Geezer

Oh that's weak! Animals show emotions, but what would be the point of that from a creators point of view? He could just tell animals to have it off mechanically to further their species, after all, they are just their for us to be masters of! But, even in animals, you see genuine friendships between animals, and hatred, and it's not always over territory or mating.

Happiness, depression, anger, fear, all exhibited by animals.

There is some evidence that gorillas and elephants also cry, care to explain that one?

Tears whilst crying is most likely to gain empathy or sympathy from your peers, despite what you think, it does give you an advantage. I am not a tearful person, but I do feel emotion. Who are people going to comfort in a sad/stressful/whatever situaiton, me or the person crying next to me? I know who my money goes on, even though I may feel just as bad.

Creationism was created to fit a particular story, whereas evolutionism fits the observed world, it's quite a different process.

Geezer

Uurrgghh!

Ahhh, the old "it is what it is" theory, interesting but without conflict; it needs work, maybe you need to spice it up a tad?

djmisio85

Well obviously you cant explain it..... My simple answer to your question is... GOD

TopBanana

It's not a conscious decision. Babies don't decide to breathe in order to increase their bloody oxygen levels straight after birth - it's innate.

You might miss some of the dreadful acting?

We evolved into the beings we are now long before the olympics, or cinema, or houses, or large organised societies. We haven't had time to evolve further, so perhaps we aren't perfectly adapted to this new environment?

Geezer

Oh thankyou, I haven't had such a laugh in ages

GOD is not an answer, it's a fallback when you don't have an answer.

So, you believe that everything you don't understand means God is the answer?

I bet it's fun in your house when you get a new PVR or something.

"Er, how do I set this up to record all the Coronation Streets?"

"God will program it my child!"

Geezer

djmisio85

Instead of mocking me, why dont you give me an answer to why gorillas and elephants cry?
Oh wait.... you cant......

Maybe its because humans and animals have emotions..... Where do emotions come from? Why does a cat feel emotion, but a rock doesnt? Judging from evoultion, a rock should have evolved to such a level by now, that it can walk, talk and cry

Geezer

They proably can do it for the same reasons as us, to get a reaction from others in their group. The 'evolved' it

A rock doesn't have emotions because it doesn't have a central nervous system or a brain. Rocks don't evolve because they don't reproduce, or have genetic material to mutate.

That's quite a difference you know........

I don't think we should get into questions you think cannot be explained considering your viewpoint

'God' is not an answer.

Geezer

Blue by You

iTrader: (23)

I totally agree. God is a concept reliant entirely on an individual's belief. There is no proof that a God exists, at least no proof that I have been made aware of. Furthermore we are repeatedly reminded by the Keepers of the Faith not to search for proof, but to have faith. Sounds a bit like a self fulfilling prophecy to me.

Where it all goes wrong IMHO is when we try to impose our individual, or collective, beliefs on others.

A wiser man than I (and there are quite a few ) once said, if you believe in God, then there is one. I am not so arrogant as to declare that there is no such thing as God, again there's no proof. But in the light of all available evidence, I am prepared to say that I do have my doubts.

Religious beliefs of all kinds have been responsible for countless millions of deaths through the centuries and will no doubt remain a potentially destructive force. But we can all appreciate the magnificent buildings, fine works of art, and heroic deeds all all dedicated to a belief in a God.

To get the thread back on track though, did God create Heaven and Earth and all it contains?
Sorry, Darwin has it by quite a margin for me.

CRAIGFIN

For those of you who are interested in the subject I can recommend this book by Professor Richard Dawkins.

The God Delusion

It's my favourite book of all time.

OllyK

There's a difference between "Creationism" and "the creation story". Creationism has been re-branded of late in to Intelligent Design, but the crux is the same. Yes they do believe the planet is 6000 years old, calculated from the ages of the various people in the old testament back to Adam and Eve.

OllyK

That's not an answer it's an evasion.

OllyK

You find me a breeding pair of rocks and then we'll dicuss their emotional status.

OllyK

Sam Harris - The End of Faith is worth a read. I prefer Dawkins when he sticks to genetics and evolution.

Torquemada

Now, I do think creationism is completely mental and backwards thinking.
Rocks!....Evolving!....wtf!
Dinosaurs fossils there to test faith etc., ok, you guys just go ahead believe in that.
There are too many things for creationists to explain to even start to make me think it was possible and just believing in God and having faith does not constitute an answer either
I can't take it seriously myself, but each to their own and all that

Dedrater

I am not going to get into this thread because I just can not compete with people who ask such profound questions like "why haven't rocks evolved" This is way past my current thinking, but on the flip side........**EDITED*.........

GC8

?

Devildog

If we find you "breeding" a couple of rocks, I think we'll be discussing your emotional status.

Bubba po

I honestly didn't want this thread to be a discussion about the existence or non-existence of God, but to see if there were any advocates of "Intelligent Design Theory" on SN with whom I could have a jolly good tussle. I really didn't expect a whole thread based around one man's bizarre fascination with the purpose of tears.

Devildog

BTW - basic emotions such as fear have existed in most, if not all, brained life forms since their existence began for simple reasons of self preservation. What we see is that in certain species the breadth of emotions has evolved over time to suit the partcular circumstances of that species and how they interact with their own kind.

Those with the greatest levels of interaction tend to demonstrate greater emotional diversity, ie primates & humans.

Uurrgghh!

Yawn.....

and your point is? apart from stating the obvious.

It's survival pure and simple, empathy and learning, that's all it is. Unless you're from North of the border then it appears you loose track of things slightly!

ricardo

For me, the thing in favour of evolution is that given enough time almost any combination of circumstances will occur. That means millions or billions of years, so plenty of time for things to evolve. Time spans that we simply can't imagine - a few thousand years is hard enough but we aren't equipped to visualise millions or billions.

Given umpteen million years it isn't hard to see how some slimy combinations of self-copying molecules found an advantage by being able to colonise hot springs, or dryish beaches, or whatever, and evolved from slime to early algae. Each tiny step took a very long time and probably had an uncountable number of false starts and blind avenues, extinctions and successes, but given enough time life reached the position it holds now.

Eventually there were animals whose conceptual skills and communications allowed them to come up with the idea of gods...

Uurrgghh!

Strange though that in the last 100,000 years there have been no signs of evolution, none, not one.

Lisawrx

iTrader: (1)

Really it's more of a matter of how everything started. I believe in evolution, as you can see it going on, and how it's already happened. Living things adapt, change and develop over time to survive basically. Some are successful, some aren't. Unless something compelling comes along to wipe out that theory, I for now, accept this is the way.

However, how it all 'got going', I'm less sure about. Was it a big bang, was it a higher power? I don't know. I'd like to think it was something 'bigger' rather than just luck that certain things mixed and life was born, but that's just me.

As I've said before, I know alot of people who believe there is a higher power at work, yet also accept, or certainly don't dismiss evolution.

Removed.

Evolution for me. Whilst I personally don't believe in some sort of supreme being like the Great Green Arkleseizure, that magically produced what we see today, if another person wants to, good for them. However, if there is some sort of "God" then I think he has some very strange ideas, famine, war, pestilence, and please don't give me that whole "sent to test us" guff. I watched a series of programmes a few years ago that put forward the "Supreme being created it all, and the fossils etc are all part of a giant puzzle that will lead to ultimate knowledge and enlightenment" argument. Whilst I could understand and to some extent agree with some of their suppositions and arguments, there were some massive gaps in their belief systems, and they just completely ignored some of the interviewers very valid questions, particularly those dealing with other faiths, such as Muslims, Bhuddists, Hindus.

Kieran_Burns

iTrader: (1)

Loading the gun:

A concept known as "intelligent design" (ID) has been used as an argument against Darwinism from the publication of On the Origin of Species in 1859 right up to the present day. Quite simply, ID states that living organisms must be the product of careful and conscious design, so perfectly formed that they cannot be explained by the random workings of evolution alone. Modern ID theorists contend that this is a new and novel scientific alternative to evolution.

ID, however, has been rejected by the modern scientific community for the same reasons that it failed in the 19th century. When closely examined, the living world is filled with evidence that complex organisms not only could have evolved through evolution's trial-and-error mechanism, but must have done so, because their structure, their physiology, and even their genetic makeup are all inconsistent with the demands of intelligent design.


from here: Evolution: Change: Life's Grand Design

Bubba po

Exactly. If organisms were designed, they could have been done a lot better.

Kieran_Burns

iTrader: (1)

Got that one covered as well:

If the eye was designed, the designer is in need of urgent reappraisal.


The eye is an organ of unsurpassed beauty, its evolution thought to be "absurd in the highest possible degree." But it is hardly a perfect organ or represents perfect design. Its lens becomes cloudy, causing visual loss; its anterior chamber may be too narrow, predisposing to angle closure glaucoma. The vitreous detaches causing visual obscuration and predisposes to retinal detachments. The retina is back to front, prone to holes and tears. The blood supply of the retina and optic nerve is prone to occlusion or inflammation with resultant irreversible visual loss. The nerve supply of the extraocular muscles also shows quite remarkable design flaws in their origin, pathways, and terminations. The optic pathways are hardly organised in a sensible fashion, indeed they may be affected by a stroke, resulting in visual loss with anatomically untouched

Kieran_Burns

iTrader: (1)

Oh stuff it - just go read "The Blind Watchmaker"

the author amusingly proved the non-existance of God - citing that if God exists and designed / drove all of creation he must be sufficiently complex himself, but no one offers an explanation of how!

Bubba po

But only in the vertebrate eye. In the most highly evolved invertebrate eye, that of the cephalopods (squids and octopuses) it's the "right" way round.

This requires some explanation:

In the vertebrate eye (e.g. our eye), the cells that detect light have their 'wires' coming out of the front, onto the surface of the retina! They are routed over the retina, getting in the way of the light, until they go down the optic nerve. The cephalopod eye has a much better arrangement, where the 'wires' come out of the back of the receptors and are routed behind the retina.

jods

Notice - Adam and Eve.

Not

Adam and Steve.

Think on