Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,875 Year: 4,132/9,624 Month: 1,003/974 Week: 330/286 Day: 51/40 Hour: 2/3


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Conclusion vs Presupposition
LucyTheApe
Inactive Member


Message 56 of 94 (445628)
01-03-2008 7:49 AM
Reply to: Message 46 by RAZD
01-02-2008 6:40 PM


Re: Beginning presuppostions
Raz writes:
tesla writes:
by what manner does evolution propose that life was introduced?
It doesn't. Evolution starts with life existing - particularly starting with the life we know today and working backwards.
Creationists believe there was no life on earth before God created it, then they work forward.
Evolutionists believe there already was life and then they work backwards.
Raz writes:
The earliest life known is a cyanobacteria 3.8 billion years old
Isn’t this cyanobacteria blue-green algae, the same blue-green algae we see today in our rivers and lakes. Shouldn’t it have evolved after 3 800 000 000 years or does it need longer?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 46 by RAZD, posted 01-02-2008 6:40 PM RAZD has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 57 by Beretta, posted 01-03-2008 8:02 AM LucyTheApe has not replied
 Message 60 by Granny Magda, posted 01-03-2008 9:20 AM LucyTheApe has not replied
 Message 61 by tesla, posted 01-03-2008 10:10 AM LucyTheApe has not replied
 Message 62 by jar, posted 01-03-2008 10:34 AM LucyTheApe has replied

  
LucyTheApe
Inactive Member


Message 59 of 94 (445637)
01-03-2008 8:56 AM
Reply to: Message 50 by sidelined
01-03-2008 2:18 AM


Re: Beginning presuppostions
in response to Beretta, Sidelined writes:
Through the physics of the electromagnetic force and only different from the rusting of iron or the freezing of water in complexity of interaction between the atomic bonds of the elements present and the order of their interaction.
So life is as simple as a rusty nail or a cold winters night.
A nail oxidizes because it obeys the 2nd law of thermodynamics. Life doesn’t.
Water turns to ice because it goes through a state change below a certain temperature. Life doesn’t.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 50 by sidelined, posted 01-03-2008 2:18 AM sidelined has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 81 by sidelined, posted 01-04-2008 6:59 AM LucyTheApe has not replied

  
LucyTheApe
Inactive Member


Message 65 of 94 (445663)
01-03-2008 11:07 AM
Reply to: Message 62 by jar
01-03-2008 10:34 AM


Re: Only one part that MIGHT be on topic.
jar writes:
  1. we see that life exists today.
  2. there are fossils found buried in the ground that show that life existed in the past.
  3. looking at some of the deepest, oldest rocks we find no evidence of life.
  4. we see that life forms have changed from very simple to more complex.
  5. we see that certain lifeforms appear to show gradual changes over time.

Based on those facts, what can be concluded?
Well for a start I can conclude that you obviously presuppose that life can be and was simple. And then you call it a fact.
And also that apparitions are facts. But of course these are not supernatural apparitions, they've been conjured up by human magicians.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 62 by jar, posted 01-03-2008 10:34 AM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 67 by jar, posted 01-03-2008 11:23 AM LucyTheApe has replied
 Message 68 by Rahvin, posted 01-03-2008 11:29 AM LucyTheApe has not replied

  
LucyTheApe
Inactive Member


Message 69 of 94 (445684)
01-03-2008 11:53 AM
Reply to: Message 67 by jar
01-03-2008 11:23 AM


Re: Only one part that MIGHT be on topic.
jar writes:
Where are the presuppositions?
Evolutionist presuppositions:
  1. The theory of evolution is infallible
  2. The first mutation is not their problem it's someone elses
  3. The accuracy of dating techniques is someone elses problem
  4. Nothing outside of an evolutionists observation is or can be real
  5. There is no God, matter came into existence because of a loud noise

This message is a reply to:
 Message 67 by jar, posted 01-03-2008 11:23 AM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 70 by jar, posted 01-03-2008 12:08 PM LucyTheApe has replied
 Message 71 by Rahvin, posted 01-03-2008 12:11 PM LucyTheApe has not replied

  
LucyTheApe
Inactive Member


Message 72 of 94 (445698)
01-03-2008 1:03 PM
Reply to: Message 70 by jar
01-03-2008 12:08 PM


Re: Only one part that MIGHT be on topic.
  1. The theory of evolution is infallible

  2. The theory remains no matter how much it evolves itself. In other words evolution is the be all and end all of explaining life. (once it's actually going) No other theory can explain life. That is a supposition.
  3. The first mutation is not their problem it's someone elses

  4. It's not up to the evolutionist to explain the origin of the first life form. (Although I bet you'd have it under your umbrella if it could be proven). Life itself is a presupposition as far as the evolutionist is concerned.
  5. The accuracy of dating techniques is someone elses problem
  6. The presupposition here is that the evolutionist is not expected to confirm dates, they're supplied for them and the evolutionist accept them.
  7. Nothing outside of an evolutionists observation is or can be real

  8. This is exactly the same presupposition as No 1 on Your list.
  9. There is no God, matter came into existence because of a loud noise
  10. Evolutionists presuppose that matter existed, It is not up to them to prove it. It's just taken for granted because the astronomers told them. And it fits their agenda.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 70 by jar, posted 01-03-2008 12:08 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 73 by jar, posted 01-03-2008 1:18 PM LucyTheApe has not replied
 Message 74 by Modulous, posted 01-03-2008 1:33 PM LucyTheApe has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024