Kind of rude to take one guy's off the cuff thoughts in a field he clearly doesn't think hard on and treat them like the gospel.
As a "Christian Fundamentalist" I believe that God created the world. I believe He created it to grow and adapt, which is why we have so many variations of evolved creatures that clearly spring from the same mold.
The issue I have with "evolution" as it's presented, is that it's putting an awful, AWFUL lot of blind faith in random chance creating, from scratch, an incalculable number of incredibly complex and precise biological systems that work perfectly in tandem, over and over and over again without collapsing on its own chaotic entropy. You can't just win the lottery once and be done with it, because every system is so deeply intertwined with each other. I can buy a creature becoming fatter and furrier in response to cold. I can buy an environment encouraging stripes and spots to blend in. I cannot buy the incredibly complex and barely understood language that is DNA spawning from the aether and facilitating universal rules for all life on this planet without being destroyed by the inevitable unfavorable conditions.
They say infinite monkeys will write Shakespeare if given infinite time. Number one, nobody thinks we have infinite time. Number two, even entertaining the slight possibility that they could get close, there is going to be an impossible number of typos as they go, because a million monkeys don't care about unimportant little things like formatting and spelling and grammar. The very things that make the concept of language possible in the first place. They can't just get lucky once, they have to get lucky again, and again, and again, and again, ad nauseum, or else the whole thing has to be thrown out and started over.
You just proved OP's point. Your ignorance of the basics of biology probably explain your beliefs.
Amino acids did not come from some "aether", they are small simple molecules with atomic masses around 100amu and around 15 atoms. They have been found on lifeless objects such as including comets and nebula. Since amino acids are self organizing, life only has to get lucky ONCE, and 4 billion years, 10^21 kg of water, and thousands to billions of interactions per second per kg is a lot of chances to get lucky (a lower bound of 10^41 chances, 10^60 is more likely). A protein that self replicates in a warm environment with lots of building blocks would quickly become more complex simple due to the number of replications. The fossil record show that meters thick algal mats covered the earth in the Precambrian. That is a tremendous amount of building blocks for more complex life.
In contrast, your strawman of the Shakespeare monkeys do in fact have to get lucky around 26^198000 times to make Hamlet, which is not even close to comparable, since words do not self organize. A fair comparison would be a room full of GPT-3 models asked to write hamlet because that is equivalent to self organizing words.
Finally you assertions that
incredibly complex and precise biological systems that work perfectly in tandem, over and over and over again without collapsing on its own chaotic entropy.
is just bullshit. Biological systems aren't precise, let alone perfect. They fail early and often. For an easy example, just look at the number of people with moles, or who have to wear glasses, or who are stuck down with incurable diseases before they are even 10, let alone the number of failed fertilizations of eggs that are then lost. You christcucks just handwave all the failures of biology away as "its only god's will."
Calling me stupid and trying to buffalo me with "statistics." Cute. Lemme guess. You're at the top of your field and I should just trust the experts, right? Clearly, we know precisely what the exact state of the world was like by looking intently at the makeup of rocks. Puh-lease. At absolute best, you've explained how a monkey could possibly, (POSSIBLY, mind you. You're still talking in hypotheticals and guesses, nobody has scientifically observed this happening on the scale you demand.) get its hands on a typewriter. Now riddle me this, Bio-Man. Where does the DNA come from? You say "Oh, the amino-acids just self-organize into the patterns that make life, and somehow, that also comes together to form the script that tells it to eat, reproduce, and survive. And that just keeps going ad nauseum, building on itself, getting new information by lucky chance mutations, over and over and over again, to create the incredibly complex biodiversity we have today. Just because."
You make this massive jump from "Here's where you get the typewriter' to "Here's why the typewriter is capable of typing in English, or even functional in the first place." Without explaining anything beyond "Just trust me bro, it's the ONLY way it could happen!" I thought we were above "Trusting the science" here, but I guess not.
Biological systems aren't precise, let alone perfect. They fail early and often.
Ah yes. Because a margin for error isn't something every good engineer puts into their creations. Because a car breaking down means it's not a miracle of engineering. Wear and tear over time? Cracks and defects in the windshield? A defective part getting missed on the assembly line? Some retard trying to build the stupid thing while drunk? Some natural disaster destroying the factory? Clearly, the Engineer is at fault for every possible failure state, and there are no external factors that could lead to mistakes or accidents. Stupid Engineer. He should have taken away that pesky free will and just made a bunch of perfect, soulless animatronics. Then EVERYTHING would have been perfect. Nobody would rebel and lead to a fallen world where there are terrible consequences!
So clearly, this Ferrari magically appeared on the street. Because ferrous materials naturally attract to each other, and simple machines like pulleys and levers came together to naturally form a crude wheeled platform. That then evolved an internal combustion engine, rubber tires, Headlights and optional heated seating. But remember, it's not a precisely designed machine, because the radio died, and one of its headlights is out.
Calling me stupid and trying to buffalo me with "statistics." Cute. Lemme guess. You're at the top of your field and I should just trust the experts, right?
Brother, his response was about as far from credentialism as you can get.
He may have been rude and combative, and take issue with that if you will. But that's not justification to stoop to putting words in people's mouths.
It's not "just trust me bro" just to list a few key fundamentals and presume understanding of the others, rather than write out the 1000 page book it would take to explain the whole process in detail. Frankly a conversation between two people with very different levels of experience in a field can only happen in mutual good faith and patience, and even then it's like giving free college level 1-on-1 tuition, it's not something you can expect to be given out glibly.
For example the car analogy vis the imprecision of biology. Engines are precise, but they have still have defects and failures occasionally. It's how they respond to failures that makes them a precision system. A broken timing belt on a running engine is an "everything's fucked" moment, but if it were as error tolerant as most biological systems are it would self assemble itself into a smaller engine with a weird tumor of broken parts grafted onto the side. Automotive engineering works because to get a result they do something with a 99.999+% success rate once or twice. Most biological systems work because they do something with a 90% success rate 10,000 times and sweep out the junk. There are so many biological systems that are basically just junk collection or defect recycling, even down at the simplest amoeba level. But it's hard to explain that difference succinctly if someone doesn't have experience with the specifics.
It's a shambling, duct taped mess of non-standard parts from lawnmowers and old shopping carts, trying to go as fast as possible while using the least amount of stuff possible. Its an improvised work-in-progress with whatever materials you can use. The human eye isn't a perfect machine, it's a mix of light detection sensors from many species; some of which could stand to be optimized for humans (blind spots, reversed retina that had to be compensated for inside the brain, etc)
The creator set the laws that turn the relative lump of coal that is an amoeba into the diamond that is sentient creatures using the application of evolutionary pressure
This is mainstream Christian belief. Some people are willing to say evolution is part of God's intelligent design, but will make a distinction between animal and human evolution.
Christian fundamentalism is enslaving the right by driving away anyone who isn't an extremist retard like them. Matter of fact, not believing in evolution is a leftist belief, cuz of means all races are equal
Since this is kia2, I'm going to assume you support gatekeeping with our hobbies. Why wouldn't you want to gatekeep matters related to your soul?
One guy saying he doesn't buy into evolution isn't affecting anyone at all. Gibson isn't a church official and doesn't hold any public office. How is his opinion enslaving anyone?
The replies and the tweet itself are calling him based for that. It's a clear attempt to intellectually kneecap the right and turn them into jihadis. I want to gatekeep the fuck of of that.
I wish someone would explain to me why people delete posts where they get downvoted, (unless it's just bad faith or to salve their bruised egos. Those I understand, though I think they're cowardly.)
Kind of rude to take one guy's off the cuff thoughts in a field he clearly doesn't think hard on and treat them like the gospel.
As a "Christian Fundamentalist" I believe that God created the world. I believe He created it to grow and adapt, which is why we have so many variations of evolved creatures that clearly spring from the same mold.
The issue I have with "evolution" as it's presented, is that it's putting an awful, AWFUL lot of blind faith in random chance creating, from scratch, an incalculable number of incredibly complex and precise biological systems that work perfectly in tandem, over and over and over again without collapsing on its own chaotic entropy. You can't just win the lottery once and be done with it, because every system is so deeply intertwined with each other. I can buy a creature becoming fatter and furrier in response to cold. I can buy an environment encouraging stripes and spots to blend in. I cannot buy the incredibly complex and barely understood language that is DNA spawning from the aether and facilitating universal rules for all life on this planet without being destroyed by the inevitable unfavorable conditions.
They say infinite monkeys will write Shakespeare if given infinite time. Number one, nobody thinks we have infinite time. Number two, even entertaining the slight possibility that they could get close, there is going to be an impossible number of typos as they go, because a million monkeys don't care about unimportant little things like formatting and spelling and grammar. The very things that make the concept of language possible in the first place. They can't just get lucky once, they have to get lucky again, and again, and again, and again, ad nauseum, or else the whole thing has to be thrown out and started over.
You just proved OP's point. Your ignorance of the basics of biology probably explain your beliefs.
Amino acids did not come from some "aether", they are small simple molecules with atomic masses around 100amu and around 15 atoms. They have been found on lifeless objects such as including comets and nebula. Since amino acids are self organizing, life only has to get lucky ONCE, and 4 billion years, 10^21 kg of water, and thousands to billions of interactions per second per kg is a lot of chances to get lucky (a lower bound of 10^41 chances, 10^60 is more likely). A protein that self replicates in a warm environment with lots of building blocks would quickly become more complex simple due to the number of replications. The fossil record show that meters thick algal mats covered the earth in the Precambrian. That is a tremendous amount of building blocks for more complex life.
In contrast, your strawman of the Shakespeare monkeys do in fact have to get lucky around 26^198000 times to make Hamlet, which is not even close to comparable, since words do not self organize. A fair comparison would be a room full of GPT-3 models asked to write hamlet because that is equivalent to self organizing words.
Finally you assertions that
is just bullshit. Biological systems aren't precise, let alone perfect. They fail early and often. For an easy example, just look at the number of people with moles, or who have to wear glasses, or who are stuck down with incurable diseases before they are even 10, let alone the number of failed fertilizations of eggs that are then lost. You christcucks just handwave all the failures of biology away as "its only god's will."
Calling me stupid and trying to buffalo me with "statistics." Cute. Lemme guess. You're at the top of your field and I should just trust the experts, right? Clearly, we know precisely what the exact state of the world was like by looking intently at the makeup of rocks. Puh-lease. At absolute best, you've explained how a monkey could possibly, (POSSIBLY, mind you. You're still talking in hypotheticals and guesses, nobody has scientifically observed this happening on the scale you demand.) get its hands on a typewriter. Now riddle me this, Bio-Man. Where does the DNA come from? You say "Oh, the amino-acids just self-organize into the patterns that make life, and somehow, that also comes together to form the script that tells it to eat, reproduce, and survive. And that just keeps going ad nauseum, building on itself, getting new information by lucky chance mutations, over and over and over again, to create the incredibly complex biodiversity we have today. Just because."
You make this massive jump from "Here's where you get the typewriter' to "Here's why the typewriter is capable of typing in English, or even functional in the first place." Without explaining anything beyond "Just trust me bro, it's the ONLY way it could happen!" I thought we were above "Trusting the science" here, but I guess not.
Ah yes. Because a margin for error isn't something every good engineer puts into their creations. Because a car breaking down means it's not a miracle of engineering. Wear and tear over time? Cracks and defects in the windshield? A defective part getting missed on the assembly line? Some retard trying to build the stupid thing while drunk? Some natural disaster destroying the factory? Clearly, the Engineer is at fault for every possible failure state, and there are no external factors that could lead to mistakes or accidents. Stupid Engineer. He should have taken away that pesky free will and just made a bunch of perfect, soulless animatronics. Then EVERYTHING would have been perfect. Nobody would rebel and lead to a fallen world where there are terrible consequences!
So clearly, this Ferrari magically appeared on the street. Because ferrous materials naturally attract to each other, and simple machines like pulleys and levers came together to naturally form a crude wheeled platform. That then evolved an internal combustion engine, rubber tires, Headlights and optional heated seating. But remember, it's not a precisely designed machine, because the radio died, and one of its headlights is out.
And you call ME the stupid one.
Brother, his response was about as far from credentialism as you can get.
He may have been rude and combative, and take issue with that if you will. But that's not justification to stoop to putting words in people's mouths.
It's not "just trust me bro" just to list a few key fundamentals and presume understanding of the others, rather than write out the 1000 page book it would take to explain the whole process in detail. Frankly a conversation between two people with very different levels of experience in a field can only happen in mutual good faith and patience, and even then it's like giving free college level 1-on-1 tuition, it's not something you can expect to be given out glibly.
For example the car analogy vis the imprecision of biology. Engines are precise, but they have still have defects and failures occasionally. It's how they respond to failures that makes them a precision system. A broken timing belt on a running engine is an "everything's fucked" moment, but if it were as error tolerant as most biological systems are it would self assemble itself into a smaller engine with a weird tumor of broken parts grafted onto the side. Automotive engineering works because to get a result they do something with a 99.999+% success rate once or twice. Most biological systems work because they do something with a 90% success rate 10,000 times and sweep out the junk. There are so many biological systems that are basically just junk collection or defect recycling, even down at the simplest amoeba level. But it's hard to explain that difference succinctly if someone doesn't have experience with the specifics.
Life is more like a go-cart than a Ferrari.
It's a shambling, duct taped mess of non-standard parts from lawnmowers and old shopping carts, trying to go as fast as possible while using the least amount of stuff possible. Its an improvised work-in-progress with whatever materials you can use. The human eye isn't a perfect machine, it's a mix of light detection sensors from many species; some of which could stand to be optimized for humans (blind spots, reversed retina that had to be compensated for inside the brain, etc)
The creator set the laws that turn the relative lump of coal that is an amoeba into the diamond that is sentient creatures using the application of evolutionary pressure
Tbf, It's more like a room full of GPT-3 models asked to write GPT-3 models
The monkey/typewriter thing is more about random pressing of keys than the monkeys mastery of language.
And it doesn't work, because random keys will not give you the results we can see in the world.
This is mainstream Christian belief. Some people are willing to say evolution is part of God's intelligent design, but will make a distinction between animal and human evolution.
How does this 10 second clip prove that Christianity is enslaving the right?
Read the replies. Fundamentalists are retards
The comments are the usual suspects throwing insults around and say nothing about how Christianity is enslaving right-wingers exclusively.
Christian fundamentalism is enslaving the right by driving away anyone who isn't an extremist retard like them. Matter of fact, not believing in evolution is a leftist belief, cuz of means all races are equal
It's driving people away and enslaving them at the same time?
Its driving away the sane so only the zealots are left to run things, and they are not fans of freedom.
Since this is kia2, I'm going to assume you support gatekeeping with our hobbies. Why wouldn't you want to gatekeep matters related to your soul?
One guy saying he doesn't buy into evolution isn't affecting anyone at all. Gibson isn't a church official and doesn't hold any public office. How is his opinion enslaving anyone?
The replies and the tweet itself are calling him based for that. It's a clear attempt to intellectually kneecap the right and turn them into jihadis. I want to gatekeep the fuck of of that.
I wish someone would explain to me why people delete posts where they get downvoted, (unless it's just bad faith or to salve their bruised egos. Those I understand, though I think they're cowardly.)
It was a sloppy post that I regretted making.