Embryology and Miracle

Status
Not open for further replies.
May 9, 2004
15,166
179
#81
your whole premise is that humans are extra special or somehow divine creatures, when in fact there is no 'improvement' or 'decrement' defined in evolution. There is only adaptation. Understand?

here maybe you'll get this:



another explanation, God did it, logical, succinct and to the point
ار باجیو
حال فرض کنیم انتلیجنس انواع مختلفی دارد و چنانکه انسان در تفکر پیشرفت کرده موجودات دیگر در اعضایی دیگر
که البته این یکی هم از زیر سئوال در رفتن از طرف طرفداران تکامل است درست مانند پیش کشیدن موضوع جهش
انوقت که دیدند حلقه های گمشده تئوری تکامل را سست می کند
تئوری جهش را پیش کشیدند
ولی باز بر فرض اینکه این موضوع یعنی انواع انتلجینس را قبول کنیم
باز بر می گردیم به اصل و پایه تئوری تکامل
تک سلولیها چگونه بوجود امده اند ؟
داروین و دانشمندان قرن نوزده فکر می کردند که تک سلولیها از جامدات بی جان بوجود می ایند
و تکامل از انجا اغازشده
الان برای همهگان روشن است اشتباه می کردد
و بعد از ان طرفداران این تئوری از اوپرن گرفته تا دانشمندان کنونی دریافتند که این امر یعنی بوجود امدن موجود زنده از جماد ممکن نیست
که باز سئوال دیگری را مطرح می کند اگر ما از تکامل ایپ و ایپ از حیوانات دیگر تا تک سلولیها بوجود امده ایم
خود تک سلولیها از چه تکامل یافته اند ؟
البته من فکر می کنم این سئوالات پایان پذیر نیست و هر سئوالی سئوال دیگری را مطرح می کند
و درست مانند مطرح کردن وجود خدا است
یعنی در اخر ان کس که به خدا اعتقادندارد می تواند بگوید تک سلولیها خود بخود بوجود امده اند
که باز جواب همان اندازه غیر علمی و غیر منطقی خواهد شد
که خدا باوران برای وجود خدا همان جواب را خواهند داد
یعنی خود بخود بوجود امده است
در اخر انهایی که می خواند با علم و منطق وجود خدا را نفی کنند خود به بن بستی می رسند که خدا باوران
در همان اول رسیده بودند !!!!ا
 

R.BAGGIO

National Team Player
Oct 19, 2002
5,702
0
Toronto
#82
Now you are changing the topic ;)


Evolution never claimed to describe where life comes from, only how it evolves, but the whole point of science is to search for answers to questions. Evolution is the best model man has ever come up with to explain how life evolves as the title suggests, not a model to explain origins of life, it holds until contradictions are found.

There is no standard model for the origins of life, simply because no one has been able to make protocells using basic components. This is as far as my knowledge goes, however this does not in any way make evolution wrong, because of the reasons in the above paragraph.


have a nice day
 

R.BAGGIO

National Team Player
Oct 19, 2002
5,702
0
Toronto
#85
It's funny creationists have a problem with evolution specifically, but you never heard them question the Newtonian notion of gravity, by the same token Newton could not explain why mass creates gravity, before Einstein came along you could argue that god made gravity.


I guess questioning gravity would be too ridiculous, even for a creationist. ;)
 
May 9, 2004
15,166
179
#86
Now you are changing the topic ;)


Evolution never claimed to describe where life comes from, only how it evolves, but the whole point of science is to search for answers to questions. Evolution is the best model man has ever come up with to explain how life evolves as the title suggests, not a model to explain origins of life, it holds until contradictions are found.

There is no standard model for the origins of life, simply because no one has been able to make protocells using basic components. This is as far as my knowledge goes, however this does not in any way make evolution wrong, because of the reasons in the above paragraph.


have a nice day
خیر جانم
اولا داروین می گفت که دانشمندان در اینده کشف خواهند کرد که تک سلولیها چگونه بوجود امده اند
چون او قادر به حل این مسئله نبود و فکر می کرد نظریه تکاملش صحیح است و این قسمت را به دانشمندان اینده حواله کرده بود
دوم از ان البته که توبک را عوض می کنم
من ده تا پست زده ام و خواستم یکی جواب من را در مورد سئوالی که از چگونگی جهش تنها در یک شاخه
و چرا زمان در تکامل انواع حیوانات فرق می کند را بدهید
یکی از پرتقال و سیبب نوشته و شما از اینکه برخی از حیوانات از نظر فیزیکی تکامل یافتند و انرا ربط به انسان متفکر داده اید که نه تنها جواب نگرفته ام بلکه
سئوالات دیگری برایم پیش امده
چرا برخی از این حیوانات پسرفتگی فیزیکی داشته اند نه پیشرفت
چرا مدت زمان در تکامل بجز یک بار دها ملیونها سال طول کشیده
ولی انسان امروزی تنها چند صد سال پیش سر از تکامل در اورده
و چرا در یک نوع حیوان گروهی تکامل یافته اند و گروهی نه با در نظر گرفتن یکسان بودن شرایط محیط زیست انها
و چرا و چر ا و چراها که بسیار است
می فرمایید که تکامل بهترین نظریه و مدلی است که انسان می تواند وجود خود را شرح دهد
به چه دلیل ؟
ایا دلیل قاطعی هست یا فقط یک فرضیه
می خواهید من از کلود ویریلهون برای شما مدلی بهتر از تکامل داروین بیاورم
شاید شما کتاب های
اینتلیجنت دیزاین
پدران اسمانی ما
اری به گلونینگ انسان
به استقبال نیاکان اسمانی
و چند کتاب دیگر در رابطه با این موضوع را مطالعه نکرده اید؟
باور کنید مدلهای بهتر و منطقی تر از اصل انواع داروین را ارئه می کنند
ولی ایا یک حقیقت است ؟
 

R.BAGGIO

National Team Player
Oct 19, 2002
5,702
0
Toronto
#87
as I said there is no 'pasraft' and 'pishraft' in evolution.

there are other models, none are 'scientific' which means explanation using data and observations.

You can choose to believe in any model you like but they are not scientific.

but I'll ask you one question, do you believe that homo erectus was as intelligent as a modern human?
 

Natural

IPL Player
May 18, 2003
2,559
3
#88
you conveniently ignored all my points and went back to your original argument. If you can't argue it's best to leave it alone.. it makes you look like a douch bag when you close your ears and act as if you didn't get your answer.

you said very stupid comments such as "takamol haye 2 zari" but I came across this one which really proved to me you have no sense of what science is and what it tries to do and how it goes about doing it.

You said:

در اخر انهایی که می خواند با علم و منطق وجود خدا را نفی کنند خود به بن بستی می رسند که خدا باوران
در همان اول رسیده بودند !!!!ا

I'm glad you admit the god believers are at a "bon bast" since the beginning. but Science is DEFINITELY not at a "bon bast". as a matter of fact, time and time again, generation after generation, science has proved that it can find answers given enough time and experience. Look at the scientific revolution and industrial revolution which happened all in the past century. Or just 400 years ago, we didn't know the earth is round and we're not the center of the universe. But today, only after 400 years, we can observe galaxies billions of light years away from us and analyze the light and come up with what elements form them. That's incredible, Imagine what can happen in the next 400 years and what answers we'll have about the universe we live in. I can come up with so many examples to prove how far humanity has come in regards to scientific discovery.

If the trend is any indication, scientific discoveries are on an exponential up trend. you know why? Because, as intelligence piles on intelligence, as ability piles on ability, the speed of it changes. The next generation input would be how far we've come today. The next generation will have our shoulders to stand on and discover more truth about our universe. So dont you DARE say science is at a "BON BAST" because it truely makes you look like a clown that you are.... But you were damn right about your fellow believers being at a BON BAST and having been there since the beginning of it.


Having said all that, I dont expect you to understand what I have written. So feel free to divert attention and ignore it.
 
Last edited:
May 9, 2004
15,166
179
#90
I think the point that General is trying to get across is that we should all (and scientists included) accept creationism as fact and stop wasting our time trying to find a scientific and sane reason for our existence.
خیر
من چنین حرفی را نزدم
من می گویم اگر شما به کریشنیزم ایراد می گیرید قبول کنید که تکامل هم ایراد دارد
جوری وانمود نکنید که تکامل یک حقیقت محض است
بر عکس خیلی چیزها هست که نظریه تکامل را در ده های اخیر بشدت زیر سئوال برده است
من نمی گویم که حقیقت را من می دانم
ولی باور کنید حقیقت پیش شما و در کتاب اصل انواع هم نیست


بله جانم

 
May 9, 2004
15,166
179
#91
Oh, he understands Baggio jaan. Javabesho az had aghal 4 nafar gerefte hanooz khodesho miazane beh koouchey Ali chap, keh masalan begeh shoma jaheleedo nemifahmid, bandeh Akhundo, roshan-fekro fahmideh! :D
نه جناب
شما خوتان خوب می دانید که جواب را نه سیب و پرتقال شما داد نه فیزیک بدنی باجیو
من سئوال می کنم که چرا انسان متفکر در طی چند صد هزار سال این همه تکامل یافته و انوقت برخی از حیوانا ت برای جابجا کردن دو تا استخوان و سه تا دندان شصت میلون سال توی صف تکامل منتظر مانده اند
شما می ایید از تفاوت سیب وپرتقال می گوید
باجیو از پیشرفت و پس رفت فیزیکی برخی از حیوانات
شما اگر روشن فکر بودید انقدر درک داشتید که بدانید مثال سیب و پرتقالی که زدید مضحک ترین مثالی بوده که کسی در رابطه با جواب من زده است
حالا ژست روشنفکری به خود نگیرید که سیب و پرتقال شاهد است
:D


خلاصه کلام
نه سیب و پرتقال شما جواب شد نه فیزیک باجیو


بله جانم
 

Behrooz_C

Elite Member
Dec 10, 2005
16,650
1,566
A small island west of Africa
#92
Jenaab General,

Scientific inquiry does not end because scientists failed to find evidence for their theories. You can't criticise scientists for going from one theory to another in oder to find answers.

That's what I mean when I say you expect us and scientists to just accept creationism and move on.
 

BijanD

Bench Warmer
Oct 9, 2004
1,027
0
Vancouver
#93
خیر
من چنین حرفی را نزدم
من می گویم اگر شما به کریشنیزم ایراد می گیرید قبول کنید که تکامل هم ایراد دارد
جوری وانمود نکنید که تکامل یک حقیقت محض است
بر عکس خیلی چیزها هست که نظریه تکامل را در ده های اخیر بشدت زیر سئوال برده است
من نمی گویم که حقیقت را من می دانم
ولی باور کنید حقیقت پیش شما و در کتاب اصل انواع هم نیست


بله جانم
Do you know what "theory" means in scientific terms. It's an idea that has been tested by thousands of different scientific methods. Evolution falls into that category. Just like quantum theory in physics, it has predicted and explained many natural phenomenons with precision. Now we might come up with a few things that cannot be explained with this theory, but that doesn't disprove it. In scientific term, you need to come up with many many evidence based claims to disprove it. And that has yet to happen.
 

shahinc

Legionnaire
May 8, 2005
6,745
1
#94
As Ayn Rand said, "Reason is not automatic. Those who deny it cannot be conquered by it. Do not count on them. Leave them alone."
Natural Aziz, Behroz, Baggio
Please read what Houman said above. The individual that you are having a disscution with, is incapable of carrying such a disscution since He does not understand the basic manners in which one has to carry a LOGICAL disscution and also the basics of logic ( no offence intended ).

I also think, he is not after the answer but his whole intention is to carry this fruitless disscution as long as he can, therefore diverge attention to other important issues that is around us.

As a proof, look at his other disscutions with other members over the years.
 
May 9, 2004
15,166
179
#95
as I said there is no 'pasraft' and 'pishraft' in evolution.

there are other models, none are 'scientific' which means explanation using data and observations.

You can choose to believe in any model you like but they are not scientific.

but I'll ask you one question, do you believe that homo erectus was as intelligent as a modern human?
جناب
من نمی توانم بگویم که صد در صد مثل انسان بوده ولی باور دارم که نوعی خلاقیت داشته است
ولی این ربطی به سئوال من ندارد حتی اگر فرض کنیم که هومو ارکتوس نیاکان ما بوده اند باز حلقه های گمشده ای است که تکامل به ان جوابی نداده
همچنین جهش اگر اتفاق افتاده که ما بوجود امده ایم
چرادر شاخه های دیگر چنین جهشی رخ نداده
و چرا مدت زمان تکامل فرق می کند و چرا های دیگر
شما می فرمایید بقیه مدلها علمی نیستند ؟
باز می پرسم ایا کتبی را که به شما پیشنهاد کردم خوانده اید ؟؟؟
این کتابها از مدلهای علمی جالبی صحبت می کنند با دلایل بهتر و قانع کنند تر
همچنین تکامل هم یک حقیقت علمی نیست اصلا اصل نظریه تکامل به چند هزار سال پیش در هند باز میگردد
هندوها باور داشتند که انسان از میمون ومیمون از جانور ی دیگر و ان جانور از دیگری ووووو بوجود امده
فقط بعدها داروین انرا در قالبی علمی بیان کرد
والا چیز تازه ای نیست
 
Jun 9, 2004
13,753
1
Canada
#97
QUOTE: جوری وانمود نکنید که تکامل یک حقیقت محض است

LMAO. For the Nth time my misinformed and misinforming friend:

EVOLUTION IS AN ABSOLUTE SCIENTIFIC FACT - JUST LIKE GRAVITY.

I thought maybe your eyes are a little weak and you missed this the first few times.

GRAVITATIONAL THEORY DOES NOT MEAN GRAVITY IS A THEORY.
EVOLUTIONARY THEORY DOES NOT MEAN EVOLUTION IS A THEORY.

THEY SIMPLY MEAN THAT THERE ARE THEORIES TO EXPLAIN HOW THEY HAPPEN.


This is as simple as the explanation can get. Hanooz agar nemifahmi chi be chieh, motasefam keh enghadr az marhale parti

Hala dobareh begoo soale mano javaab nadadeeno bejaaye toot-farangi chera az sibo porteghal harf mizaneed?
:confused-
 

BijanD

Bench Warmer
Oct 9, 2004
1,027
0
Vancouver
#98
General Parsaian, if you really want an answer, instead of asking that question of yours from us I recommend maybe reading the book Climbing Mount Improbable. If this book doesn't answer your question, I really don't think we can. Your answer is not something that can be summarized on to a page in a forum.
 

Natural

IPL Player
May 18, 2003
2,559
3
#99
you conveniently ignored all my points and went back to your original argument. If you can't argue it's best to leave it alone.. it makes you look like a douch bag when you close your ears and act as if you didn't get your answer.

you said very stupid comments such as "takamol haye 2 zari" but I came across this one which really proved to me you have no sense of what science is and what it tries to do and how it goes about doing it.

You said:

در اخر انهایی که می خواند با علم و منطق وجود خدا را نفی کنند خود به بن بستی می رسند که خدا باوران
در همان اول رسیده بودند !!!!ا

I'm glad you admit the god believers are at a "bon bast" since the beginning. but Science is DEFINITELY not at a "bon bast". as a matter of fact, time and time again, generation after generation, science has proven that it can find answers given enough time and experience. Look at the scientific revolution and industrial revolution which happened all in the past century. Or just 400 years ago, we didn't know the earth is round and we're not the center of the universe. But today, only after 400 years, we can observe galaxies billions of light years away from us and analyze the light and come up with what elements form them. That's incredible, Imagine what can happen in the next 400 years and what answers we'll have about the universe we live in. I can come up with so many examples to prove how far humanity has come in regards to scientific discovery.

If the trend is any indication, scientific discoveries are on an exponential up trend. you know why? Because, as intelligence piles on intelligence, as ability piles on ability, the speed of it changes. The next generation input would be how far we've come today. The next generation will have our shoulders to stand on and discover more truth about our universe. So dont you DARE say science is at a "BON BAST" because it truely makes you look like a clown that you are.... But you were damn right about your fellow believers being at a BON BAST and having been there since the beginning of it.


Having said all that, I dont expect you to understand what I have written. So feel free to divert attention and ignore it.
 

tajrish

Elite Member
Oct 18, 2002
3,037
197
57
San Diego, California
GP jan, here is the answer to your original question about the miracles, courtesy of the late George Carlin:

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gPOfurmrjxo"]YouTube- George Carlin on Religion and God[/ame]
 
Status
Not open for further replies.