|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
|
|
|
BADecker
Legendary
 Offline
Activity: 3766
Merit: 1367
|
 |
July 22, 2017, 03:52:37 AM |
|
First, there is no disorder whatsoever. The only thing that exists is the appearance of disorder to us. Why is there no disorder? Cause and effect in everything. This means that there is no self-organization, and no emergence that wasn't in the making even though it appears that complexity came from simplicity. The thing to find is the "starter" of cause and effect. Some people suggest that Big Bang started cause and effect. But BB Theory doesn't have anywhere near enough information in it to match multitudes of complex happenings in the universe... especially regarding life and intelligence... to make it realistic.  |
|
|
|
|
The_prodigy
|
|
July 22, 2017, 08:20:00 AM |
|
First, there is no disorder whatsoever. The only thing that exists is the appearance of disorder to us. Why is there no disorder? Cause and effect in everything. This means that there is no self-organization, and no emergence that wasn't in the making even though it appears that complexity came from simplicity. The thing to find is the "starter" of cause and effect. Some people suggest that Big Bang started cause and effect. But BB Theory doesn't have anywhere near enough information in it to match multitudes of complex happenings in the universe... especially regarding life and intelligence... to make it realistic. I think that evolution really is true but sadly I think that it only applies to some. I ak a creationist and it is my belief that the reasons why there are still mo keys is that there is no need for them to evolve as nature does not need them to adapt anymore as they are alreat peak. But once the world changes then only then would they evolve again. |
|
|
|
|
IadixDev
Full Member
Offline
Activity: 322
Merit: 151
They're tactical
|
|
July 22, 2017, 12:04:08 PM
Last edit: July 22, 2017, 01:23:11 PM by IadixDev |
|
The theory from veda http://www.hinduwebsite.com/evolution.asphttp://eternalreligion.org/evolution/This explains the scientist and Vedic theory of evolution. The Scientific Theory of Evolution – Charles Darwin Theory Charles Darwin is famous worldwide for his evolutionary theory. According to his theory, one life form evolved into all the species that are existing today. Thus one body changes into another, then into another, and so on. We evolved from the animals, our closet relatives in the animal kingdom are the monkeys. The Vedic Theory of Evolution The Vedic scriptures specify an evolutionary process, but the definition is different from that of Charles Darwin. Instead of one body (species) changing to another, the Vedic knowledge is that the soul transmigrates from one body to another. There is an evolution of consciousness from one species to another. Based on the inclinations of the soul, it moves from one body to another to satisfy it’s desires and deserves. The variety of species is due to the variety of mentalities developed by the souls when in the human bodies. For example, if a human likes to eat meat, then he is better off in the animal kingdom as a tiger, where he can enjoy the best meat daily and fresh into the mouth. God is fair, just, and He satisfies our desires and deserves via the variety of species.  And even if you decode darwin and Freud, it come close to veda. And those two are the most misunderstood genius of history, darwin is not limited to ape to man, and Freud not limited to oedipe complex, those are the anti religion troll arguments. Darwin studied bio dynamics very deeply, much more than studying skeleton and ape to men, and Freud studied psychology dynamic very deeply too, and he is most famous for getting against religion saying libido is good, and would be hard to deny libido has to do with evolution, but that's deeper look into veda and evolutionary forces. But taking darwin most known "moto" about necessity & chance, knowing the depth of thinking and appropriation of theory for political mean , it require some deeper understanding. Already if you are scientific, world obey to reason, and chance is just unknown force . ( and it's also what the bible says) And the concept of necessity is meaningless without an intelligence. There is no "absolute objective necessity" if the world is just random. Necessity is always subjective. Necessity is the product of desire from a conscious being. Evolution is necessarily the product of intelligence, and recognition of desire for life to paliate it's own percieved deficiency. Freud was actually jew and a believer most likely, and it would not surprise me that darwin was also a believers, despite the uproar of the catholic hierarchy of the time. |
|
|
|
BADecker
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3766
Merit: 1367
|
|
July 22, 2017, 12:58:52 PM |
|
The theory from veda http://www.hinduwebsite.com/evolution.asphttp://eternalreligion.org/evolution/This explains the scientist and Vedic theory of evolution. The Scientific Theory of Evolution – Charles Darwin Theory Charles Darwin is famous worldwide for his evolutionary theory. According to his theory, one life form evolved into all the species that are existing today. Thus one body changes into another, then into another, and so on. We evolved from the animals, our closet relatives in the animal kingdom are the monkeys. The Vedic Theory of Evolution The Vedic scriptures specify an evolutionary process, but the definition is different from that of Charles Darwin. Instead of one body (species) changing to another, the Vedic knowledge is that the soul transmigrates from one body to another. There is an evolution of consciousness from one species to another. Based on the inclinations of the soul, it moves from one body to another to satisfy it’s desires and deserves. The variety of species is due to the variety of mentalities developed by the souls when in the human bodies. For example, if a human likes to eat meat, then he is better off in the animal kingdom as a tiger, where he can enjoy the best meat daily and fresh into the mouth. God is fair, just, and He satisfies our desires and deserves via the variety of species. Very good point. Both of these are religion. |
|
|
|
IadixDev
Full Member
Offline
Activity: 322
Merit: 151
They're tactical
|
|
July 22, 2017, 01:13:36 PM |
|
Many people would say veda is the original religion, some says jesus would have received some teaching from yogi in the east on the years he disapeard  |
|
|
|
|
Astargath
|
|
July 22, 2017, 03:14:25 PM |
|
It's kinda like taking a look at nature, and assuming there is any evolution at all. Since evolution has never been seen happening, and anything that somebody says is evolution can be shown to be other things instead, all of evolution is a make-believe story. Now, if this were the only point against evolution, the odds that evolution was false would be astronomical. But add to it things like - the probability against the parts coming together, - Irreducible Complexity, - the fact that nature must have been smarter than scientists to be able to do what scientists can't, - machinery design of nature that points to an Intelligent Designer, - cause and effect programming, - entropy that shows that things devolve rather than evolve, - the fact that in the few cases where nature makes complex chemicals that it destroys them almost immediately, - and many other things that you can find when you Google search for them... shows that the entire probability against evolution is way beyond what science considers necessary for there to even be a chance that evolution happened. Evolution isn't just a hoax. It is a grand hoax. - the probability against the parts coming together, (Which is what? What parts?)- Irreducible Complexity, (Which is debunked, you can google it for yourself)- the fact that nature must have been smarter than scientists to be able to do what scientists can't, (How is that a fact? Does nature have to be smarter than a scientist to create mountains?)- machinery design of nature that points to an Intelligent Designer, (I don't know what that means) - cause and effect programming, (?)- entropy that shows that things devolve rather than evolve, (You do not understand entropy, stop mentioning it xd)- the fact that in the few cases where nature makes complex chemicals that it destroys them almost immediately, (Such as?)- and many other things that you can find when you Google search for them... (Everything you said can be googled and you can find rebuttals to everything lol)shows that the entire probability against evolution is way beyond what science considers necessary for there to even be a chance that evolution happened. |
|
|
|
BADecker
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3766
Merit: 1367
|
|
July 22, 2017, 04:38:45 PM |
|
It's kinda like taking a look at nature, and assuming there is any evolution at all. Since evolution has never been seen happening, and anything that somebody says is evolution can be shown to be other things instead, all of evolution is a make-believe story. Now, if this were the only point against evolution, the odds that evolution was false would be astronomical. But add to it things like - the probability against the parts coming together, - Irreducible Complexity, - the fact that nature must have been smarter than scientists to be able to do what scientists can't, - machinery design of nature that points to an Intelligent Designer, - cause and effect programming, - entropy that shows that things devolve rather than evolve, - the fact that in the few cases where nature makes complex chemicals that it destroys them almost immediately, - and many other things that you can find when you Google search for them... shows that the entire probability against evolution is way beyond what science considers necessary for there to even be a chance that evolution happened. Evolution isn't just a hoax. It is a grand hoax. - the probability against the parts coming together, (Which is what? What parts?) - Any and all the parts of anything that is considered to make up so-called evolution.- Irreducible Complexity, (Which is debunked, you can google it for yourself) - The debunking is simply talk-arounds, thereby debunking itself, and showing that evolution is not real.- the fact that nature must have been smarter than scientists to be able to do what scientists can't, (How is that a fact? Does nature have to be smarter than a scientist to create mountains?) - Yes. Mountains don't appear all over the place. But the DO exist. So, let a scientist make one. Or let someone show us the process whereby they were made. Nature must be way smarter to make something that scientists cannot... especially mountains and planets and stars and you-name-it... and so smart that science is only guessing about how all those things might have formed.- machinery design of nature that points to an Intelligent Designer, (I don't know what that means) - Of course you don't. You can't seem to see the machines in nature all around us. The simple lever that we use is being used by nature all over the place, both macro, and micro.- cause and effect programming, (?) - Science could not break the laws of physics and nature even in the hydrogen bomb. All they did was put together some cause and effect actions that they were caused to do by some other cause and effect... exactly as the cause and effect had them do it... according to the physics and laws of nature. Everything is programmed to exist and act the way it does by cause and effect. Our goal should be to find out what programmed the cause and effect process, and to find out if that programmer ever travels through time, back to the beginning, to remake it a little here and there.- entropy that shows that things devolve rather than evolve, (You do not understand entropy, stop mentioning it xd) - Basically, entropy is the changing of complexity into simplicity without the loss or gain of any of the components of either. Entropy is universal on Earth. The few things we can see off-planet show us that it is universal out there as well.- the fact that in the few cases where nature makes complex chemicals that it destroys them almost immediately, (Such as?) - My mistake. Nature doesn't make complex chemicals. No evolution.- and many other things that you can find when you Google search for them... (Everything you said can be googled and you can find rebuttals to everything lol) - The rebuttals are not rebuttals. They are talk, backwards talk showing things that do not happen in nature, talk-arounds, non-proven talk, etc. The so-called rebuttals are part of the science that shows evolution to be impossible. They are part of the evolution hoax, because they are not rebuttals at all.shows that the entire probability against evolution is way beyond what science considers necessary for there to even be a chance that evolution happened. |
|
|
|
|
Astargath
|
|
July 22, 2017, 04:45:16 PM |
|
It's kinda like taking a look at nature, and assuming there is any evolution at all. Since evolution has never been seen happening, and anything that somebody says is evolution can be shown to be other things instead, all of evolution is a make-believe story. Now, if this were the only point against evolution, the odds that evolution was false would be astronomical. But add to it things like - the probability against the parts coming together, - Irreducible Complexity, - the fact that nature must have been smarter than scientists to be able to do what scientists can't, - machinery design of nature that points to an Intelligent Designer, - cause and effect programming, - entropy that shows that things devolve rather than evolve, - the fact that in the few cases where nature makes complex chemicals that it destroys them almost immediately, - and many other things that you can find when you Google search for them... shows that the entire probability against evolution is way beyond what science considers necessary for there to even be a chance that evolution happened. Evolution isn't just a hoax. It is a grand hoax. - the probability against the parts coming together, (Which is what? What parts?) - Any and all the parts of anything that is considered to make up so-called evolution.- Irreducible Complexity, (Which is debunked, you can google it for yourself) - The debunking is simply talk-arounds, thereby debunking itself, and showing that evolution is not real.- the fact that nature must have been smarter than scientists to be able to do what scientists can't, (How is that a fact? Does nature have to be smarter than a scientist to create mountains?) - Yes. Mountains don't appear all over the place. But the DO exist. So, let a scientist make one. Or let someone show us the process whereby they were made. Nature must be way smarter to make something that scientists cannot... especially mountains and planets and stars and you-name-it... and so smart that science is only guessing about how all those things might have formed.- machinery design of nature that points to an Intelligent Designer, (I don't know what that means) - Of course you don't. You can't seem to see the machines in nature all around us. The simple lever that we use is being used by nature all over the place, both macro, and micro.- cause and effect programming, (?) - Science could not break the laws of physics and nature even in the hydrogen bomb. All they did was put together some cause and effect actions that they were caused to do by some other cause and effect... exactly as the cause and effect had them do it... according to the physics and laws of nature. Everything is programmed to exist and act the way it does by cause and effect. Our goal should be to find out what programmed the cause and effect process, and to find out if that programmer ever travels through time, back to the beginning, to remake it a little here and there.- entropy that shows that things devolve rather than evolve, (You do not understand entropy, stop mentioning it xd) - Basically, entropy is the changing of complexity into simplicity without the loss or gain of any of the components of either. Entropy is universal on Earth. The few things we can see off-planet show us that it is universal out there as well.- the fact that in the few cases where nature makes complex chemicals that it destroys them almost immediately, (Such as?) - My mistake. Nature doesn't make complex chemicals. No evolution.- and many other things that you can find when you Google search for them... (Everything you said can be googled and you can find rebuttals to everything lol) - The rebuttals are not rebuttals. They are talk, backwards talk showing things that do not happen in nature, talk-arounds, non-proven talk, etc. The so-called rebuttals are part of the science that shows evolution to be impossible. They are part of the evolution hoax, because they are not rebuttals at all.shows that the entire probability against evolution is way beyond what science considers necessary for there to even be a chance that evolution happened. Your arguments are not arguments, they are talk, backwards talk showing that they are false. Your arguments are simply talk-arounds therefore debunking themselves and showing that evolution is real |
|
|
|
|
Sweetbtc
|
|
July 22, 2017, 05:10:00 PM |
|
I thought that this might be one of the craziest things I've ever heard but then I forgot about something else that I saw on the internet.
|
|
|
|
BADecker
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3766
Merit: 1367
|
|
July 22, 2017, 05:17:16 PM |
|
It's kinda like taking a look at nature, and assuming there is any evolution at all. Since evolution has never been seen happening, and anything that somebody says is evolution can be shown to be other things instead, all of evolution is a make-believe story. Now, if this were the only point against evolution, the odds that evolution was false would be astronomical. But add to it things like - the probability against the parts coming together, - Irreducible Complexity, - the fact that nature must have been smarter than scientists to be able to do what scientists can't, - machinery design of nature that points to an Intelligent Designer, - cause and effect programming, - entropy that shows that things devolve rather than evolve, - the fact that in the few cases where nature makes complex chemicals that it destroys them almost immediately, - and many other things that you can find when you Google search for them... shows that the entire probability against evolution is way beyond what science considers necessary for there to even be a chance that evolution happened. Evolution isn't just a hoax. It is a grand hoax. - the probability against the parts coming together, (Which is what? What parts?) - Any and all the parts of anything that is considered to make up so-called evolution.- Irreducible Complexity, (Which is debunked, you can google it for yourself) - The debunking is simply talk-arounds, thereby debunking itself, and showing that evolution is not real.- the fact that nature must have been smarter than scientists to be able to do what scientists can't, (How is that a fact? Does nature have to be smarter than a scientist to create mountains?) - Yes. Mountains don't appear all over the place. But the DO exist. So, let a scientist make one. Or let someone show us the process whereby they were made. Nature must be way smarter to make something that scientists cannot... especially mountains and planets and stars and you-name-it... and so smart that science is only guessing about how all those things might have formed.- machinery design of nature that points to an Intelligent Designer, (I don't know what that means) - Of course you don't. You can't seem to see the machines in nature all around us. The simple lever that we use is being used by nature all over the place, both macro, and micro.- cause and effect programming, (?) - Science could not break the laws of physics and nature even in the hydrogen bomb. All they did was put together some cause and effect actions that they were caused to do by some other cause and effect... exactly as the cause and effect had them do it... according to the physics and laws of nature. Everything is programmed to exist and act the way it does by cause and effect. Our goal should be to find out what programmed the cause and effect process, and to find out if that programmer ever travels through time, back to the beginning, to remake it a little here and there.- entropy that shows that things devolve rather than evolve, (You do not understand entropy, stop mentioning it xd) - Basically, entropy is the changing of complexity into simplicity without the loss or gain of any of the components of either. Entropy is universal on Earth. The few things we can see off-planet show us that it is universal out there as well.- the fact that in the few cases where nature makes complex chemicals that it destroys them almost immediately, (Such as?) - My mistake. Nature doesn't make complex chemicals. No evolution.- and many other things that you can find when you Google search for them... (Everything you said can be googled and you can find rebuttals to everything lol) - The rebuttals are not rebuttals. They are talk, backwards talk showing things that do not happen in nature, talk-arounds, non-proven talk, etc. The so-called rebuttals are part of the science that shows evolution to be impossible. They are part of the evolution hoax, because they are not rebuttals at all.shows that the entire probability against evolution is way beyond what science considers necessary for there to even be a chance that evolution happened. Your arguments are not arguments, they are talk, backwards talk showing that they are false. Your arguments are simply talk-arounds therefore debunking themselves and showing that evolution is real If this is what you truly think, pick a point, and explain what is wrong with it. Using the words of other people to do this shows you do not personally, really know. |
|
|
|
|
Sweetbtc
|
|
July 22, 2017, 05:28:07 PM |
|
During an interview with a woman about that 37 Moon thing which of course was a hoax, she actually stated that she believes that there is no such thing as space. She actually said that space was a government conspiracy made up and that space itself did not exist.
|
|
|
|
BADecker
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3766
Merit: 1367
|
|
July 22, 2017, 05:32:54 PM |
|
During an interview with a woman about that 37 Moon thing which of course was a hoax, she actually stated that she believes that there is no such thing as space. She actually said that space was a government conspiracy made up and that space itself did not exist.
You really need to read every last word of the Flat Earth thread - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1009045.0. |
|
|
|
|
Astargath
|
|
July 22, 2017, 07:13:35 PM |
|
It's kinda like taking a look at nature, and assuming there is any evolution at all. Since evolution has never been seen happening, and anything that somebody says is evolution can be shown to be other things instead, all of evolution is a make-believe story. Now, if this were the only point against evolution, the odds that evolution was false would be astronomical. But add to it things like - the probability against the parts coming together, - Irreducible Complexity, - the fact that nature must have been smarter than scientists to be able to do what scientists can't, - machinery design of nature that points to an Intelligent Designer, - cause and effect programming, - entropy that shows that things devolve rather than evolve, - the fact that in the few cases where nature makes complex chemicals that it destroys them almost immediately, - and many other things that you can find when you Google search for them... shows that the entire probability against evolution is way beyond what science considers necessary for there to even be a chance that evolution happened. Evolution isn't just a hoax. It is a grand hoax. - the probability against the parts coming together, (Which is what? What parts?) - Any and all the parts of anything that is considered to make up so-called evolution.- Irreducible Complexity, (Which is debunked, you can google it for yourself) - The debunking is simply talk-arounds, thereby debunking itself, and showing that evolution is not real.- the fact that nature must have been smarter than scientists to be able to do what scientists can't, (How is that a fact? Does nature have to be smarter than a scientist to create mountains?) - Yes. Mountains don't appear all over the place. But the DO exist. So, let a scientist make one. Or let someone show us the process whereby they were made. Nature must be way smarter to make something that scientists cannot... especially mountains and planets and stars and you-name-it... and so smart that science is only guessing about how all those things might have formed.- machinery design of nature that points to an Intelligent Designer, (I don't know what that means) - Of course you don't. You can't seem to see the machines in nature all around us. The simple lever that we use is being used by nature all over the place, both macro, and micro.- cause and effect programming, (?) - Science could not break the laws of physics and nature even in the hydrogen bomb. All they did was put together some cause and effect actions that they were caused to do by some other cause and effect... exactly as the cause and effect had them do it... according to the physics and laws of nature. Everything is programmed to exist and act the way it does by cause and effect. Our goal should be to find out what programmed the cause and effect process, and to find out if that programmer ever travels through time, back to the beginning, to remake it a little here and there.- entropy that shows that things devolve rather than evolve, (You do not understand entropy, stop mentioning it xd) - Basically, entropy is the changing of complexity into simplicity without the loss or gain of any of the components of either. Entropy is universal on Earth. The few things we can see off-planet show us that it is universal out there as well.- the fact that in the few cases where nature makes complex chemicals that it destroys them almost immediately, (Such as?) - My mistake. Nature doesn't make complex chemicals. No evolution.- and many other things that you can find when you Google search for them... (Everything you said can be googled and you can find rebuttals to everything lol) - The rebuttals are not rebuttals. They are talk, backwards talk showing things that do not happen in nature, talk-arounds, non-proven talk, etc. The so-called rebuttals are part of the science that shows evolution to be impossible. They are part of the evolution hoax, because they are not rebuttals at all.shows that the entire probability against evolution is way beyond what science considers necessary for there to even be a chance that evolution happened. Your arguments are not arguments, they are talk, backwards talk showing that they are false. Your arguments are simply talk-arounds therefore debunking themselves and showing that evolution is real If this is what you truly think, pick a point, and explain what is wrong with it. Using the words of other people to do this shows you do not personally, really know. If that is what you think, pick a rebuttal and explain what is wrong with it using your own words and not other creationists who just use the same flawed arguments. |
|
|
|
IadixDev
Full Member
Offline
Activity: 322
Merit: 151
They're tactical
|
|
July 22, 2017, 07:30:44 PM |
|
During an interview with a woman about that 37 Moon thing which of course was a hoax, she actually stated that she believes that there is no such thing as space. She actually said that space was a government conspiracy made up and that space itself did not exist.
There is no spoon !  |
|
|
|
|
Chip-Dale
|
|
July 22, 2017, 08:50:17 PM |
|
During an interview with a woman about that 37 Moon thing which of course was a hoax, she actually stated that she believes that there is no such thing as space. She actually said that space was a government conspiracy made up and that space itself did not exist.
There is no spoon ! I do not understand. What is not yet, but that all the negation of the cosmos and the round earth, this is perhaps delirium of Pure water. |
|
|
|
IadixDev
Full Member
Offline
Activity: 322
Merit: 151
They're tactical
|
|
July 22, 2017, 08:53:52 PM |
|
During an interview with a woman about that 37 Moon thing which of course was a hoax, she actually stated that she believes that there is no such thing as space. She actually said that space was a government conspiracy made up and that space itself did not exist.
There is no spoon ! I do not understand. What is not yet, but that all the negation of the cosmos and the round earth, this is perhaps delirium of Pure water. Everything is an illusion It's zen principle lol Moreover, Zen firmly believes that nobody knows the answers to those questions and that they are impossible to answer because of our limited condition. Life is a dream, a grand illusion that we perceive through the filter of our personality, our experiences, our ego. This is a great piece of theater in which we do not see all the actors and in which we barely understand the role of those that we see.
Zen gladly accepts the idea that men are only men and nothing more. Man, being what he is, cannot answer life's impossible questions without falling into the trap of illusion. No one knows the answers to the deep questions about life and death.The spoon is from matrix when neo see the Oracle with the Kids trying to bend the spoon, saying like if you want to bend the spoon, you must change your perception of reality or something The final conclusion is there is no spoon at all. The only thing that exists is the concept of the spoon in the mind. It's more or less what they say in "What the bleep do we know" |
|
|
|
xsudo23
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 35
Merit: 0
|
|
July 22, 2017, 09:04:11 PM |
|
So you are saying that two people just popped on the Earth surface sent by some mythological creature? And what's the source a book written by humans? Obviously humans developed from some kind of organism just like any other creatures on these planet. It doesn't matter which book you follow blindly (Bible, Quran,Bhagvat Geeta, etc). But there's isn't a single theory to prove that the contents of these books are right let alone facts.
I never stated in this post that God isn't there. I'm agnostic. That's why I live by facts and rational thinking.
Well thats my opinion.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Samthehero
|
|
July 22, 2017, 09:23:37 PM |
|
Why are you still around when there are intelligent human beings? |
|
|
|
|
|
Samthehero
|
|
July 22, 2017, 09:26:23 PM |
|
I do not believe in the theory of evolution , Because the theory is not clear
No, it's because you're a fanatic! |
|
|
|
|
|
