Pope Benedict admits evidence for evolution

[Matabele]

:lol:

I didn't realise you'd be so chastened by being so badly shown up.

And all it took was a few one-liners.

Mr 1 in 50 billion. :lol:

 

[Matabele]

Even your hero Dawkins wasn't dumb enough to fall into the trap you sprung for yourself Dan.

 

[Dan]

Nothing to do with being shown up you havent even ****ing come close to that, it is your complete and utter inibility to listen and respond to FACt and what is written that frustrates me. it is akin to speaking to a brick wall, and not something i will waste my time with.


I suggest you read and re-read the topic in its entirety then think about it. Then read again, have a think, pick up a book like say "The Atheist Manifesto" then read my link to the big bang theory and then think a bit more then try again

 

[Matabele]

I just re-read part of the god delusion and found that i slightly misquoted. There are a billion billion planets in the universe not that can support life, but because we exist that means there is at least a 1 in a billion chance. which means that there life should exist on a billion planets

part of the full quote
-----------
Suppose life's origin on a planet took place through a hugely improbable stroke of luck, so improbable that it happens on only one in a billion planets. The National Science Foundation would laugh at any chemist whose proposed research had only a one in a hundred chance of succeeding, let alone one in a billion. Yet, given that there are at least a billion billion planets in the universe, even such absurdly low odds as these will yield life on a billion planets. And - this is where the famous anthropic principle comes in - Earth has to be one of them, because here we are.

:wall:

 

[Fro]

Someones crying, lord, kumbaya
Someones crying, lord, kumbaya
Someones crying, lord, kumbaya
Oh lord, kumbaya

Just thought someone (or 2 someones in this case) needed a hug

 

[Matabele]

Did you expect anything else Fro?

 

[Dan]

Matas you are seriously testing my patience. I did not "cock" up even once. I opened the floor to further discussion by presenting that the big bang singularity is a Singularity, how that is anything against my argument I do not know.

You do know the length of time between the big bang and now. And that life was not sprung out of the big bang, BILLIONS of years and millions of chemical reactions passed between then.

That still gives us a billion billion planets that we current know of within the range of our telescopes, it also provides us with the chance that YOU previously provided of a 1 in a billion chance of life evolving by "random chance" that still gives us 1 billion chances.

I dont think i could make that any clearer but I still see you wont understand.

 

[Matabele]

What is your definition of "life" Dan?

 

[Dan]

That is not a simple answer, I also fear that whatever I write I will be explaining for 10 - 20 - 30 posts because you dont understand scientific method.

So make your point and we will assume a black and white definition for now

 

[Matabele]

So your stance is that "life" is a new sentence?

 

[Dan]

No and I am not allowing you to put words in my mouth.

You make your full point and then ask a question, Dont use cheap lawyer tricks.

 

[ManlyBacker]

It is a matter of the fact you have not once debated a topic you have used 1 line answers and shown no understanding of what is being said, just tried to truck on toward a point that only you know no matter the answer placed in front of you.

It is a typical approach most often employed by scientology, one I will waste no further time on

This is hitting the nail right on the head. It is like someone in the backseat saying "are we there yet?" every 3 minutes but not bothering to look at any map or at the current surroundings.

Dan is spot on with his definition of Singularity and anyone who has read anything knows that that is the term used. There is String Theory which also looks at the possibility of existence prior to Singularity, but just a theory.

One sentence statements questioning the definition of existence, definition of life, the number of planets that could have life, misinterpreting the Singularity event all miss where this discussion started with ID and evolution and are just a smokescreen so you don't have to think too hard or put up any ideas.

You claimed that we believe that theism and evolution are mutually exclusive. I know I do and have spent a bit of time explaining why I believe that is so. You haven't presented anything at all in defense of your proposition that they are not.

8)