The Thinking Mans Thread - Evolution Schmevolution. No Offence to the Ladies.

[Zingari]

Not sure how you've got that from my posts - I see no reason to include a god into evolution, with no evidence of a god it's unscientific, not to mention evolution is explainable without invoking the supernatural.

A god could have been tinkering I admit, but I see no reason to take that over a naturalistic explanation given the absence of evidence that such a being exists.

read what you said in the evolution thread

[Zingari]

Yep, on this he and I disagree. though it's something of an abstract point in that he says that "evolution definitely happens without a god", and I say that "it could happen with or without a God but we'll never be able to distinguish it so it doesn't make any difference either way."

Of course it matters , it's like saying cars may or may not have evolved without design.it really doesn't matter just so long as you accept that they evolved .

That's the whole crux of the discussion

[The Doctor]

read what you said in the evolution thread

Yes however you phrased it suggested I thought that evolution meant no god, certainly not - only a fool would argue that, particularly since evolution doesn't touch on the origins of life.

As for what I said, that's what the theory says (in a basic summation), and I agree with it in saying that, factoring in a god isn't science, I accept that a god might be tinkering in subtle way, but I see it very unlikely.

[Zingari]

Of course it matters , it's like saying cars may or may not have evolved without design.it really doesn't matter just so long as we accept they evolved .

That's the whole crux of the discussion

[Zingari]

Yes however you phrased it suggested I thought that evolution meant no god, certainly not - only a fool would argue that, particularly since evolution doesn't touch on the origins of life.

As for what I said, that's what the theory says (in a basic summation), and I agree with it in saying that, factoring in a god isn't science, I accept that a god might be tinkering in subtle way, but I see it very unlikely.

how you keep moving the goalposts

So you accept that Dawkins et al may be wrong ?

And what you keep saying is "fact" , is just really only the best

theory available now ? however good it may seem.

[The Doctor]

how you keep moving the goalposts

So you accept that Dawkins et al may be wrong ?

And what you keep saying is "fact" , is just really only the best

theory available now ? however good it may seem.

They may be wrong and there may be heliocentric crockery, but I don't see it as particularly likely, god may be fiddling with development of species, but I'd suggest applying ockham's razor, it's simpler to assume completely natural explanation than it is to add in unproven supernatural entities.

It's the hypothesis that has the most evidence, that's why it's called a theory, because it's been verified repeatedly over the last century and a half. The way science works it's as close to being fact as is possible. Is it fact in the sense of 100% certain, no, but its certainty would be well beyond the 5 sigma level physicists use (99.999%), it's so close we might as well just consider it fact.

[leicsmac]

Of course it matters , it's like saying cars may or may not have evolved without design.it really doesn't matter just so long as they evolved .

That's the whole crux of the discussion

Nope, it really doesn't. And you've actually landed on the point of why I find this whole debate absurd.

If there is no possible way to tell the actions of a 'divine power' from those of 'natural laws' (and there is no way we can right now - hence why many people still do believe in a God) then they become the same in our perception. Since we can't perceive the causes, then I find it absurd to speculate about it - much like when people ask 'what triggered the Big Bang?' So the question of whether there is a hidden hand in evolution is actually irrelevant to us, simply because it's a question that cannot be answered.

[Zingari]

Nope, it really doesn't. And you've actually landed on the point of why I find this whole debate absurd.

If there is no possible way to tell the actions of a 'divine power' from those of 'natural laws' (and there is no way we can right now - hence why many people still do believe in a God) then they become the same in our perception. Since we can't perceive the causes, then I find it absurd to speculate about it - much like when people ask 'what triggered the Big Bang?' So the question of whether there is a hidden hand in evolution is actually irrelevant to us, simply because it's a question that cannot be answered.

That's what i've been saying all along

[leicsmac]

That's what i've been saying all along

[whoareyaaa]

Nope, it really doesn't. And you've actually landed on the point of why I find this whole debate absurd.

If there is no possible way to tell the actions of a 'divine power' from those of 'natural laws' (and there is no way we can right now - hence why many people still do believe in a God) then they become the same in our perception. Since we can't perceive the causes, then I find it absurd to speculate about it - much like when people ask 'what triggered the Big Bang?' So the question of whether there is a hidden hand in evolution is actually irrelevant to us, simply because it's a question that cannot be answered.

But there are Scientists that are trying to figure out this question so its not irrelevant to us at all, maybe one day they will find the answer... maybe not.

[Zingari]

Good night all

[leicsmac]

But there are Scientists that are trying to figure out this question so its not irrelevant to us at all, maybe one day they will find the answer... maybe not.

The Big Bang trigger question? We've got pretty close to it (closer than 10^-40 seconds), and we'll get closer...but we'll never be able to simulate the event itself. Not outside of a black hole where the fundamental laws of physics break down anyway.

[The Doctor]

The Big Bang trigger question? We've got pretty close to it (closer than 10^-40 seconds), and we'll get closer...but we'll never be able to simulate the event itself. Not outside of a black hole where the fundamental laws of physics break down anyway.

So then, where's best for us to make ourselves a mini black hole? I'd suggest France, it's of no use otherwise.

[leicsmac]

So then, where's best for us to make ourselves a mini black hole? I'd suggest France, it's of no use otherwise.

Too close to home for my liking. How about Quebec? Contains a lot of people who have all the French annoying qualities, while having few of their redeeming features.

[The Doctor]

Too close to home for my liking. How about Quebec? Contains a lot of people who have all the French annoying qualities, while having few of their redeeming features.

But I want to destroy France! I suppose we could just flatten France and cover it in solar panels, ans Canada isn't a real country anyway, so it could work. The other benefit is that if anything goes wrong the Americans are ****ed.

[Guest Bilo]

I did quite enjoy this on the Dickie Dawkins page.

This be my only contribution for now.

[The Doctor]

If we're now heading down that route - why the devil is actually the good guy: http://www.lucifer.com/lucifer.html

[fleckneymike]

Good old El Empty and his tin foil hat threads.

[birdwith2beaksandnofriends]

The joke is on the tin foil brigade! It doesn't prevent mind manipulation and control, it aids it!

Everyone knows that tin is the best conductor of mind control waves.

[The Doctor]

Unfortunately though people don't make lead foil.

[Parafox]

Indeed, however the attitude of we don't understand, so let's not bother doing anything would hold us back. For instance I think it was Werner Forssmann who didn't understand how the vascular system worked, so jammed a catheter (small camera) into his own arm and guided it down to his heart to take a look.

Now THAT take balls!

No cath lab,CT scanner, ultrasound, xrays, map or nuffink? WOW. How long ago WAS this, my first camera was a box Brownie and I had trouble getting that back in it's case.

[The Doctor]

Now THAT take balls!

No cath lab,CT scanner, ultrasound, xrays, map or nuffink? WOW. How long ago WAS this, my first camera was a box Brownie and I had trouble getting that back in it's case.

He did it in 1929. From wiki:

In 1929, while working in Eberswalde, he performed the first human cardiac catheterisation. He ignored his department chief and persuaded the OR nurse in charge of the sterile supplies, Gerda Ditzen, to assist him. She agreed, but only on the promise that he would do it on her rather than on himself. However, Forssmann tricked her by restraining her to the operating table and pretending to locally anaesthetise and cut her arm whilst actually doing it on himself. He anesthetized his own lower arm in the cubital region and inserted a uretic catheter into his antecubital vein, threading it partly along before releasing Ditzen (who at this point realised the catheter was not in her arm) and telling her to call the X-Ray department. They walked some distance to the X-ray department on the floor below where under the guidance of a fluoroscope he advanced the catheter the full 60 cm into his right ventricular cavity. This was then recorded on X-Ray film showing the catheter lying in his right atrium

[Parafox]

He did it in 1929. From wiki:

Wow... and he got to tie up a nurse... bastard!

[Zingari]

The joke is on the tin foil brigade! It doesn't prevent mind manipulation and control, it aids it!

Everyone knows that tin is the best conductor of mind control waves.

Not really . they are clever enough to realise that tin foil is made of aluminium

[Jaspa]

El Empty must be dissapointed in his own creation

This thread Isnt living up to its billing