Customer Discussions > religion discussion forum

staunch defenders of evolution theory: allergic to the present day?


Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 76-100 of 153 posts in this discussion
In reply to an earlier post on 28 Jan 2013 11:17:44 GMT
G. Heron says:
I rest my case.

In reply to an earlier post on 28 Jan 2013 11:19:36 GMT
Last edited by the author on 28 Jan 2013 11:27:07 GMT
For a righteous cause. Is that a problem?

"true true. he doesn't deserve a voice. He doesn't even appreciate our institutions of Alan Sugar or X-factor! #Dropmeout. Go back to your own country you looney!...
burn the witch! burn the witch!" *breaks into national anthem*

Posted on 28 Jan 2013 11:23:48 GMT
Last edited by the author on 28 Jan 2013 11:24:17 GMT
you're like Alan Sugar and Richard Branson's foot-soldiers. Staunch defenders of da faif. Hoping to be "the elect".

In reply to an earlier post on 28 Jan 2013 11:35:10 GMT
AJ Murray says:
-"everything except darwinism is considered "a wrong turn into crazytown" by darwinists. it's exclusive and is pumped into the schools and institutions wholesale. It gives no real choice to believe in anything different with regards human origin, present process of so-called "natural selection", and your ultimate destination. It guides these areas exclusively. A darwinist derides alternatives, for fear of not being one of the so-called "elect" himself. For fear of other darwinists singling him out. Like a hive mentality."

So you think that discovering facts about human biological origins should somehow be discouraged? Whatever for? As someone else has pointed out we have plenty of theories, and no-one suggests that these should become some model for human society.

-"You'll certainly not be a star footballer, or alan sugar's apprentice, or win x-factor if you carry on like that! The horror! The shame!"

As i said, whilst crazytown can be an intersting diversion, you don't wanna live there.

-"And you say "evolutionary success" is determined by offspring? Well, indirectly. Also determined by being able to adapt to environment. which in a present day human context (note: present-day), (and where darwinist theory pervades), that generally means, vaguely, unbelief and capitalism."

So we can add adaption to the list of things you don't understand about evolution. Natch.

-"which translates to hoarding cash by any means necessary even if it means injustice. Since the machiavellian wins."

Only in your mind.

-"Charity is certainly the exception, not the rule. When the going gets tough, darwinism says its time for austerity measures AKA selfishness. Recession. Contraction. Survival of "the fittest", AKA, the capitalist."

Where does darwinism say this?

-"Still with me?"

No, you left me at the outskirts of crazytown.

-"Do you disagree with anything above?"

All of it.

In reply to an earlier post on 28 Jan 2013 11:37:50 GMT
AJ Murray says:
So now we know what TULIP is, basically a summary of a particular religious doctrine that was formulated from the Bible and at a time when evolutionary biology was unknown.

And for you this represents darwinism 'AKA' capitalism...

Yeah. I suggest you take a lie down in a darkened room until your demons disperse gtL.

Posted on 28 Jan 2013 11:54:54 GMT
can't these darwinists see they're just proving to me the brainless thuggishness which darwinism leads to?

Can''t these folk at least address the OP? The best you folk can all do is insult me, mock me, single me out and try to gang up? Bullying? I understand ... so fearful of being singled out yourselves.

The thing you're forgetting is that you're divided in everything except your darwinian thuggish blindness. If anything, you can be thankful for me being here, since I provide you with a temporary illusion of unity, whilst you all scapegoat and lynch me unrighteously. I'll still probably be more righteous than you in my day to day life.

Just make sure to keep evading the topic.

In reply to an earlier post on 28 Jan 2013 11:56:41 GMT
"formulated from the bible"?
don't give up your day job.

Posted on 28 Jan 2013 11:58:50 GMT
Last edited by the author on 28 Jan 2013 12:08:28 GMT
"Don't complain about it! It was predestined! Resign yourself to your fate in silence, witch!"

Darwinism gives you the green light to act this way. How does it feel? good? Do you get a rush of blood through your system? Like fighting on a saturday night after a pi**-up? Real macho guys.

All I'm doing is holding a mirror up to yourself. Not my fault if you're averse to your reflection. At least defend your position through reason so we might learn something, other than the tribal brutishness you unbelievers are so obviously partial to. Surprise me.

In reply to an earlier post on 28 Jan 2013 12:29:26 GMT
Ian says:
"Just because there's evidence, does that mean we have to blindly adhere to it?"

It depends what you mean by blindly adhere to it.

If you're comfortable telling lies, then I guess it'd be fine to go around telling people it isn't true.

If we accept that evolution by natural selection is true, do we have to apply it to every area of our lives/society? No. Only an idiot would do that.

If I were to try to make myself a successful individual by natural selection I would have as many children with my wife as I believe we can successfully raise to adulthood. I would also have as many children as possible by as many other women as possible but I wouldn't waste my time, energy or resources supporting them. In addition I'd make sure that my children were well-equipped to survive and succeed in the world and make sure that other peoples' children were ill-equipped - by becoming a teacher, headmaster or secretary of state for education and deliberately being terrible at it thus ruining everyone else's childrens' chances of competing successfully with my many, many children.

In reply to an earlier post on 28 Jan 2013 12:42:16 GMT
Last edited by the author on 28 Jan 2013 14:06:53 GMT
RE: "If we accept that evolution by natural selection is true, do we have to apply it to every area of our lives/society? No. Only an idiot would do that."

or a child who was brainwashed incessantly by it since birth and knows no other acceptable or indeed permissible philosophy. why are tribalist sports so popular?

RE: "If I were to try to make myself a successful individual by natural selection I would have as many children with my wife as I believe we can successfully raise to adulthood. I would also have as many children as possible by as many other women as possible but I wouldn't waste my time, energy or resources supporting them. In addition I'd make sure that my children were well-equipped to survive and succeed in the world and make sure that other peoples' children were ill-equipped - by becoming a teacher, headmaster or secretary of state for education and deliberately being terrible at it thus ruining everyone else's childrens' chances of competing successfully with my many, many children."

Now we're getting somewhere. I especially like the terms you're using. Competition, etc.

Let me ask you. If you had the power, influence, and shrewd heart to fulfill those things, is there anything in darwinism that would plead for you to put the brakes on and not decimate the populace like a tyrant?

Is the "selfish gene" not that little voice that would say "press the button, you're out for yourself, you'll be a hero, you'll WIN". what is there in darwinism to stop people back-stabbing out of self-interest?

In reply to an earlier post on 28 Jan 2013 12:48:00 GMT
Ian says:
" is there anything in darwinism that would plead for you to put the brakes on and not decimate the populace like a tyrant?"

No. Because it's not a philosophy; it's an explanation of how the variety of life we see around us came to be. As I said before, if you don't like that explanation and feel that the world would be a better place if you lied and told everyone it didn't happen then feel free.

Nor does Heisenberg's uncertainty principle tell me to behaviour better than the example I gave. That doesn't make it untrue. Nigella Lawson's How to be a Domestic Goddess doesn't tell me how to live for the benefit of others either - but that doesn't make the recipes it contains inherently evil.

So can I just confirm, am i right in thinking that you accept that Darwin's theory of evolution by natural selection is correct in that living things have evolved over time by natural selection, but you feel it has implications for modern society which you don't like?

In reply to an earlier post on 28 Jan 2013 12:48:11 GMT
AJ Murray says:
The Wealth of Nations; first published 1776
On the Origin of Species; first published 1859

John Calvin 1509 - 1564

Seriously gtL, are you really suggesting that John Calvin (a theologian) used either of the two in formulating his creed?

In reply to an earlier post on 28 Jan 2013 12:49:40 GMT
Ian says:
You misunderstand the concept of the selfish gene. It is not a gene which makes you selfish. Ironically there are many examples in nature of where altruism benefits and organism and increases its success in terms of the numbers of its genes which are in existence.

Posted on 28 Jan 2013 12:52:34 GMT
AJ Murray says:
staunch defenders of a conspiracy theory: allergic to the facts?

In reply to an earlier post on 28 Jan 2013 12:53:41 GMT
you, you mean?

In reply to an earlier post on 28 Jan 2013 12:55:00 GMT
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

In reply to an earlier post on 28 Jan 2013 12:59:46 GMT
Last edited by the author on 28 Jan 2013 13:00:19 GMT
Dan Fante says:
Perhaps we in the UK should take our lead from countries where religious belief is much more popular than here. I'm thinking of perhaps America or, better still, Saudi Arabia. You know, somewhere where there is no selfish capitalism at work.

In reply to an earlier post on 28 Jan 2013 13:10:33 GMT
AJ Murray says:
I cannot give you too little credit for your brain farts.

Wasn't Darwin raised a Unitarian?

In reply to an earlier post on 28 Jan 2013 13:26:36 GMT
Ian says:
"Perhaps we in the UK should take our lead from countries where religious belief is much more popular than here. I'm thinking of perhaps America or, better still, Saudi Arabia. You know, somewhere where there is no selfish capitalism at work. "

You mean countries where surveys suggest the majority of the population don't believe in evolution by natural selection but do believe the universe was created by God/Allah? Those places must have wonderful societies which have rejected capitalism and embraced much better measures of success...

In reply to an earlier post on 28 Jan 2013 13:32:07 GMT
Dan Fante says:
It's almost as though capitalism lies at the very heart of human nature ;-)

Posted on 28 Jan 2013 13:48:17 GMT
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

In reply to an earlier post on 28 Jan 2013 14:03:02 GMT
Last edited by the author on 28 Jan 2013 14:05:47 GMT
the thing I'm trying to show is that there is more than one way to live out your life. the problem with darwinism is that it is exclusive and all-consuming and produces minds which are closed to any other "tracks" on which to run. It's one philosophy. It's not THE philosophy. The problem is that darwinists literally are unaware that it is just that. A philosophy. An ideological framework. A launching-pad for other ideas.

You folks keep insisting its not a philosophy etc. etc. but that's just nonsense. You're too caught up in the "atheism is a negation of belief" argument. Too addicted to it. Very narrow-minded.

I already *know* that there is more than one ideology to choose from. I just wish you people wouldn't use yours to justify oppression of non-darwinists. Because at the end of the day, you cannot justify yourselves by any way other than by making appeals to barbarism. Darwinism spawns unreasonable tyranny. Thuggishness. Brutishness.

Darwinism leads to tribalist tyranny. there's no two ways about it. You have to be in denial to not see that. It's manifest all over unbelieving society. I guess it's a case of not seeing the wood for the trees, then. (Or choosing not to see the woods, for the sake of being counted a tree, rather. Living in denial of the wretchedness of darwinist "liberty". The Calvinist elect. Perseverance of the "saints".).

In reply to an earlier post on 28 Jan 2013 14:09:55 GMT
Norm Deplume says:
Wrong.

The line is "Infamy! Infamy! They've all got it in for me!"

Posted on 28 Jan 2013 14:12:42 GMT
Dan Fante says:
"the problem with darwinism is that it is exclusive and all-consuming and produces minds which are closed to any other "tracks" "
Not like religion then!

Posted on 28 Jan 2013 14:14:13 GMT
easytiger says:
Irony. If it wasn't for the christian (of which I'm not) values of the western world, Darwin's survival of the fittest would have mean't you dogmatic evolutionists getting a good kicking and sweeping up.
[Add comment]
Add your own message to the discussion
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Prompts for sign-in
 


More Customer Discussions

Most active community forums
Most active product forums

Amazon forums
 

This discussion

Discussion in:  religion discussion forum
Participants:  18
Total posts:  153
Initial post:  26 Jan 2013
Latest post:  30 Jan 2013

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.

Search Customer Discussions