KingEbukasBlog:


[s]There is no verifiable proof to evolution.[/s] It is a faith-based religion

You seriously seriously need to start thinking

That's a mentally indolent response , I mean for people who claim to operate in logic and reasoning . How did these laws of nature come out?

Isn't that the ultimate goal for science? To unravel the mystery of the universe?? How do you expect me to know when it has not been unraveled yet

Lol .

Just imagine an emotionless group of creatures . And a member dies , so nature figured out that there should be a reaction to this event , that's why there's pain or mourning ? Wawu .

Don't play dumb. I gave a very crude sketch of what happened; not a full detailed explaination; of which many biologists have done in mountainous books; some of which you can actually read online.

There are others guilt , disgust , embarrassment (I'd love to hear the story for this one ) , enjoyment , equanimity , a lot . There would be a story too for why sex is pleasurable for humans and why there is orgasm.

These are just rational explanations , no proof to these . I wonder when you guys would understand that.

There have been many experiments done on animals, some bodering on animal cruelty, to study and deduce the behaviour of animals such as these.

I don't know why you keep talking like men and women of science who devote their lifes to this just wake up one morning and begin to pen down cockamie stories.


They experiment, hypothesize, make predictions which are proven either right/wrong by their experiments.

Before any research scientist publish a finding, they crosscheck a hundred time because they know their peers will rip them out if they're done.

It's dog eat dog out there and it sure as hell works to produce the socio-biological history of primate animals who feel they're the centre of the universe.

KingEbukasBlog:


Its a theory na haba .

and the big bang is what? A law

Quantum physicists and classical physicists are still reeling in confusion at the irreconcilabe differences between the two fields.......

Mark my words, the day the two finally agree on something; we will start creating universes.

KingEbukasBlog:


Ok . So which of the avatars do you like ?

I saw your pic the last time, you are in a fat human body avatar,am I wrong?

SirWere:
and the big bang is what? A law

Quantum physicists and classical physicists are still reeling in confusion at the irreconcilabe differences between the two fields.......

Mark my words, the day the two finally agree on something; we will start creating universes.

If you mean artificial universes , of course .

ifenes:


I saw your pic the last time, you are in a fat human body avatar,am I wrong?

lmao ... .

You just had to do a come back - that's a good one

No , you are not

KingEbukasBlog:


If you mean artificial universes , of course .

An artifical universe What do you term as a real universe? In what ways will they be different??


Ever heard of the simulation argument

SirWere:


You seriously seriously need to start thinking

Voraciously consuming godless explanations termed as rational and factual is not thinking

Isn't that the ultimate goal for science? To unravel the mystery of the universe?? How do you expect me to know when it has not been unraveled yet

Very little has been unraveled though

Don't play dumb. I gave a very crude sketch of what happened; not a full detailed explaination; of which many biologists have done in mountainous books; some of which you can actually read online.

Assumptions . No one witnessed it , you can only assume .

There have been many experiments done on animals, some bodering on animal cruelty, to study and deduce the behaviour of animals such as these.

I don't know why you keep talking like men and women of science who devote their lifes to this just wake up one morning and begin to pen down cockamie stories.


They experiment, hypothesize, make predictions which are proven either right/wrong by their experiments.

Before any research scientist publish a finding, they crosscheck a hundred time because they know their peers will rip them out if they're done.

It's dog eat dog out there and it sure as hell works to produce the socio-biological history of primate animals who feel they're the centre of the universe.

I know how these experiments are done . But the inferences drawn as proof to emotions are ludicrous . Give me one explanation for how embarrassment came about.

SirWere:
An artifical universe What do you term as a real universe? In what ways will they be different??


Ever heard of the simulation argument

An artificial universe is computer generated . Our universe is real .

Simulation argument ? That our reality is not real or something like that

KingEbukasBlog:


Voraciously consuming godless explanations termed as rational and factual is not thinking

Unneccesarily writing "big" words does not make one sound intelligent.
And for crisssake, haven't you heard of theistic evolution

Very little has been unraveled thoigj

Mordern science is very relatively young and still faces obstacles....... Even till now

Assumptions . No one witnessed it , you can only assume .

Unless you can create a time machine that can take us back to the time of "creation"/ the point when molecules started self-assembling; then very close and probable assumptions are all we got

I know how these experiments are done . But the inferences drawn as proof to emotions are ludicrous . Give me one explanation for how embarrassment came out .

The inferences drawn are ludicrous.... Seriously??

So a whole generation of people who study these things, cutting across race, nationality, religion and ethnicity .......all drew ludicrous intentions..

Wow, I can almost see how the bulk of scientific community will mangle you for that

And embarassment is a state of the mind.......
How it came about, I can only wildly guess.

SirWere:


Unneccesarily writing "big" words does not make one sound intelligent.
And for crisssake, haven't you heard of theistic evolution

What's with you guys and my choice of words Haba . You should know the meaning of the word "voracious" na .

Now you switch to theistic evolution - what's the point of bringing this up . Are you one - a theistic evolutionist ?

Mordern science is very relatively young and still faces obstacles....... Even till now

Modern science is inundating us with assumptions . I'm an ardent reader of " Daily Mail Science"

Unless you can create a time machine that can take us back to the time of "creation"/ the point when molecules started self-assembling; then very close and probable assumptions are all we got

Then you believe through faith .

The inferences drawn are ludicrous.... Seriously??

So a whole generation of people who study these things, cutting across race, nationality, religion and ethnicity .......all drew ludicrous intentions..

Wow, I can almost see how the bulk of scientific community will mangle you for that

And embarassment is a state of the mind.......
How it came about, I can only wildly guess.

Now you get the point . Theories , guesses - that's what they . Being obdurate that they are true means you accept them by faith .

KingEbukasBlog:


An artificial universe is computer generated . Our universe is real .

Simulation argument ? That our reality is not real or something like that

Aight....

Now suppose computer scientists and software developers, in conjuction with boring astronomers (sorry johny ) make a break through and was able to map this our ownuniverse as we know it, bit by bit, atom by atom into a software, including this planet earth and everybody inside it and say call it

"Universe 1".

Now the question is : Would our computer generated equivalent feel emotions as we feel? Would they be alive (whatever that means) as we are

Would it be murder to wipe them out


And,



Are we also just a project on another "person's" computer; in danger of being wiped out at any second because we're taking too much space??

That's the simulation argument.

KingEbukasBlog:


What's with you guys and my choice of words I dont actually care if you dont understand me . An adult like you don't understand the word "voracious"

Now you switch to theistic evolution - what's the point of bringing this up . Are you one

Seems like you're trying to show off with the words to be honest.

And I brought up theistic evolution for your claim that it is "godless".

Infact sef; many theist scientists accept evolution; even if they believe in a guiding hand

Then you believe through faith .

Now you get the point . Theories , guesses - that's what they . Being obdurate that they are true means you accept them by faith .

Define "Faith". I'm all ears.

SirWere:


Seems like you're trying to show off with the words to be honest.

What's the point of knowing so much , if you can't make use of it

And I brought up theistic evolution for your claim that it is "godless".

Have you seen Richard Dawkins' reaction to theistic evolution on Youtube ?

Infact sef; many theist scientists accept evolution; even if they believe in a guiding hand

If God did it though evolution then I have no problem accepting it .

Define "Faith". I'm all ears.

That certainty is the evidence = Faith .

I did not witness creation but I'm certain God did it . That certainty is my faith

SirWere:


Aight....

Now suppose computer scientists and software developers, in conjuction with boring astronomers (sorry johny ) make a break through and was able to map this our ownuniverse as we know it, bit by bit, atom by atom into a software, including this planet earth and everybody inside it and say call it

"Universe 1".

Now the question is : Would our computer generated equivalent feel emotions as we feel? Would they be alive (whatever that means) as we are

Would it be murder to wipe them out


And,



Are we also just a project on another "person's" computer; in danger of being wiped out at any second because we're taking too much space??

That's the simulation argument.

Oh so which argument , so which argument claims we are living in a false reality ? Controlled by a higher civilization

KingEbukasBlog:


Lol. You no well

If an emulation of nature is designed , why would you fail to acknowledge that the emulated is designed ?

Is that all?

Pyrrho:
Is that all?

Not really . I made various comparisons of different emulations and the emulated to show how delusional atheists are .

So can you address it ?

KingEbukasBlog:


Not really . I made various comparisons of different emulations and the emulated to show how delusional atheists are .

So can you address it ?

Don't refer me to another post.

What are your emulations and emulated which shows this?

Pyrrho:


All of the above-mentioned arguments, have been refuted centuries ago.

Who did the refutation ? These arguments are very much alive

KingEbukasBlog:


What's the point of knowing so much , if you can't make use of it

I feel you

Have you seen Richard Dawkins' reaction to theistic evolution on Youtube?

Dawkins is passionately anti-theistic; he will never admit anything good coming out of religion.
I'm simply atheistic; recognizing the need for religion in Societies; even if I don't participate

If God did it though evolution then I have no problem accepting it .



That certainty is the evidence = Faith .

I did not witness creation but I'm certain God did it . That certainty is my faith

We are now twisting english words..... I'm not gonna go there

KingEbukasBlog:


Oh so which argument , so which argument claims we are living in a false reality ? Controlled by a higher civilization

The simulation argument asks "What if"

Pyrrho:
Don't refer me to another post.

What are your emulations and emulated which shows this?

Man emulates nature but fails to admit nature was indeed designed .

1. RoboScorpion vs Scorpion

2. Robodog vs Dog

3. Artificial neuron vs human neuron

4. Man's arm vs Robot's arm

The former is described as intelligently designed but not the latter Do you see why atheism is irrational and the atheists need to understand the Logic of God and EVERYTHING ?

@Pyrrho

We also have the ant colony algorithm- emulates the behavior of ants in searching for food - used in solving problems

KingEbukasBlog:
@Pyrrho

We also have the ant colony algorithm- emulates the behavior of ants in searching for food - used in solving problems

your argument still belongs to the teleological category.

It's nothing new.

And thereby rendered useless like other similar arguments as it doesn't prove the existence of a God.

Pyrrho:
your argument still belongs to the teleological category.

It's nothing new.

And thereby rendered useless like other similar arguments as it doesn't prove the existence of a God.

A typical atheist , address the argument abeg

KingEbukasBlog:


A typical atheist , address the argument abeg

Still no proofs.

Pyrrho:
Still no proofs.

Address the argument

johnydon22:

A woman and a man had very sweet sex and i am the result.

Are u sure it was sweet. Abeg don't talk that talk here again o

Athiests Go to the ant thou sluggard

DeepSight:
Athiests Go to the ant thou sluggard

Hhhmm!
I wonder if that was supposed to be poetry.
I any case, it doesn't rhyme.

Depardo !!
How far na ?

Are you out of hibernation now , or were you getting in touch with your inner atheist ?

OP, Human beings came into existence the same way as all other presently living organisms. Via the process of evolution. I've made a thread on this topic, which is but a short introduction. Below it is a good quality thread by another nairalander that introduces the topic via a simple thought experiment.
https://www.nairaland.com/2914888/much-needed-explanation-evolution
https://www.nairaland.com/2806737/simplified-layman-explanation-basic-ideas

Here are also two of my favorite youtube videos describing it in a very easy to understand way, with illustrations.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hOfRN0KihOU

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GhHOjC4oxh8

Here are also some science sites that are again easy to understand for laymen. The one on the bottom is an interactive documentary that's rather beautifully put together.
http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/home.php
http://www.becominghuman.org/node/interactive-documentary

cloudgoddess:
OP, Human beings came into existence the same way as all other presently living organisms. Via the process of evolution. I've made a thread on this topic, which is but a short introduction. Below it is a good quality thread by another nairalander that introduces the topic via a simple thought experiment.
https://www.nairaland.com/2914888/much-needed-explanation-evolution
https://www.nairaland.com/2806737/simplified-layman-explanation-basic-ideas

Here are also two of my favorite youtube videos describing it in a very easy to understand way, with illustrations.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hOfRN0KihOU

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GhHOjC4oxh8

Here are also some science sites that are again easy to understand for laymen. The one on the bottom is an interactive documentary that's rather beautifully put together.
http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/home.php
http://www.becominghuman.org/node/interactive-documentary

Lemme make it crystal clear to you. Random mutations cannot make any thing. NOTHING. So it cannot be relied on to produce new features that are selected for. It is irrational to attribute design to a series of accidents. Hence, your precious theory is messed up and does not actually tell us how life came to be.