Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 10-26-2018, 10:41 AM
 
8,226 posts, read 3,424,199 times
Reputation: 6094

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Harry Diogenes View Post
Ha, the creationist slander of science while ignoring the 'buy our creationist video' button on every creationist site.
You think you can pigeon hole everyone into either creationist or atheist.

 
Old 10-26-2018, 10:44 AM
 
8,226 posts, read 3,424,199 times
Reputation: 6094
Quote:
Originally Posted by suzy_q2010 View Post
It appears you are the one who is confused. You said



You cannot have it both ways.
You got it backwards. Technology often helps scientific understanding. Technological advances don't generally depend on scientific progress.
 
Old 10-26-2018, 11:21 AM
 
28,432 posts, read 11,591,051 times
Reputation: 2070
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harry Diogenes View Post
There we have it, part of the universe farts.
yes it does. you prove the point. it generates waste that all life, as we know it, does.
 
Old 10-26-2018, 11:34 AM
 
28,432 posts, read 11,591,051 times
Reputation: 2070
Quote:
Originally Posted by suzy_q2010 View Post
He is conscious if he can be awakened. Being asleep is not the same as being unconscious. The definition again, since you are ignoring it and refusing to provide your own definition.:

https://www.verywellhealth.com/level...usness-1132154

"Normal Level of Consciousness
According to medical definitions, a normal level of consciousness means that a person is either awake or can be readily awakened from normal sleep.

Consciousness identifies a state in which a patient is awake, aware, alert and responsive to stimuli.
Unconsciousness identifies a state in which a patient has a deficit in awareness and responsiveness to stimuli (touch, light, sound). A person who is sleeping would not be considered unconscious, however, if waking up would result in normal consciousness."



You cannot claim something exists if you cannot define it. When you use the word mind what do you mean? When you use the words conscious and consciousness, what do you mean?



Commonly believed by whom, and what evidence do they have to support that belief?

What observations support your thesis?



No, the universe and I are not the same thing. I am but an extremely ... extremely small part of the universe. Other humans (and other animals which can be conscious) are just other small parts - discrete parts, separate from one another. There is no collective consciousness. If there were, I should be conscious of things happening all over the universe.
I use complexity verses volume ratio and a measurement to show that humans are just a complex protein in the biosphere. Due to the nature of the fluids involved and complexity when we increase the size of the "cell", the protein carry's most of the information needed to "live" in (or as) more complex bundles.

last para, yes, you are a small part of it. I mean, you and the universe are the same, the universe is not you. But you are most certainly, the universe doing you. that's just a fact. You will need some serous extraordinary evidence to show support the claim we aren't the universe doing us.

There are no discrete parts as you are presenting it. The standard model and QM, in fact, show that we are all connected at the most fundamental level. again, just a fact, If you say "no", the rest of your logic will be based on wrong information.

Last edited by Arach Angle; 10-26-2018 at 11:42 AM..
 
Old 10-26-2018, 01:35 PM
 
Location: Georgia, USA
37,110 posts, read 41,292,919 times
Reputation: 45175
Quote:
Originally Posted by Good4Nothin View Post
Yes that is the excuse. But artificial selection of species with short lifespans doesn't create new species either.
It is not an excuse. Changes that take millions of years cannot be observed. However, evidence of their existence is in the fossil record and DNA.

It does if a new organism results that cannot reproduce with the earlier one. Do you not know what the definition of a species is?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Good4Nothin View Post
I explained that. Light or dark color is already within the potential of the species, and the environment brings out one or the other. Nothing new is created. Adaptation and evolution are not the same.
The adaptation is fostered by a genetic change that causes the color difference. Such genetic changes produce evolution.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Good4Nothin View Post
Evolution is turning out to be much more complicated than was assumed in the mid 20th century. We now have reasons to think DNA can respond to changes in the organism and environment. We know for certain this is true with epigenetic changes. A lot more needs to be discovered.

The idea that random genetic changes and natural selection completely account for evolution is already out of date.
I already showed you that genetic changes, although they are due to chance, are not completely random. Epigenetic changes do not disprove evolution.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3335599/
 
Old 10-26-2018, 01:56 PM
 
Location: Georgia, USA
37,110 posts, read 41,292,919 times
Reputation: 45175
Quote:
Originally Posted by Good4Nothin View Post
You got it backwards. Technology often helps scientific understanding. Technological advances don't generally depend on scientific progress.
Poppycock. Without the science there would be no technological advances.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Arach Angle View Post
I use complexity verses volume ratio and a measurement to show that humans are just a complex protein in the biosphere. Due to the nature of the fluids involved and complexity when we increase the size of the "cell", the protein carry's most of the information needed to "live" in (or as) more complex bundles.

last para, yes, you are a small part of it. I mean, you and the universe are the same, the universe is not you. But you are most certainly, the universe doing you. that's just a fact. You will need some serous extraordinary evidence to show support the claim we aren't the universe doing us.

There are no discrete parts as you are presenting it. The standard model and QM, in fact, show that we are all connected at the most fundamental level. again, just a fact, If you say "no", the rest of your logic will be based on wrong information.
I have no idea what you mean about the universe "doing" me.

"Connected" how? Connected in the sense that I interact with the environment and other people, yes. Otherwise, you will have to explain what you mean.
 
Old 10-26-2018, 01:59 PM
 
Location: Georgia, USA
37,110 posts, read 41,292,919 times
Reputation: 45175
Quote:
Originally Posted by Good4Nothin View Post
Let is take the verywellhealth website as our authority on the definition of consciousness.
What is your definition of consciousness and what is your source? I stand by mine.
 
Old 10-26-2018, 02:31 PM
 
Location: USA
4,747 posts, read 2,351,362 times
Reputation: 1293
Quote:
Originally Posted by Good4Nothin View Post
You got it backwards. Technology often helps scientific understanding. Technological advances don't generally depend on scientific progress.
If that were true than Abraham Lincoln could have kept track of wartime developments with his cell phone instead of being forced to rely on the telegraph.
 
Old 10-26-2018, 08:02 PM
 
8,226 posts, read 3,424,199 times
Reputation: 6094
Quote:
Originally Posted by suzy_q2010 View Post
Epigenetic changes do not disprove evolution.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3335599/
What made you think I was trying to disprove evolution?
 
Old 10-26-2018, 08:04 PM
 
8,226 posts, read 3,424,199 times
Reputation: 6094
Quote:
Originally Posted by suzy_q2010 View Post
It is not an excuse. Changes that take millions of years cannot be observed. However, evidence of their existence is in the fossil record and DNA.
You are making the mistake of trying to convince me of evolution when I said over and over and over that I believe in evolution.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Closed Thread


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:52 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top