The 'evidence' we are created by intelligent design

My objection is to the rudeness of the replies.

It has nothing to do with pitchforks and villagers and everything to do with civility.

ATS USED to be known for this. Sadly those days appear to be gone.

Originally posted by aaaiii
My objection is to the rudeness of the replies.

It has nothing to do with pitchforks and villagers and everything to do with civility.

ATS USED to be known for this. Sadly those days appear to be gone.

It would appear that we have a reminder here that the term "civility" is shackled in objectivity. i saw nothing uncivil about his reply. Terse? Probably....but that is just a shade of grey that we are talking about now.

i think you are more accustomed to being talked to with kid gloves, at least as it relates to matters of religion. i think that we must also remember that respect/disrespect is not a zero sum equation. Not having respect for something is not the same as disrespecting something. we have to remember that respect is earned, and to someone who has used logic and reasoning to move away from the church, it is obvious that respect was not really earned.

i think you should lower your expectations for what civlity actually is. i would say that the intent is that we not be uncivil to each other. meaning, that we do not speak meanly. Not that we cannot just say things matter of factly and bluntly. That is expecting too many other people to conform to your own views on what civil discourse is.

And to that, I would say that you should be more tolerant Tolerance used to be a big part of ATS.....so on and so forth.

reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan

I'm used to an old-fashioned world. Unfortunately, it's gone.

I definitly believe we are here for a reason. Like something to do with mastering our emotions.

But if anything it is the animal part of us that gives us tendency and a propensity for evil. Chips kill and eat rival chimp gangs babies, Dolphins rape and murder for fun, Reindeer and jaguar eat psychedelic mushrooms. and pretty much all animals will kill any other animal that threatens them and theirs.

Over the last 30 years we have been indoctrinated to put animal life, and the environment over the value of human life.
Never before has this been so obvious to me.

If someone had to choose between letting a dog die and you, the majority of people anymore would let you die.
I cannot strees enough how wrong this is, or how much I believe it has been done intentionally to us to get us to embrace what is coming down the pipes AKA Agenda-21.

A lot of the world would be fine with a depop program in the name of saving the planet.

I for one would take a bullet for any one of you, And mean that wholeheartedly.

If anything I think the earth, and the monkey half of us is property of the enemy.(Who shall remain nameless) But I do think even him/it is just playing a role in the big show.


I love you,

There is no such thing as "good and evil", those are human concepts and those are no absolutes.
What is "good" or what is "evil" is what you, as a human, learn as part of your life.

But "good or evil" does not "exist", as such. Your wording is maybe a little off when you say we have a choice between good and evil, but it would be more correct to say that we have (are given?) the ability to develop a sense/moral...and then act according to OUR OWN, LEARNED MORAL....either "good" or "evil".

For example, there are people who kill and torture animals and who have not the slightest grasp that what they do is "evil", while others would not even hurt the smallest animal because of a sense of moral they developed on their own that it is bad/evil to hurt an animal.

But i think...on the background of the "universe" (so to speak)..there is no absolute law which dictates what is evil or good, not even killing other people etc....there is no doubt that in history people killed others 100% CONVINCED that their killing is for a good cause and actually a good thing. (Interestingly, you could also read up on serial murderers etc. who, for example, kill others because of religious fanatism..they think they are doing a good deed to kill whoever they deem bad/evil...a classic example would be the serial killer who kills prostitutes at night, convinced they are "evil" and he is doing a good thing by killing them.)

You see it's highly, highly subjective.

The challenge here..and this is where it gets interesting, is that we as humans have the ability to develop such a sense/moral to make OUR OWN, VERY OWN rule what we consider good/evil even if such an universal law might not even exist. When i, as a human being, realize that i have the power to, say, end the life of an innocent animal (example!!) but then realizing this power i say that i do not want to do this, realizing that maybe the animal has much a right to experience this life as i do.

And this is (probably)...where it gets religious/spiritual..for example then if you realize there is no "universal law" which says "You can not kill animals, it's evil"

reply to post by flexy123

Who gives us this task?

Originally posted by aaaiii
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan

 

I'm used to an old-fashioned world. Unfortunately, it's gone.

edit on 7/27/2012 by aaaiii because: (no reason given)

Your grandfather would have said the same thing.

Regardless, i too am an old fashioned guy. I come from stock that speaks their mind when it matters (and not only when it hurts), that is honest (both outwardly and inwardly), and abhors the concept of "yes men". I don't think noreaster (or my) communication style is rude. it is just matter of fact. no need to waste too many words, as to many words makes poor communication.

I think it is more your view on his opinion, not his communication, that stoked ire.

Originally posted by ImNotHuman
Good And Evil = Light And Dark

How Dont You Get It Yet?

Because there's nothing that makes me believe that is the Truth. Many good things happen in the dark, and many atrocities are committed in the light. Not to mention light itself can be harmful and deadly. There is nothing inherently good or evil about light or darkness, as you can find both in both.

reply to post by Atzil321


The brain runs on either glucose or ketones. Meat is a source of both. Fruits tend to have fructose except some have sucrose. Lot of glucose in mushrooms though Grilled Mushroom on his steak with some baked potatoes on the side and all the nutrients would be there. The potato seems to have originated in south America along with this potato head kid.

reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan

You are wrong. So much for your efforts to crawl inside my head.

reply to post by aaaiii


wouldn't be the first time i was wrong.

So I thought about this a little this evening....

....it seems as though, to me, what is taken offense at is the way that NorEaster points out that regardless of what we believe to be true, the actual truth will continue to exist regardless. And tomorrow, if we don't wake up, the world will continue as well.

I think why i find this to be perfectly fine is because i believe our Creator to be utterly indifferent. Our reality was created with the rules needed to allow it to grow on its own (with life arising as a byproduct of the rules of the universe). God doesn't interact with us, he doesn't acknowledge us, and he doesn't provide us relief. He is absolutely indifferent to our existence, as it currently stands. Of course, this is the Shamanic study i have undetaken speaking.

A few weeks ago, in another thread, a loooong time friend literally freaked out when I intimated the above viewpoint. I suddently, after a decade of friendship. was a "Christian bashing hater" that could no longer be tolerated. All i was pointing out was that, in my view, God didn't care about our daily struggle. That prayers were not answered, and that we are subject to the whims of reactive fate.

We are all locked into the march of The Universal Law Of Consequence. This is so fundamental that God himself dare not try to violate it, or risk becoming grotesquely intertwined in our daily affairs.

There is a theory I discussed in another thread discussing the bicameral mind. It would apply here, where we are discussing the origins of religious thought. Or not. I don't want anyone else thinking i am bashing a faith that I value, even thought i don't participate.

Originally posted by Wonderer2012
I find it hard to see how you could not believe in 'good and evil'.

I never said I didn't believe in good and evil, please don't twist what I said to mean something different.

So you first say this:

Animals do not make conscious decisions. They act from instinct. They do not rationalise or have the ability to do so. They are guided by survival instinct.

Then you say this:

However, SOMETHING gave us free will, why would nature give us this ability?

Are you saying that WE are the only animals with free will? How can you presume we are the only animals that choose what we do or that nature could be so selective? We are not that different from the rest of nature.

Good and evil are not definable constants. What seems good from one point of view may seem evil from another so they are purely a matter of perspective.

Mowing a lawn for an elderly neighbour may seem like a good thing and not an evil thing.....unless you are a bug on that lawn.

reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan

So what is your opinion on fractals? Endless iteration is evidence of evolution? Or, just maybe, something sentient designed the system and the fractal is an example of a controlled universe since there are no mutations?

Do you see mutation as evolution, or is it the machinations of a master designer tweeking his creations? Birth defects, a platypus, marsupials, examples of errors in his code, or deliberate programming anomalies to test our faith, or lack thereof?

How is it that we came to be Homo sapiens without any discernible transition from "ape" to man?

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan

Originally posted by All Seeing Eye
We are not here for you to be amused by our humanity.

For what its worth, i find amusement in other people being human. I see humans as just another primate, when i am viewing them from the outside looking in. Then i have to remember: i am one of those primates, too. And that forces me to make myself start trying to act like a human again. But it generally sucks, to be honest, having to keep up all those phony airs so as to not castrate myself socially or professionally. So I smile, and pretend to be interested. Or I laugh at the unfunny. Or I show concern for the willfully morose. Then I grimace at the recollection that my primate behavior is actually amusing to me. I am on the other side of the glass.

For what its worth, NorEaster is speaking good information. I am a believer in a deity, and I still support every single thing NorEaster has posted in this thread. There wasn't anything ugly in there. He just avoided the human primate need to not be blunt and honest.

I suppose your perspective is understandable, if you neglect to consider that all these "smart" monkeys are operating under chemically induced stupidity. I myself give them great respect in that they can still operate, and learn a few thing about life. Hell, half of them can still tie their shoe laces.
I understand far more about "You" than you will ever admit to publicly, and maybe in the long run, that is a good thing.
Humanity is not a walk in the park, its not a ride in the Merc, if you know what I mean. All I ask is go a little easier on the meat bags, one day, you might find yourself back in one. Im sure individually, they are doing the best they can, with what they have.
Be Safe
ASE

It takes an intelligent being to come up even with the idea of Intelligent design. Who is to say we are not the intelligent designers ourselves?

reply to post by SparkOfSparks6

I'm right there with you on that thought. I, too, had the idea that in the future we may find time to be a circle and we will come back around only to learn we have created ourselves.

There are things that seem to indicate this. Our advances in brain research, prosthetics, etc.

Originally posted by aaaiii
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan

 

So what is your opinion on fractals? Endless iteration is evidence of evolution? Or, just maybe, something sentient designed the system and the fractal is an example of a controlled universe since there are no mutations?

Do you see mutation as evolution, or is it the machinations of a master designer tweeking his creations? Birth defects, a platypus, marsupials, examples of errors in his code, or deliberate programming anomalies to test our faith, or lack thereof?

How is it that we came to be Homo sapiens without any discernible transition from "ape" to man?

If we are to talk about me, first i need to clarify that i find it hard to believe anything absolutely. I have various things I believe within levels of probability, and other things i temporarily believe so i can think through a paradigm. That seems complicated....if you need clarification let me know.

Having said that....i "believe" that there is a master architect. I do not know who/what it/he/she is. But there are "laws" of our universe that maintain the system in the way that it is. These laws represent the levers that the Creator could pull to alter the outcome (our reality). Now, is this akin to a computer simulation? I like to fancy that idea sometimes...but realize that is is oversimplification to the nth degree.

I realize that when you step out of our reality you find a timeless existence. This would intimate that there was no "first tip of the domino" in a chain of events leading up to us today, as the line that leads up to us today is an illusion (albeit, a persistent one as our friend Einstein once told us).

I also believe the incompleteness theorem to be correct in its assertion that there are some puzzles that we are just not going to be able to solve.

Regardless, as it regards fractals....yes that is amazing. It shows that there is a "code" in the way the universe operates. A simple (or, maybe not so simple) set of rules that guides all actions and interactions. I also think that they are a hint at the "outside looking in" environment that exists beyond our reality (could it be considered tetraspace, or something like it? I don't know...but interesting to think about).

I also think that it is possible that our timeline of events was created, along with others, for a purpose. that the greater reality is the actual canvas on which our reality is painted on.

Nowhere in any of my thoughts is God a man in white flowing robes. Nowhere in any of my thoughts is our Creator anything other than that: a creator. With infinite possibilities of occurance throughout a timeless existence, I see little probability that what i am doing, in this very moment, is of great enough consequence to matter. Not that I am inconsequential, as none of us are. We are a part of the chain of events on this timeline. Now, what that means, I have no idea.

reply to post by Wonderer2012

To me, God exists, he is our creator.

So now what ? God exists and you stop as if frozen in the astonishment of your conclusion? No you go to the next step.
Which for me ( and should be for you ) was, seeing Gods obvious infinite capabilities. Surely he would leave us a communication. So find it. I did. Look here on Earth at all the candidates. One should stand out.

reply to post by Wonderer2012


Tons of animals kill out of joy...my cat does it all the time. Kills those tiny birds/mice and then lets them rot without eating them.

In short, I'm afraid you haven't posted any objective evidence at all...and we all know subjective evidence isn't reliable or valid to prove something like that