PUSH THE THROTTLE Posted May 23, 2006 Report Share Posted May 23, 2006 There is no proof that god does exist! 519739[/snapback] The fact is there is no proof he doesn't exist. Why do you fail to realize that. You have no proof that a piece of salt and a rock touched to create a sperm and then life was created. I can prove that if you cut somebody's legs off they can learn to walk on their hands does that prove evolution? How about somebody who is blind their sense of touch and hearing is enhanced. And prove to me what came first the chicken or the egg, or are you saying science can't explain that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
warwgn Posted May 23, 2006 Author Report Share Posted May 23, 2006 so if I say I am an alien from another planet, since you cant prove I'm not I must be!! I will prove that the so-called Dilemma of the Chicken and the Egg is, in reality, not a dilemma at all. The question, which of the two was there first, is a simple question, that can be solved. It was Darwin who made it possible to provide the correct answer, as I will do in this scholarly article, but also before Darwin there can never have been a Dilemma, as all myths about the Creation I know of speak of the creation of animals, not of eggs. The famous Dilemma of the Chicken and the Egg, in other words, is nothing but a sham. Nowadays we know that chickens, or eggs, for that matter, were not created by God, but that they are the product of a long evolution, and that makes the Dilemma more difficult to solve. But it can be done. To begin with, we have to specify that we will be speaking about chickens and chicken's eggs, not about chickens and any kind of eggs, because in that case, the answer is trivial and uninteresting. This seems evident, but I mention it because of its importance further in this discussion. Let us call the animal which preceded chickens in the evolution of the species the primeval chicken, or p-chicken for short. The difference between chicken and p-chicken is probably small and arbitrary, but it must be possible to differentiate between them, although the criterion we will use will be chosen more or less arbitrarily by biologists. In the remainder of this article I will speak about chickens and p-chickens as if we all know the difference; what exactly this difference is, is unimportant to us philosophers. One day a p-chicken must have laid an egg, out of which a modern chicken emerged. The arrival of this strange chicken has maybe happened on several occasions independently, and the first modern chicken might not be the ancestor of all our chickens, or it might even have died childless, but this is of no importance for our discussion. The only factor of importance is, whether the egg out of which the first modern chicken was born, was a real chicken's egg. If this egg actually was a chicken's egg, then the Egg existed before the Chicken, if not, it can only have originated later. Now we still have to define a chicken's egg. At first sight, there seem to be three possibilities: a chicken's egg is an egg laid by a chicken (we might call this the popular definition of a chicken's egg), or a chicken's egg is an egg out of which a chicken is born, or a chicken's egg is an egg laid by a chicken, out of which a chicken is born. In fact, only the first definition can be right, because also the eggs we eat, which most certainly do not contain chickens, are called chicken's eggs. And on top of that, if eggs were named after what they contained, there would also have to exist cock's eggs. No, the genitive form can only refer to the maker, not to the inhabitant of the egg. So, as the egg, out of which the first chicken emerged, cannot have been a chicken's egg, because it was laid by a p-chicken, and as we have clearly stated that the Egg in the Dilemma of the Chicken and the Egg can only have been meant as a chicken's egg, I conclude that the Egg came into existence after the Chicken. With the remark, that for once the old creation myths and modern science have come to the same conclusion, I finally put an end to this learned discussion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PUSH THE THROTTLE Posted May 23, 2006 Report Share Posted May 23, 2006 so if I say I am an alien from another planet, since you cant prove I'm not I must be!! 519753[/snapback] I beg to differ it can be proven that you aren't an alien. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PUSH THE THROTTLE Posted May 23, 2006 Report Share Posted May 23, 2006 I will prove that the so-called Dilemma of the Chicken and the Egg is, in reality, not a dilemma at all. 519753[/snapback] And where did the p-chicken come from? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PUSH THE THROTTLE Posted May 23, 2006 Report Share Posted May 23, 2006 Warwgn how do you set the standards for right and wrong in a life with no moral basis? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brooke Posted May 23, 2006 Report Share Posted May 23, 2006 so if I say I am an alien from another planet, since you cant prove I'm not I must be!! 519753[/snapback] that would make you a scientologist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brooke Posted May 23, 2006 Report Share Posted May 23, 2006 wow. no offense warwgn, but that was just about the dumbest attempt at answering the chicken vs. egg question ever. where did you find that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
warwgn Posted May 23, 2006 Author Report Share Posted May 23, 2006 Warwgn how do you set the standards for right and wrong in a life with no moral basis? 519761[/snapback] the same way anybody with half a brain does, make up my own mind. Do you need a book to tell you right form wrong? wow. no offense warwgn, but that was just about the dumbest attempt at answering the chicken vs. egg question ever. where did you find that? 519764[/snapback] first one that came up in google, figure a stupid question deserved a stupid answer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PUSH THE THROTTLE Posted May 23, 2006 Report Share Posted May 23, 2006 the same way anybody with half a brain does, make up my own mind. Do you need a book to tell you right form wrong? 519774[/snapback] Can you explain using evolution as a basis how your brain knows right and wrong? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
warwgn Posted May 23, 2006 Author Report Share Posted May 23, 2006 our brains evolved from millions of years of trial and error, and specificly the right and wronglongata region of the brain, which is smaller and just below the lookthreresadumbass sphere which is highly developed in my brain, and everytime I read one of your posts it goes straight to that spot Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BilDaKid Posted May 23, 2006 Report Share Posted May 23, 2006 Wow, this is one long, engrossing topic. The fact is, religion is an institution. If you think that your religion is 100% correct, then you're crazy. For all the people bashing the christians; If thier beliefs help them live their lives better and be a better person then good for them, calling them weak people is disrespectful and out of line. There are plenty of weak people in every walk of life. As for those people who belive in "God". You say there isn't enough proof of evolution. So instead of believing some facts supporting one threory, you believe in something that has zero facts supporting it. Basically "God" is something completely unexplainable that man has "created" through history to explain something else he can't fully understand. Whether it is the holy trinity, allah, buddah, the sun god, the greek gods and so on. So all the religious people out there, get away from your beliefs for a second and think logically. Which one sounds more likely? As for the Bible. It is a book, written by men. Nobody disputes this. It's very very old. it's been re-written several times. and translated even more. So honestly, how can you really trust that it conveys what it was written to in the beginning? It has changed. Now about the Davinci Code. If the church would've left this book and movie alone, it wouldn't be as successful as it's going to be, and would not be getting near the credability is has recieved. So the church has shot itself in the foot on this one. OH yeah, and Helldriver, calm down and quit being an asshole to everybody who doesn't agree with you. You've got plenty of people here who would mostly support your ideas, but you're being too big of a jackass for anybody to agree with you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
csrmel Posted May 23, 2006 Report Share Posted May 23, 2006 (edited) ever sence i was a little kid and my parents forced me to go to church with them i awalys saw the inconsistencys in religion. espically in the catholic church. why do catholics need $5000 alters and gold candle holders to worship? that money would be better spent helping people with disabilitys or terminally ill. i dont agree with any religion, however the way i see it is if you are going to worship, it does not need to be in some grand cathedral. it could be in the basement of a building, or a city park, etc. why do so many religions have elaborate espen$ive ornaments and buildings when none of that is needed? it never made sence to me. to me god seems like a tool created by man to force control over the masses. its like a prison for youre mind. the money spent on churches woould be better spent elsewhere. last year i went to visit my grandmother who has alzheimers and she requested i go to church with her. she couldnt remember that i was very much against all forms of religion because of her alzheimers. so i thought, it cant hurt and i took her to church. sitting there for that hour and a half, listening to some guy who i dont know trying to tell me how to live my life and telling me about fake gods and magical things (no one walks on water, thats just stupid to believe) it all seemed to silly to me. why believe in anything you cant see, touch, smell, taste or know? in the entire existance of man there has never been proof that there is a god. all there is proof of is some tribesmen who wrote some books. i was glad when the hour and a half long church session was over. i am a man of science and i tend to lump all the religions of the world together with things like dragons, giants, elves, aliens, etc. back in the dark ages people really did believe in things like giants, god, dragons, etc. as the world has aged and technology has shown more and more of these mythological caracters are indeed fake, the better off the world has become. i wish i could be alive when the day comes that all forms of religion is deemed false and fake. the world will be a better place without it. imagine a world free of religion, free of guilt, poverty, opression, crusades, free of vadinci code type books. it sounds great to me. i dont need some god to tell me how to live my life. i know what is right and what is wrong. i would rather die than be forced to worship some god. the idea of worshipping something which does not exist sickens me. to think of how many people over the years have been douped into believing in this great hoax. all the witches who were burned at the stake, people executed, etc. its just sick tat religion is still allowed to keep going and all those who believe turn a blind eye to religions past and close there eyes to its probable future. Edited May 23, 2006 by csrmel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
warwgn Posted May 23, 2006 Author Report Share Posted May 23, 2006 I already said most of that so I agree 100%, but they wont listen or see reason for fear god will know their doubts and send them to hell. Let them belive what they want I dont care if they choose to belive in moon men, just dont dispute a know fact, and dont tell me your right if you have no proof to back it up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PUSH THE THROTTLE Posted May 23, 2006 Report Share Posted May 23, 2006 just dont dispute a know fact, 519794[/snapback] I'm still waiting for you to tell me what that know[n] fact is??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
csrmel Posted May 23, 2006 Report Share Posted May 23, 2006 why should we let them believe? its just wrong. one day in the distant future when most religions are crumbling from lack of funding a man will rise up and crush them. most people would call this man the antichrist. a man that shows the world what it could never see. a man that forces everyone to see the truth.when the world is united under one government, one curency, and no religion, it would be a grand place to live. i wish i could be alive at that time but i know its too early for that to happen. religion is too strong right now. too many believers to let it happen. time will slow religion, as it has been doing. the precent of people in the world who believe in a god are growing less and less as the world ages. the writers of the bible knew this would eventually happen, and they wrote about it in revelations. only they twisted the truth to make it sound like this time would be the end of the world. in reality its the end of the world for religion, and the begenning of a new, free world for man. how did they know it would happen? because it is the same story with everything that goes on in the world. every great empire eventually falls. its impossible to ignore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts