God Vs Darwin.

Status
Not open for further replies.

nathaniak

Guest
I am... upset

Anyway, let's go bash our opponents - we are on the same side here!
 

DeletedUser

Guest
Well, I don't know if god exists or not, but I've seen, experienced things which I never really could answer to without believing that somewhere out there, there is someone with superpowers. Well, I agree it's most probably because science isn't developed enough to give me answers to my questions, so I just think that there is some1 with superpowers which could be terribly wrong. But if god exists, what does he expects from us? Being nice to humans, animals & our planet (universe in bigger apect) and pray to him. I think people dont really need to have belief in god to be nice it's pretty much logical. If you ain't nice to others, they ain't to you, simple as that. But if god let's us burn in hell even if we were nice just because we didn't pray to him I think he's an idiot in that case. So I myself always try to be nice to ppl and so on and don't pray to god. I believe this kind of lifestyle is profitable wheter god exists or not. Nice thread lol, keep going.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
damn, go to supper, then have realize you have a project o_O damn, me skip ahead cause me lazy :)

Shinin(G) Angel said:
...But if god let's us burn in hell even if we were nice just because we didn't pray to him I think he's an idiot in that case...
Click to expand...

alright, not sure about other religions, but in Christianity it isn't like God says, MUHAHAHA! BURN IN HELL! Its more like...darn it all...you didn't want to love me so I guess you won't. (This naturally brings up the "Why does God allow us to go to hell? which is because we sin, then people ask "Why did God allow us to sin?" which the answer is, "because he gave us free will. Then you ask "Why did he give us free will when he knew we were going to disobey him and in the end burn in hell...the answer is I don't know...jk, I do :icon_wink: Its because if you didn't have the choice to love God it wouldn't really be love now would it. You'd be like a robot )

and well seeing as I'm bored I guess I will go back to evolution seeing as it was a cool topic :icon_smile:

Morales...did we get them through evolution :icon_eek: I can prove we didn't :icon_cool:.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
In koran there is stated, that people who don't pray to god will burn in hell.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
never actually seen a koran, but I would be willing to research that part for you, do you know where it says in the koran it says that?
 

nathaniak

Guest
Evolution can prove morals. When we lived in tribes, if you helped another, then that was great. But the others would hold the genes too, so they would be kind back. If a tribe member was not nice, they would not be as nice to him.

ERGO the members with the 'niceness' gene complex AS A GROUP benefit. So we only probably evolved morals when we started living together.

BTW before you shout at me, we lived in tribes for millions of years so there was enough time for evolution.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
MESIBA said:
never actually seen a koran, but I would be willing to research that part for you, do you know where it says in the koran it says that?
Click to expand...

Take a look at 257 بقره
if you have a koran...
 

DeletedUser

Guest
pyker42 said:
Waits for the proof.
Click to expand...

YEAH...my turn :icon_twisted:

You are starving, you steal food to survive...you feel bad about it...yet you aren't going to die anymore o_O

If morals corresponded with evolution then morales would be guided by what helps us live. If you steal to eat you are generally going against your morales...and your conscious is there to tell you that your doing it...not sure what the conscious is there for but I can tell you it ain't because of evolution. If they were stealing food to survive would not go against them...but they are.

Shinin(G) Angel said:
Take a look at 257 بقره
if you have a koran...
Click to expand...

Unfortunately I can't read Arabic...can you give me an English name for that book o_O so I can look it up :icon_razz:

nathaniak said:
Evolution can prove morals. When we lived in tribes, if you helped another, then that was great. But the others would hold the genes too, so they would be kind back. If a tribe member was not nice, they would not be as nice to him.

ERGO the members with the 'niceness' gene complex AS A GROUP benefit. So we only probably evolved morals when we started living together.

BTW before you shout at me, we lived in tribes for millions of years so there was enough time for evolution.
Click to expand...

Yes, I'm sure if you helped eachother it was great...and I'm sure rivaling tribes wouldn't kill eachother in order to gain hunting grounds and that they all hugged eachother and the world was peaceful :icon_rolleyes:

And i dare you to find that niceness gene...and it shouldn't be too hard...they got the entire genome mapped, and only 1% of it differs from person to person so it shouldn't be that hard to look through to find it if the niceness gene isn't with everyone :lol:

and I just have to say it

vader-fail.jpg


Does this mean I don't have the niceness gene? :icon_twisted:
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DeletedUser

Guest
ristow said:
Koran is the english name. >_<
Click to expand...

I know Koran is the english name, but just like the Bible is split up into books so is the Koran...and that was what I was asking

257 بقره

can't read arabic so I don't know which specific book that is so I can't look it up :icon_sad:
 

DeletedUser

Guest
MESIBA said:
You are starving, you steal food to survive...you feel bad about it...yet you aren't going to die anymore o_O

If morals corresponded with evolution then morales would be guided by what helps us live. If you steal to eat you are generally going against your morales...and your conscious is there to tell you that your doing it...not sure what the conscious is there for but I can tell you it ain't because of evolution. If they were stealing food to survive would not go against them...but they are.
Click to expand...
How exactly does this prove that morals don't come from evolution? :icon_rolleyes:

Humans are pack animals, just like wolves and lions. It is embedded in our nature that we work together to survive, not being loners like tigers. Morals can be considered a manifestation of the pack animal mentality. There is a societal hierarchy that needs to be maintained to ensure the survival of the pack, and by extension, the individuals of the pack. As our society has evolved into civilization, the need for an ordered hierarchy has evolved with us into the basic tenants that we consider to be morals.
MESIBA said:
And i dare you to find that niceness gene...and it shouldn't be too hard...they got the entire genome mapped, and only 1% of it differs from person to person so it shouldn't be that hard to look through to find it if the niceness gene isn't with everyone :lol:
Click to expand...

You do realize that there are 20,000 - 25,000 genes in human DNA, right? So, 1%, while not sounding like much, is 200 - 250 genes. When you also consider that basically only 10% of the genes in our DNA are apparently used, that 1% difference then represents 10% of the genes used.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
pyker42 said:
How exactly does this prove that morals don't come from evolution? :icon_rolleyes:

Humans are pack animals, just like wolves and lions. It is embedded in our nature that we work together to survive, not being loners like tigers. Morals can be considered a manifestation of the pack animal mentality. There is a societal hierarchy that needs to be maintained to ensure the survival of the pack, and by extension, the individuals of the pack. As our society has evolved into civilization, the need for an ordered hierarchy has evolved with us into the basic tenants that we consider to be morals.


You do realize that there are 20,000 - 25,000 genes in human DNA, right? So, 1%, while not sounding like much, is 200 - 250 genes. When you also consider that basically only 10% of the genes in our DNA are apparently used, that 1% difference then represents 10% of the genes used.
Click to expand...

#1. It proves that morals did not come by evolution because the 2 conflict...Evolution has to do with survival, if it benefits your survival then you do it, but morals sometimes go against survival...ie, the starving analogy. So if the 2 conflict they couldn't exist with each other as is. Therefore evolution did not cause morales

#2. Ok, now that we are in our pack groups, would you not still feel bad if you stole from a different country in order to survive? Like say you live in France and your country had a severe case of acid rain...but you don't have anything to protect yourself from it, and you can't afford to buy any filters for your water in order to drink. Are you saying that if the French people crossed the border and took the filters from the spanish their morals wouldn't tell them not to :icon_eek:

#3. Genes and DNA is different...we have tonnes of DNA we don't use, but we do use all of our genes, and in those genes there is a 1% difference person to person. and seeing as the "niceness gene would be in the 200-250 it shouldn't be too hard to find it there now should it.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
uh huh...so your saying that a geneplex gave us morales through evolution...hmmmm, as you can tell by my previous points I think you should know where I stand on that one.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
MESIBA said:
#1. It proves that morals did not come by evolution because the 2 conflict...Evolution has to do with survival, if it benefits your survival then you do it, but morals sometimes go against survival...ie, the starving analogy. So if the 2 conflict they couldn't exist with each other as is. Therefore evolution did not cause morales
Click to expand...
You are ignoring the concept of pack mentality. When the lionesses bring a kill back for the pride, your assumption would be, that based on survival, they would eat first, correct? In actuality, though, the males eat first. This is because of the societal hierarchy that is embedded in their nature. It is the same way for humans. We often put the concerns of the whole over the concerns of the individual. In fact, that is the basis of civilization, for if we were not capable of doing that we wouldn't exist as we do today. It is our pack animal heritage that creates this mentality that is now manifested in what we call "morals."

MESIBA said:
#2. Ok, now that we are in our pack groups, would you not still feel bad if you stole from a different country in order to survive? Like say you live in France and your country had a severe case of acid rain...but you don't have anything to protect yourself from it, and you can't afford to buy any filters for your water in order to drink. Are you saying that if the French people crossed the border and took the filters from the spanish their morals wouldn't tell them not to :icon_eek:
Click to expand...
As the world grows closer and into one "tribe" this type of mentality will diminish. However, pack mentality doesn't mean that we put the preservation of other packs ahead of ourselves. We are concerned with our own pack.

In regards to your example, no, "morals" would not stop them. You know why? The survival of their pack (the French) far outweighs the survival of the the other pack (the Spanish), therefore, their morals will be counter acted by the need for survival of their group. Of course, it is the French we are talking about, so they might just instead surrender to the Spanish and hope for the best. :lol:

MESIBA said:
#3. Genes and DNA is different...we have tonnes of DNA we don't use, but we do use all of our genes, and in those genes there is a 1% difference person to person. and seeing as the "niceness gene would be in the 200-250 it shouldn't be too hard to find it there now should it.
Click to expand...

As it has been a long time since I've taken a biology course, I will hold off on responding to this until later. But it is coming.:icon_twisted:
 

DeletedUser

Guest
On the first page Broly brought up the point that humans "haven't evolved" in "recent" times.

Firstly, look at the percentage of our time on earth as humans that we have kept accurate enough records to prove that there haven't been "significant" changes.

Secondly, we have actually been growing taller at a fairly steady pace. Victorian men as an example were several centimetres smaller on average that we are now.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top