believe in evolution guided by a holy hand... It's a shame you didn't read the whole thread because I tried to show that luck has nothing to do with it. Just becuase a series of steps looks lucky to you it is simply because they happened. If they never happened none of us would be here to say "Coo, that was lucky". It's not luck, chance, fate, kismet or destiny, it's just things that happened.

^ what you're describing is a behavior present in all seahorses of a certain species, and of course that's in the genes. The brain of these creatures is built in a way that it contains that behavior. What the post I answered to was about was knowledge of individuals.

Mr ProgFreak wrote: Only the genes are passed on - experiences are accumulated in the mind, not in eggs and sperms. Every new animal starts as a single cell, so I fail to see how experiences should reach the offspring by any other means than learning.

Lamarckism is the curse-word of evolutionsits so must be approached with caution. Some of his ideas are of value, unfortunately it is the learnt traits one that lets him down.

That would not be a safe assumption.

Negoba wrote: That would not be a safe assumption.

I simply said that I doubt it ... before raising it to "assumption" of course I would have to validate this doubt.

Agree with you Dean... but you used the most evident behaviours... it becomes a little messy when you start finding some things that are not actually accurate to our little boxes we wanted to clasify everything in... but how is that elephants have their own codes to communicate through low frecuency vibrations over the ground... that's learning process... that means something to the discussion...??? Well, my point was with the argument that Progfreak said he dissetimated these facts in the evolution in great scale...