Author Topic: 10 Commandments in Alabama?  (Read 16469 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Vampire_Hunter_Bob

  • SK.net Sergeant at Arms
  • Of the Abyss
  • *****
  • Posts: 4299
  • Karma: 10
  • Gender: Male
Re:10 Commandments in Alabama?
« Reply #50 on: September 01, 2003, 07:23:48 PM »
Well, from 1997...
Students suspended for protesting prayer ruling
So is this it?  (check the related stories for more information.)

I don't see any problem with suspending kids for walking out of class.  Thats the point of social disobedience.  

Nope not it, the story i heard was the kid was suspended for praying at lunch.

medievald00d

  • Guest
Re:10 Commandments in Alabama?
« Reply #51 on: September 01, 2003, 07:48:38 PM »
well i guess that wraps that up :P I was misinformed, it's not my fault! >_<

anyway i still want to take one second to respond to the rest of pheonixfenix's post. I haven't done a ton of research, i've done some for an english paper, watched some videos (and yes they were subject to Christian views, but no i do not consider them infalible) i've also debated quite a bit online. In any case, i do not believe whatever i'm told, and i'm not Catholic.You COMPLETELY misunderstood what i said here. I was saying that punishing VOLUNTARY prayer in schools is not favoring chrstianity and that's all i said. I was saying this to counter the claim that the government always favors christianity. If someone would've said the government always favored muslims, i could've countered it with the same example, and freedom of religion is just as important to me as it is anyone else. and i certainly never supported forced prayer in a public school.

Anyway, i'm done now  :-X

Ah. Ok, I've read arguments from both sides of the case. Athiests rely on science, which is based on repeated experimentation and what is known about the real world. Christians use the bible, and only the bible. I HAVE read Christian arguments based on science, but their science is faulty, and sadly enough, I, a high schooler, have a greater knowledge of the science they speak of. People who dont understand or accept science dont deserve to use it to argue. Thats where Darwinian prejudiced people came in the 18th century.

Voluntary prayer is acceptable, and if it is punished, it is unconstitutional. At my school, a club known as CCF prays every day at lunch, therefore voluntary prayer DOES HAPPEN.

One more thing. I dont care if you dont believe anything you hear. You'd better have some damned good reasoning or research to go against a well structured scientific theory. Saying that you dont think that people evolved from one celled organisms doesnt cut it. Humans, are only made up of millions of multi-celled organisms working in unison. I figure you wont believe me, as you probably have little knowledge of science. Go do some research, and dont spew out facts that are completely incorrect

medievald00d

  • Guest
Re:10 Commandments in Alabama?
« Reply #52 on: September 01, 2003, 07:54:14 PM »
Nope not it, the story i heard was the kid was suspended for praying at lunch.

That would only happen if the Student tried to lead others in prayer, or made himself very vocal, so that everyone could hear. Just so you know, thats very disrespectful. My cousins, are deeply religious (a few months back they tried to get me to church.. ::)), and whenever we eat together, they always have a prayer before a meal (our family respects this by bowing down with them), but when in resturaunts, or public areas they never make it vocal. usually its a whisper that I can barely hear, even just across the table. If someone were to say his prayers loudly, it would be disrespectful to other students of other religions, and therefore would be subject for suspension.

Offline Makkuro

  • Of the Interstice
  • **
  • Posts: 356
  • Karma: 0
  • Gender: Male
  • El pueblo unido jamás será vencido!
Re:10 Commandments in Alabama?
« Reply #53 on: September 01, 2003, 08:07:57 PM »

medievald00d

  • Guest
Re:10 Commandments in Alabama?
« Reply #54 on: September 01, 2003, 08:12:01 PM »
Thats got to be one of the funniest debates I've ever read. Thx for the link Makkuro!
  8)

http://blake.prohosting.com/tptest/bible.txt

Now go ahead test yourself

Offline Bok Choy

  • Of the Interstice
  • **
  • Posts: 292
  • Karma: 0
  • Gender: Male
  • 100% Leafy Goodness!
Re:10 Commandments in Alabama?
« Reply #55 on: September 01, 2003, 11:48:44 PM »
Jebus is lord!

Awesome.  ;D  

Too bad an evolution debate usually turns out that way.  I have yet to see a anti-evolutionist NOT resort to ad hominem attacks and straw man arguments.
"I'm not dumb. I just have a command of throughly useless information."
-Calvin, of Calvin and Hobbes

Offline MangyKid Ver.4.5

  • Of the Interstice
  • **
  • Posts: 293
  • Karma: 0
  • Gender: Male
  • Champion!
Re:10 Commandments in Alabama?
« Reply #56 on: September 02, 2003, 12:28:58 AM »
How about this:
Everyone who has any religion either shuts up or gets killed.
Deal?
El Pincero: Teacher, Mother, Secret Lover.

Offline red ram of death

  • Of the World
  • *
  • Posts: 21
  • Karma: 0
  • Gender: Male
  • drench your vision in darkness
Re:10 Commandments in Alabama?
« Reply #57 on: September 02, 2003, 01:45:38 AM »
KILL THEM ALL I SAY.
rip your face off

Offline himura_kenshin

Re:10 Commandments in Alabama?
« Reply #58 on: September 02, 2003, 02:23:17 AM »
Hmm.. one argument i saw that i sort of liked, was related to a sea slug that eats an anemonies with poisonous darts. The slug somehow avoids being killed by the darts and actually stores them in it's stomach for defense. I'm not sure of the name of the thing. Anyway, the point was, how could it adapt to doing that if any attempt without the right equipment and instincts would've killed it? i brought this into an atheist chat room once and was met with "sometimes nature give animals what they need" or something like that. That to me, is just admitting to the existence of some sort of guide or even a god, and calling it "nature". I personally can't think of a good argument, anybody have one?

edit: oh, btw, i've heard of that story too vampire hunter bob, don't remember when or where though *shrug*.
« Last Edit: September 02, 2003, 02:28:20 AM by himura_kenshin »

medievald00d

  • Guest
Re:10 Commandments in Alabama?
« Reply #59 on: September 03, 2003, 02:26:51 AM »
Hmm.. one argument i saw that i sort of liked, was related to a sea slug that eats an anemonies with poisonous darts. The slug somehow avoids being killed by the darts and actually stores them in it's stomach for defense. I'm not sure of the name of the thing. Anyway, the point was, how could it adapt to doing that if any attempt without the right equipment and instincts would've killed it? i brought this into an atheist chat room once and was met with "sometimes nature give animals what they need" or something like that. That to me, is just admitting to the existence of some sort of guide or even a god, and calling it "nature". I personally can't think of a good argument, anybody have one?

edit: oh, btw, i've heard of that story too vampire hunter bob, don't remember when or where though *shrug*.

A guess of mine would be that at some point in time, the slug had nothing else to eat but anemones. The anemones were poisonous, but it had to adapt, otherwise it would be extinct. Maybe a genetic anomaly in one slug allowed it to be immune to the anemone. This slug would have had a greater evolutionary advantage over other slugs, therefore ensuring its reproductiveness. Over hundreds of generations, they have come to be as they are today.

Please note that what i said above is speculation, not not ground on any evidence. That is the difference between science and religion. Anything science says without hard concrete evidence is taken with a grain of salt, however, the most inane babblings of religion are taken in as solid evidence. This is why I prefer science. It is ground down to pure truth.

Offline himura_kenshin

Re:10 Commandments in Alabama?
« Reply #60 on: September 03, 2003, 09:58:00 PM »
correction: it's ground down what our observations lead us to believe is pure truth.

And in any case this anomaly not only had to make the slug immune to the poison, it had to make it able to store the dart in it's stomach for defense. Perhaps this was a two-step evolution? Pehaps the slug first became immune to the poison, and later developed the ability to defend itself with the stored darts. My question here is, why did it not instead develope it's own poisonous darts? I mean, it's not unreasonable for this to have happened, since at some point the anemone had to do the same thing. A creature's safety being threatened, in the case of the anemone, has caused it to develope poisonous darts to defend from it's predators. The predators of the slug can be attacked with the same poisonous darts so why did it not just develope its own through evolution? Of course because it's easier to store the darts, but there was apparently no guide to evaluate that it was easier. Since we are dealing with nature and cause/effect here, the slug should have followed the same evolutionary procedure as the anemone. What I see here is a conscious evaluation that storing of darts is a better method in this case.


edit: One more question, and this doesn't serve as a statement in any way, i just plain don't know. Which of these is a better of example of the way evolution works:

1.)A group of organisms is threated, and their offspring begin to show characteristics capable of surviving this threat.

2.)A group of diverse organisms are threated and the only ones that survive are the ones that were already fit to survive the challenge. Since the only ones that survive are the only ones that reproduce, the entire population is eventually like this.
« Last Edit: September 03, 2003, 10:03:18 PM by himura_kenshin »

Offline Majin Tenshi

  • McCoy Golem!
  • Of the Abyss
  • *****
  • Posts: 2177
  • Karma: 0
  • Gender: Male
  • The can opener went bye-bye...
Re:10 Commandments in Alabama?
« Reply #61 on: September 03, 2003, 11:00:25 PM »
Before I being, I would like to remind everyone that there is mutation in every generation of organism.  Its just that much of the time, it isn't enought to easily notice.  
My question here is, why did it not instead develope it's own poisonous darts?
Thats actualy far less likely to happen then evolveing an imunity and storage.  

It would have to develop a completely new organ to produce its own poison and darts, however, it merely had to adjust its current organs to store them (I'm sure the darts must be stored in what was a pre-existing organ, or perhaps a skin flap or something).  

Something does not spontaneously develomp something like darts.  It would most likely start as poison secreted on the skin (defenseive).  Thicker "hairs" (or something pre-existing or servering a different pourpose) would be able to distribute poison better, and those with the thickest "hairs" would survive better.  Eventualy, these would be thick and sturdy enough to be considered spines.  Spines that broke off could continue to injure prey after it had moved away, allowing poison to work more effectively, so they became more easily renewed and easily detached.  

Basicly, what it comes down to, is that evolution does not spontaneously generate new systems, only modify pre-existing ones.  Mutation (key to evolution) sometimes results in new protiens being produced which can have slight changes.  Sometimes a new protien combines with pre-existing ones to create something simple but new and useful.  Through the generations, this is refined to become something more complex.

1 is evolution.  Benificial mutations survive and reproduce, weaker mutations don't.  
2 is survival of the fittest.  (it also applies to 1, since there is variation within a species.)
Ok, so I leave and come back....

medievald00d

  • Guest
Re:10 Commandments in Alabama?
« Reply #62 on: September 04, 2003, 12:03:22 AM »
I would also like to point out a few things of evolution

We, Humans, are also in the process of evolution. We have an appendix left over from when our ancestors had two stomachs, our eyes lack perfect vision, and our backs are not built to support bipedal locomotion.

I personally believe humans are no longer evolving, or evolving very slowly. Why? Modern medicine is the problem. Any disease, virus, or bacteria that we may carry that may potentially endanger us can be cured through anti-viral shots, pills, or chemotherapy. This means that many of us can reproduce, allowing our bad genes too be passed on. Had we never found a cure for smallpox, eventually we would have become immune to it, or become extinct in the process...

Also, i would like to point out that poison being secreted out of the skin could be a way of protecting the slugs body from the poison. It may not have even been a defensive measure, just a way to protect itself from the poison.

Also, a question such as the one you posed on the development of the poisonous darts is thoroughly thought out, and a logical hypothesis is evolved through discussion. Religion (I hate to bring that nasty word up) generally gives a statement, and does not question it.

Your correction is correct however, it is ground down to our observations to lead us to "pure truth". Religion, is ground down to an interpretation events that happened 2000 years ago, written by people more than 1000 years ago. Interpretations. Nothing more.

Offline MangyKid Ver.4.5

  • Of the Interstice
  • **
  • Posts: 293
  • Karma: 0
  • Gender: Male
  • Champion!
Re:10 Commandments in Alabama?
« Reply #63 on: September 04, 2003, 12:17:12 AM »
Go phoenix! I've been thinking about modern medicine lately and how antibiotics are losing effect as  viruses and bacterias start to gain immunity, and I really hope we aren't screwed. I'm starting to think the reason humans exist is to fuck everything up, because that's pretty much what we do.
El Pincero: Teacher, Mother, Secret Lover.

Offline himura_kenshin

Re:10 Commandments in Alabama?
« Reply #64 on: September 04, 2003, 12:33:04 AM »
Quote
Any disease, virus, or bacteria that we may carry that may potentially endanger us can be cured through anti-viral shots, pills, or chemotherapy.
Hmm.. i'm going to guess you're loosing the term "any" loosely here, because plenty of people die from diseases when modern medicine fails. The first example that comes to mind is cancer. Yes cancer can be treated to an extent, but it's not "cured" often as far as i know. Are the few times that cancer is cured really enough to keep our bodies from adapting? Furthermore, why aren't people in third world countries evolving much faster than us, since they don't have this medicine?

I'm having trouble verbalizing my thoughts here, and this is an over simplification of what i'm thinking, but i'll just phrase it this way:If nature is nothing but a complicated biological machine (Which is what it is if there is/are no god/souls/guide), why is there no single manmade machine (That works under the same laws of physics and cause/effect as a natural bilogical machine) that improves itself?

Another way to say this, if i can put it in the right words here, is what difference does it make to a slug if it lives or dies? a computer has never cared if it's on or off. Why would any animal try to preserve it's genes if it's only a biological machine run by cause and effect?
« Last Edit: September 04, 2003, 12:34:16 AM by himura_kenshin »

medievald00d

  • Guest
Re:10 Commandments in Alabama?
« Reply #65 on: September 04, 2003, 06:36:47 AM »
Hmm.. i'm going to guess you're loosing the term "any" loosely here, because plenty of people die from diseases when modern medicine fails. The first example that comes to mind is cancer. Yes cancer can be treated to an extent, but it's not "cured" often as far as i know. Are the few times that cancer is cured really enough to keep our bodies from adapting? Furthermore, why aren't people in third world countries evolving much faster than us, since they don't have this medicine?

I'm having trouble verbalizing my thoughts here, and this is an over simplification of what i'm thinking, but i'll just phrase it this way:If nature is nothing but a complicated biological machine (Which is what it is if there is/are no god/souls/guide), why is there no single manmade machine (That works under the same laws of physics and cause/effect as a natural bilogical machine) that improves itself?

Another way to say this, if i can put it in the right words here, is what difference does it make to a slug if it lives or dies? a computer has never cared if it's on or off. Why would any animal try to preserve it's genes if it's only a biological machine run by cause and effect?

yes, there are diseases that we cannot fully cure. Science however, continues to try. It does not leave one's fate to "God". How do you know that people in third world countries arent evolving faster than we are? Most of the worlds greatest runners are from africa. People with Dark skin are more immune to UV rays than lighter skinned people. Biologically, I personally believe Africans have an advantage over us...now if only they could get over the AIDS epidemic...

Man-Made machines is a loosely phrased word. Do you mean industrial machines, or computers? First off, we DO NOT want to make self improving machines. Why? Think Skynet. If a machine could self improve, became self aware, we would be in deep shit. I believe it IS possible to make a computer to self-improve. Some companies make AI's (artificial intelligence) that will learn from their mistakes, to prevent the mistakes from happening again.

A biological machine run by cause and effect? Elaborate. Right now, That statement makes me assume you are an idiot. Animals try to preserve their genes because it is in their nature. You may as well be asking why animals have sex, or why people have the desire for food and sex.

Offline himura_kenshin

Re:10 Commandments in Alabama?
« Reply #66 on: September 04, 2003, 12:11:48 PM »
Yes they're more athletic and not as harmed by UV rays, but i don't see any becoming immune to deadly diseases that americans or europeans are not.

And as to the second part you seem to have missed my point. Let me make this easier by asking you a question. Do you believe in predistination? Or say, if we made a computer (i know this would be impossible in real life, but hypothetically) that held all possible information about the universe as it exists now and has existed, could we predict the future with perfect accuracy? When i see something, does it lead to the inevitable chain reaction of being sent from my eyes to my brain, my brain processing it, me linking it to my experiences and other personality traits inhereted through genes, and then reacting the only way i possibly could given the circumstances?

Offline Majin Tenshi

  • McCoy Golem!
  • Of the Abyss
  • *****
  • Posts: 2177
  • Karma: 0
  • Gender: Male
  • The can opener went bye-bye...
Re:10 Commandments in Alabama?
« Reply #67 on: September 04, 2003, 12:27:15 PM »
yes, there are diseases that we cannot fully cure. Science however, continues to try. It does not leave one's fate to "God". How do you know that people in third world countries arent evolving faster than we are? Most of the worlds greatest runners are from africa. People with Dark skin are more immune to UV rays than lighter skinned people. Biologically, I personally believe Africans have an advantage over us...now if only they could get over the AIDS epidemic...
 Yea, advanced countries no longer have the weak die off, so survival of the fittest no longer applies.  
Oh, and Africans don't have an all out advantage.  Every "race" that originated near the equater has skin about that dark, its just not that purpleish black color.  And take an african to Antarctica and they don't get enough vitimin D to survive.  

Ok, why does a critter try to preserve itself?  Well, those with a tendency to try to live and reproduce continue on and the rest die off.  By common decent theory, this would have been one of the first things to evolve.  
Ok, so I leave and come back....

Offline himura_kenshin

Re:10 Commandments in Alabama?
« Reply #68 on: September 04, 2003, 08:18:01 PM »
Quote
Ok, why does a critter try to preserve itself?  Well, those with a tendency to try to live and reproduce continue on and the rest die off.  By common decent theory, this would have been one of the first things to evolve.
Hmm... well that is a pretty reasonable theory, but it requiers that some things started off with a tendency to try and survive and procreate. I would equate it to saying some computers like to be on and some don't care.

The first thing i'm going to get criticzed with here is the obvious "Animals and cells are different from complex computers." And from my perspective, i could give a few reasons why i think they're different. But from an atheist perspective... just how are they different?

I believe that survival and procreation is an goal that was set into place by God on or near the time of creation. Why would such a goal exist otherwise? Pain, for example, is a phsycological reaction to something our body deems bad for our health.

All living things have desires, goals, and they work toward suvival. Even plants. Forementioned examples of adaptation or evolution prove this. No matter how complicated or capable you make a computer, it will only work toward it's own maintenance if it is programmed to do so, by the programmer. Majin, your answer to my question basically that not all organisms had this goal, but of course they died out. But no matter how many supercomputers you build, none of them will have goals or desires unless told to. The way I see it, none of those organisms should have had any such tendancy.

Anway, i'm getting fairly abstract here and really having trouble verbalizing and giving good examples of what i'm thinking here. But hopefully you get what i mean.
« Last Edit: September 04, 2003, 08:19:56 PM by himura_kenshin »

medievald00d

  • Guest
Re:10 Commandments in Alabama?
« Reply #69 on: September 04, 2003, 09:40:50 PM »
Hmm... well that is a pretty reasonable theory, but it requiers that some things started off with a tendency to try and survive and procreate. I would equate it to saying some computers like to be on and some don't care.

The first thing i'm going to get criticzed with here is the obvious "Animals and cells are different from complex computers." And from my perspective, i could give a few reasons why i think they're different. But from an atheist perspective... just how are they different?

I believe that survival and procreation is an goal that was set into place by God on or near the time of creation. Why would such a goal exist otherwise? Pain, for example, is a phsycological reaction to something our body deems bad for our health.

All living things have desires, goals, and they work toward suvival. Even plants. Forementioned examples of adaptation or evolution prove this. No matter how complicated or capable you make a computer, it will only work toward it's own maintenance if it is programmed to do so, by the programmer. Majin, your answer to my question basically that not all organisms had this goal, but of course they died out. But no matter how many supercomputers you build, none of them will have goals or desires unless told to. The way I see it, none of those organisms should have had any such tendancy.

Anway, i'm getting fairly abstract here and really having trouble verbalizing and giving good examples of what i'm thinking here. But hopefully you get what i mean.
I am sorry.You obviously either did not read my post, or did not understand it. WE DONT WANT COMPUTERS TO HAVE SELF PRESERVATION. Why? this could cause serious problems. Secondly, DEFINE "Atheist perspective". Then, define atheist. Quite frankly, I dont think you know the meaning.

Now i have to claim your a hypocrite. I say this because you are christian, therefore believe that a god gave you the desire for survival. Yet, why can't man give a computer the desire for survival? If you plan to argue as a christian, stick by the laws of christianity.

You seem to look at things in one perspective. You look at everything modernly, as if everything came to pass instantly. Animals have been evolving for millions of years, developing ways to survive, passing their genes on through reproduction. I will only compare computers with animals the day you can show me a computer that can have sex. Nuff said

Offline Mizar

  • Of the Nexus
  • ***
  • Posts: 664
  • Karma: 0
  • Œ©‰Ž•·‚©‰ŽŒ¾‚퉎
Re:10 Commandments in Alabama?
« Reply #70 on: September 04, 2003, 09:51:38 PM »
Hmm... well that is a pretty reasonable theory, but it requiers that some things started off with a tendency to try and survive and procreate.

Sorry, but did you read what Majin wrote? I quote: "By common decent theory, this would have been one of the first things to evolve."

You see, that tendency you're talking about is just a simple evolutionary product, created through mutation and natural selection. And of course computers don't have any desire or will to live, you don't expect us to be able to recreate something that 'nature' needed billions of years for? And besides, computers don't need a will to live to be able to survive, they just need a careful and understanding owner. ;)

Offline Majin Tenshi

  • McCoy Golem!
  • Of the Abyss
  • *****
  • Posts: 2177
  • Karma: 0
  • Gender: Male
  • The can opener went bye-bye...
Re:10 Commandments in Alabama?
« Reply #71 on: September 04, 2003, 10:36:40 PM »
Hmm... well that is a pretty reasonable theory, but it requiers that some things started off with a tendency to try and survive and procreate.
 As I understand it:
The basic scientific idea of the origin of life is that a chance combination of elements (C O H mostly I'd guess) created the first self replicateing molecules.  These molecules started building randomly (not exact copies) and these various protiens eventualy began to form more complex structures.  

Now, my previous statement was based on the idea that it was allready to the point of simple cells (pre-nucleus though they may be).  Simply the fact that some would randomly duplicate would be enough for this.  By reproduceing, they doubled the frequency of thier duplicate gene in all of life.  This easily overpowers anything that doesn't have a tendency to reproduce.  
Really, we should get off of this computers = life analogy.  Its really bad.  All computers are designed to do is repeat the same task quickly.  Computers don't have any capacity for mutation or reproduction, two basic requirements for evolution.  Perhaps nano-machines...
« Last Edit: September 04, 2003, 10:41:52 PM by Majin Tenshi »
Ok, so I leave and come back....

Offline himura_kenshin

Re:10 Commandments in Alabama?
« Reply #72 on: September 04, 2003, 10:40:25 PM »
Quote
I am sorry.You obviously either did not read my post, or did not understand it. WE DONT WANT COMPUTERS TO HAVE SELF PRESERVATION. Why? this could cause serious problems. Secondly, DEFINE "Atheist perspective". Then, define atheist. Quite frankly, I dont think you know the meaning.

Now i have to claim your a hypocrite. I say this because you are christian, therefore believe that a god gave you the desire for survival. Yet, why can't man give a computer the desire for survival? If you plan to argue as a christian, stick by the laws of christianity.

You seem to look at things in one perspective. You look at everything modernly, as if everything came to pass instantly. Animals have been evolving for millions of years, developing ways to survive, passing their genes on through reproduction. I will only compare computers with animals the day you can show me a computer that can have sex. Nuff said


First of all I see why we wouldn't want computers that practice self-preservation, but wanting or not wanting them nothing to do with the HYPOTHETICAL questions i was presenting. I did read your first post, and you're still not understanding what I'm saying or providing decent answers to my questions.

And if you haven't noticed yet, i'm not defending my beliefs right now, i'm attacking yours. That's why i'm repeating what you say and asking questions. My preferred debating strategy is to turn people on themselves, so don't tell me how to debate.

Also, the reason i asked the difference between animals and computers is because computers only have goals if they're programmed, but you claim that animals can have goals without being "programmed". And then you answer me with "they have sex". Oh well now it all makes perfect sense, animals try to survive because they have sex. Perfectly logical explanation. And animals didn't obtain a goal of survival BY evolution, because without that goal, evolution could never have occurred in the first place. So the time passage makes no difference in this case either.

Now, no doubt you will respond with a very length post, but somewhere in it i would appreciate if you include the answer to this question:

* A hypothetical supercomputer can only strive for survival if it is told to.
* Organisms can strive for survival (according to you) without being told to.
* What crucial difference is there in an organism that allows them to have this goal without being told to?

Now, if i have misrepresented your beliefs with this question, please tell me so, and i will revise it. Otherwise i would appreciate if you would give me a reasonable answer like Majin did.

Offline himura_kenshin

Re:10 Commandments in Alabama?
« Reply #73 on: September 04, 2003, 10:47:22 PM »
Eek! two posts just while i was typing that one :P

Ok, i don't think it's such a bad analogy. I seem to be the only one here who believes in a spiritual realm (correct me if i'm wrong). So according to everyone else, if it exists, it exists in a physical form. Even a concept, such as anger, exists as a physical form as chemicals or impulses in the brain. So my question is, what is the physical form of this goal of survival? And anyway, you were only talking about reproduction there, that doesn't even touch on improvement.

edit:

Quote
The basic scientific idea of the origin of life is that a chance combination of elements (C O H mostly I'd guess) created the first self replicateing molecules.  These molecules started building randomly (not exact copies) and these various protiens eventualy began to form more complex structures.  


Why would they do that if they had no goal for survival yet? They just "did"? A combination of elements doesn't need any explanation, it's a mere coincidence and perfectly understandable. But why would they form more complex structures?
« Last Edit: September 04, 2003, 10:52:07 PM by himura_kenshin »

Offline Majin Tenshi

  • McCoy Golem!
  • Of the Abyss
  • *****
  • Posts: 2177
  • Karma: 0
  • Gender: Male
  • The can opener went bye-bye...
Re:10 Commandments in Alabama?
« Reply #74 on: September 04, 2003, 10:56:52 PM »
Eek! two posts just while i was typing that one :P
 (looks at post times) It took you an hour to write that...?
Ok, i don't think it's such a bad analogy. I seem to be the only one here who believes in a spiritual realm (correct me if i'm wrong). So according to everyone else, if it exists, it exists in a physical form. Even a concept, such as anger, exists as a physical form as chemicals or impulses in the brain. So my question is, what is the physical form of this goal of survival? And anyway, you were only talking about reproduction there, that doesn't even touch on improvement.
 There are certain things hard-wired into liveing creatures.  As in, behaviors are programed into their DNA.

For instance:
Human infants know to stop breathing and start swimming when placed in water.  (fades away)
A certain species of wasp makes a complex egg-case gaurd completely on instinct.  
Those are examples of very precisely "wired" behaviors.  More losely wired, but no less powerful, are called "drives."  These are what cause animals to re-produce.  

Plants reproduce entirely cyclically.  Single celled organisms reproduce whenever they get too big.  Both of those are easily hard wired in.
« Last Edit: September 04, 2003, 10:57:57 PM by Majin Tenshi »
Ok, so I leave and come back....