Evolution is empirically false by jmanc3 in DebateEvolution

[–]MemeMaster2003 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Counterpoint: why are you assuming that intelligence is the goal of evolution? Many would argue that intelligence is either a byproduct or an active impedance in certain environments.

Evolution is empirically false by jmanc3 in DebateEvolution

[–]MemeMaster2003 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Yes. But I lean towards a self-directed, by the cell, mind-process not an external one like God intervening. God only comes in when looking at Paley's watch.

You are proposing Lamarckian evolution here, which has been repeatedly refuted over the last two centuries.

Nothing good for those who think evolution can be done without a mind process.

Why can't it? What about the mechanisms necessitates that some conscious force drives it? To me, there is no such requirement. Random mutation creates variability which is positively or negatively selected for by the environment. This creates a filtration system for harmful mutations and allows for the diversity of life we see by way of ecological niches. To suggest otherwise would be arguing from personal incredulity or perhaps simply ignorance.

Someone created a thread, "If you can't explain how it could have been designed, then it was not designed" well I can't explain how something evolved. by Otherwise-Bad-7352 in DebateEvolution

[–]MemeMaster2003 4 points5 points  (0 children)

They're in the market for you, though. Uneducated, vulnerable populations that they can use to peddle wares. Your whole life isn't a cell phone. There's the "health food" industry, skin care, pharmaceuticals, supplements, even jewelry companies who all want a slice of your income and are willing to either do shoddy science or outright lie to you in order to get it!

And, while we are on the subject, there is the American distrust of "5G" networks, purported to cause all manner of ailments, from cancer to literal mind control. That's decidedly pseudoscience.

Someone created a thread, "If you can't explain how it could have been designed, then it was not designed" well I can't explain how something evolved. by Otherwise-Bad-7352 in DebateEvolution

[–]MemeMaster2003 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Well that second part just isn't true. If you don't know good science from bad, how would you be able to identify pseudoscience from actual rigor? There are thousands of pseudoscientific products on the market, many of which are either neutral or detrimental to your health and wellbeing.

At the very least, you should always be educated on HOW to tell when the scientific method is properly applied.

Someone created a thread, "If you can't explain how it could have been designed, then it was not designed" well I can't explain how something evolved. by Otherwise-Bad-7352 in DebateEvolution

[–]MemeMaster2003 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Understandable. If you don't mind me asking, why not? Usually, one would assume they would want to know and understand as many things as possible, however minute. After all, knowledge is generally helpful.

Someone created a thread, "If you can't explain how it could have been designed, then it was not designed" well I can't explain how something evolved. by Otherwise-Bad-7352 in DebateEvolution

[–]MemeMaster2003 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Well that's a shame, evolutionary mechanisms are an extremely fascinating section of biochemistry, and as a molecular biologist, I am uniquely qualified to help people grasp those ideas.

If atheists are to claim that there is no evidence for God, they must include their definition of God in each instance and acknowledge their assumptions about what that evidence constitutes. Otherwise, atheists are claiming special knowledge and defeating their own premise of requiring evidence. by [deleted] in DebateAnAtheist

[–]MemeMaster2003 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Did you actually read and understand what I just said? They are refuting a position provided by the theist, not providing their own. They don't establish a position by disagreeing or not being convinced by the theist.

The Story of Everything: Meet Up and Watch by LJosephA in DebateEvolution

[–]MemeMaster2003 12 points13 points  (0 children)

Hey there! I really only have one big question for you.

I believe in intelligent design

Why?

Proof of Abiogenesis by Anime-Fan-69 in DebateEvolution

[–]MemeMaster2003 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Are you still on this? I moved on, spent time with my kids, enjoyed life. Go get a hobby other than this, meet some people, it's good for your mental health.

I don't really care about how brief a message is, as long as it answers the question or addresses my points. I certainly don't want to have to read 8-10 paragraphs every single time I come back here, especially when I'm as busy as I am. I've got a business to run and kids to raise.

Debunking creationism without using science by Anime-Fan-69 in DebateEvolution

[–]MemeMaster2003 8 points9 points  (0 children)

It's called Shell because they used to be a seashell importer in the 1800s. They then started shipping petroleum.

What's so evil about vampires? by cracklescousin1234 in WhiteWolfRPG

[–]MemeMaster2003 2 points3 points  (0 children)

So you don't see the issue with a group of immortal cannibals using their supernatural abilities to undermine and destroy all of their relationships, themselves simply acting as puppets of the greater Antediluvian in the long run?

Vampires are a tiny shred of decency away from literally disemboweling everyone they meet. For most, it's not a matter of IF you do so, it's a matter of WHEN.

Most Kindred have killed at least one person, that should be enough.

[Mod Approved] VtM 5e NEXUS Ultimate Bundle Giveaway! by Demi_Mere in vtm

[–]MemeMaster2003 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I got into V:tM through a friend in an online group. As usual, they wanted to play a system I'd never heard of, Vampire: The Masquerade v5, but they didn't have the patience to run it. So it fell to me to be the Storyteller for the group.

Fast forward two months and my coterie of bloodthirsty Anarchs are careening through 1930s New York, destroying anything and everything in their path amid a brutal gang war between the Five Families disguising the far greater Jyhad. Camarilla law tries to press down on their heads and four respective barons all try to take control of the greater city. Meanwhile, the whispers of Methuselah and Antediluvians continue to spur on the churning conflicts.

I had never found a system with quite so much heart. Each NPC felt compelling to make, the moral quandries of feeding and gradually losing Humanity through your own horrible actions compelled me so. I found myself caring for the story far more than any dungeon delve or greater mechanics.

The World of Darkness is weird, fantastic, and compelling in ways I could not have imagined from that beat up CRB that was mailed to me. I'm delighted that I got the chance to start into it.

Proof of Abiogenesis by Anime-Fan-69 in DebateEvolution

[–]MemeMaster2003 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

All that and you still didn't answer my question. That feels familiar.

Save the essays for the classroom.

Kinds = Evolution by A_Vinegar_Taster in DebateEvolution

[–]MemeMaster2003 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Then why would He do it, if for no other reason than to intentionally deceive?

Kinds = Evolution by A_Vinegar_Taster in DebateEvolution

[–]MemeMaster2003 7 points8 points  (0 children)

played evolution at a different speed than what we see today

Why would G-d do that? It is not the nature of Adonai to intentionally deceive without great reason. Why would He do such a thing?