Originally posted by Andrew HamiltonIf Natural" Selection" is not purely random then why would this Agency called Nature tinker with the molecules to select the fittest species ? Are you implying that this
“...Someone like Dawkins still believes there are solid objects randomly colliding to haphazardly form more and more complex objects, until over the course of billions of years the universe produced human DNA with its billions of genetic bits. ...”
Nope. You are using the same old straw man argument yet again. This is NOT what he believes. Natural ...[text shortened]... is also NOT purely random. Nobody is claiming that everything came to existence by pure chance.
Agency or busybody is to be called God by Back Door ? When most of Universe is Dead/Barren matter,the very fact of Life is not explainable by Darwinian Logic.
1 edit
Originally posted by rvsakhadeoA filter isn't random when only particles smaller than a certain size gets through.
If Natural" Selection" is not purely random then why would this Agency called Nature tinker with the molecules to select the fittest species ? Are you implying that this
Agency or busybody is to be called God by Back Door ? When most of Universe is Dead/Barren matter,the very fact of Life is not explainable by Darwinian Logic.
You can imagine natural selection as a natural filter.
Dawkins best describes it as:
"Life results from non-random survival of randomly varying replicators"
Originally posted by lauseyLife is ...awareness, consciousness, free will, intelligence, cognition, creativity, knowledge, bliss, happiness, emotions, love, meaningful relationships.
A filter isn't random when only particles smaller than a certain size gets through.
You can imagine natural selection as a natural filter.
Dawkins best describes it as:
"Life results from non-random survival of randomly varying replicators"
So what filter or varying replicator, produces consciousness or intelligence or love. (It doesn't)
Richard Dawkins has taken God out of the equation of life, and invented words to replace God.
Throughly dishonest and foolish.
Originally posted by vishvahetuROTFLMAO
Life is ...awareness, consciousness, free will, intelligence, cognition, creativity, knowledge, bliss, happiness, emotions, love, meaningful relationships.
So what filter or varying replicator, produces consciousness or intelligence or love. (It doesn't)
Richard Dawkins has taken God out of the equation of life, and invented words to replace God.
Throughly dishonest and foolish.
So fkn far from reality it is beyond laughable.
1 edit
Originally posted by vishvahetuMore accurate is to say he never introduced God into the 'equation of life' - why should he?...why should anyone?
Life is ...awareness, consciousness, free will, intelligence, cognition, creativity, knowledge, bliss, happiness, emotions, love, meaningful relationships.
So what filter or varying replicator, produces consciousness or intelligence or love. (It doesn't)
Richard Dawkins has taken God out of the equation of life, and invented words to replace God.
Throughly dishonest and foolish.
Originally posted by AgergBecause some people are frightened of an uncaring universe so they invent someone who cares. At least it comforts some people who have trouble coping with said uncaring universe.
More accurate is to say he never introduced God [b]into the 'equation of life' - why should he?...why should anyone?[/b]
1 edit
Originally posted by rvsakhadeo“...If Natural" Selection" is not purely random ...”
If Natural" Selection" is not purely random then why would this Agency called Nature tinker with the molecules to select the fittest species ? Are you implying that this
Agency or busybody is to be called God by Back Door ? When most of Universe is Dead/Barren matter,the very fact of Life is not explainable by Darwinian Logic.
what are you talking about? If the environment the individuals are in selects the best adapted, then, by definition, that is a non-random selection.
“...then why would this Agency called Nature tinker with the molecules to select the fittest species ? ...”
that is not what evolution theory says and is nothing like what the theory says;
firstly, it does not say anything about “ Agency called Nature” but, instead, says the environment the individuals live in do the selecting.
Secondly, it doesn't say that this environment “tinker with the molecules” to do the selecting.
Thirdly, it doesn't say that evolution selects the fittest “species” but, rather, it says it selects the best adapted INDIVIDUALS WITHIN a species (and NOT the species as a whole)
“...Are you implying that this Agency or busybody is to be called God by Back Door ?...”
no. there is no “ busybody” in evolution.
“...When most of Universe is Dead/Barren matter,the very fact of Life is not explainable by Darwinian Logic. ...”
actually, the diversity of species is explained by evolution. Unless you are just talking about the existence of life? In which case that is not supposed to be explained by evolution but abiogenesis and one has nothing to do with the other.
Originally posted by vishvahetu“....Many impersonalists have translated Vedanta Sutra with the atheistic conclusion, and have polluted the true meaning. ...”
This is what happens when you Google Vedanta Sutra, with the fault finding eye.....you mis-interpret.
Many impersonalists have translated Vedanta Sutra with the atheistic conclusion, and have polluted the true meaning.
It can only be translated by an honest pure master, to receive the correct import.
Since atheism has its influence everywhere, Ve ...[text shortened]... upulous translators, purposely mis-interpret the scriptures, because they are fools and rascals.
many interpretations have been made of Vedanta Sutra by theists that believe in it and with no “ atheistic conclusion” (whatever that is supposed to mean) so how do you know that you know the correct interpretation ( i.e the “true meaning” as you said) ?
Originally posted by vishvahetu“....teaching life is an accident,...”
You foolish man....teaching life is an accident, and the cosmos has no cause or design, is without evidence and illogical. (get honest and then speak)
evolution is not an accident but inevitable.
“...this without evidence and illogical ...”
so you admit that using logic and evidence is a valid way of obtaining knowledge?
This is contrary to what you said earlier. You basically implied we should just blindly accept your religion as true and that using logic and evidence is not a valid way of obtaining knowledge. Do you want a reminder?
Originally posted by Andrew HamiltonTwisting words, fabricating.......what is wrong with you, can you not say one honest thing.
“....teaching life is an accident,...”
evolution is not an accident but inevitable.
“...this without evidence and illogical ...”
so you admit that using logic and evidence is a valid way of obtaining knowledge?
This is contrary to what you said earlier. You basically implied we should just blindly accept your religion as true and that using logic and evidence is not a valid way of obtaining knowledge. Do you want a reminder?
Originally posted by Andrew HamiltonYou are not qualified to discuss the Vedanta Sutra, because you do so with the fault finding eye....... and with no acceptance of its authority.
“....Many impersonalists have translated Vedanta Sutra with the atheistic conclusion, and have polluted the true meaning. ...”
many interpretations have been made of Vedanta Sutra by theists that believe in it and with no “ atheistic conclusion” (whatever that is supposed to mean) so how do you know that you know the correct interpretation ( i.e the “true meaning” as you said) ?
Your authority is your cheating heart and mind.
Correct that and then I can discuss with you.
1 edit
Originally posted by vishvahetuBelieve without question in the authority of the Vedas and you'll discuss what makes the Vedas authoritative! 😵
You are not qualified to discuss the Vedanta Sutra, because you do so with the fault finding eye....... and with no acceptance of its authority.
Your authority is your cheating heart and mind.
Correct that and then I can discuss with you.
Originally posted by sonhouseIt is unfair to a vast majority of troubled ,unhappy people to say that they require God because they feel neglected. Why,even the most cared for,wealthy,healthy, highly scientific/logical, stern Darwinists, know-all atheists also feel lonely, lost,without any clear understanding of Life and Reality,also feel a twinge in their hearts and cry out for God. The thirst for understanding in the human mind just cannot stop at Darwinistic theory of Evolution.Darwin explained very convincingly how life evolved and dealt a death blow to what was written in Christian Scriptures about Creation. That is not sufficient to disprove God.
Because some people are frightened of an uncaring universe so they invent someone who cares. At least it comforts some people who have trouble coping with said uncaring universe.