You really don’t get it, do you Kathy? I know I listed ignorance (above), but I probably should have mentioned obtusity, as well. Here – let me try and put so that even YOU can understand, when is a red letter no longer red?
“Where did the dna come from to form a wing or an eye?” – I have neither the time, nor the inclination, Kathy, to provide you with the education with you should have provided for yourself during the first 40 or 50 years of your life. Read Richard Dawkins’ “The Ancestor’s Tale,” and you will have the answer to that question – then come back and give me a book report.
Kathy, what did you do in school? Were you never given book assignments? Do you not read anything besides Twitter and blog postings? What do you expect Arch to do? Copy and paste the entire contents?
It’s like your comments related to Thomas Paine’s book. You wanted us to post passages from the book so you could “comment,” but that simply doesn’t work. As you have repeatedly said, It’s the CONTEXT — a paragraph or two here and there isn’t going to tell you anything.
RE “book recommendation”: That’s right, Kathy – see, what you want is for me to read it for you, summarize it for you, type it it out for you, and deliver it to you on a silver platter on the internet. You’re simply not important enough for me to do that. You asked a question, and I told you where to find the answer – the rest is up to you.
Kathy, when I read The Ancestor’s Tale which, admittedly, is not a light read, I had a point at which it clicked. The theory of evolution by natural selection explains how all of life is related. Dawkins’ book takes the reader from where life is now, with all the current forms having evolved to their present state, back through time to the beginning of life. I can’t summarize a 700+ page book for you, but I can tell you Dawkins drew a line of reasoning that I was able to follow from homo sapiens to the common ancestor of all life on Earth. I know where I fit in. I’m an ape with a big brain who can walk erect and isn’t yet extinct.
I am full of more awe now than I ever was. Life, and what it does to survive, is almost unbelievable. Just because you don’t understand it doesn’t make it untrue. The overwhelming amount and quality of evidence supporting the scientific theory of evolution by natural selection is what makes it true. My mind can make use of good information when it exists. if the Bible or Christians had provided that kind of information, I might have come to different conclusions. I gave them a chance, and they didn’t.
Even now, if I find out I am wrong, I will change my mind. Will you?
Our Kathy has disappeared, to go harass someone else. She’ll return, and if she can’t pretend she didn’t see our comments to her, she’ll at least find a way to dismiss them.
He conveniently starts out with light sensitive cells.. where’d they come from? Just as atheists try to explain how it all began by pointing to the Big Bang.. it’s not a valid answer.
Also, Gliese said:
“I am full of more awe now than I ever was. Life, and what it does to survive, is almost unbelievable. ”
Why does life fight to survive? What is the cause of that drive that all of evolution is based on?
And Gliese, I’ve never stated I don’t believe in evolution.. it’s macro evolution that I don’t agree with.. we have no proof.. and if I’m going to believe that we were once pond scum, I’d like proof of that.. it’s much easier to believe, without proof, in a Creator Who loves us. It’s much easier and makes much more sense that there is meaning and purpose behind our existence.
Where’d God come from? Does postulating another even more complicated, complex and untestable mystery really answer the question? No, it deepens the mystery.
It’s much easier to reason, with evidence, that people experience death anxiety.
It’s much easier to reason that death anxiety can cause people to need meaning and purpose in order to appreciate life.
Kathy, stating you don’t believe in macro evolution is tantamount to saying you don’t understand how evolution works. It’s not about belief.
Ok. let’s say there is a big storm and several tortoises are blown across a span of open ocean from a mainland to an island offshore. There, they find a particular set of circumstances that may be different from the mainland. The source of food may be taller, the amount more plentiful, etc. Over time, these turtles would, presumably change, little by little, to have a higher curve in their shells so they can reach the food, as each individual that has a mutation in that direction is better able to feed, live, and reproduce.. these turtles may also become larger, with different shells to accommodate their size or to thwart predators. Over time, and this is what you don’t seem to understand, these turtles would have changed enough that they would no longer be able to produce fertile offspring with their mainland ancestors. They would have become a different species.
Reproduce that process over and over throughout geologic time, which is millions and millions of years, and micro evolution happens. Of those new turtles on the island, some may move to yet another island and change again. After many years again, they would be a different species from the first species to leave the mainland. They would be even more different from the mainland ancestors.
Eventually, the turtles on the 7th or 8th island, or part of an island, may resemble the mainland turtle only remotely. when they cannot produce fertile offspring, each becomes a different species. If you think this is improbable, please read Voyage of the S.S. Beagle by Charles Darwin. It’s not as heady as The Origin of Species, but it tells what Darwin saw on his fateful voyage that contributed to his development of the scientific theory of evolution by natural selection.
If you say you’re not talking about one kind of turtle vs another kind of turtle, that is understandable given you obvious ignorance of how evolution works. With enough time, some of the species that develop off of that original group that left the mainland will no longer be turtles at all, and macro evolution will have happened.
Good scientific theories have predictive value, and this is one way that the theory of evolution by natural selection has been so significantly supported. The changes that will happen due to geographic separation, changes in food source, climate, predators, competition, etc. will eventually change, say, a small, tree-dwelling primate to homo sapeins, but not a crocodile into a duck. It doesn’t work that way. One kind of ancestral bird developed into many birds, including ducks, and another animal evolved into reptiles, including crocodiles. If you go back far enough, however, crocodiles and ducks have a common ancestor. If you go back far enough, all life is related.
The evidence is overwhelming. Even a non-scientist like myself can understand it. Just because you do not understand it does not mean it is not true. I don’t understand federal tax law, but I still have to pay taxes.
it’s much easier to believe, without proof, in a Creator Who loves us. It’s much easier and makes much more sense that there is meaning and purpose behind our existence.
You know what? I get that. It is much easier [for you] to believe this. That does not make you more objective. It makes you a believer. And that is fine.
For many of us, though, we have studied these things in-depth. That doesn’t make us smarter than you. It just means that we have actually taken the time to really consider both sides of the argument instead of doing the easy thing.
That’s right. It is harder to do the due diligence and come to your own conclusions than it is to listen to soundbites, read a couple of paragraphs here and there, and then dismiss it all as nonsense.
How much study of macro-evolution have you done? I would like to know specifically what publications or material you have read from a scientific perspective.
Strangely, Kathy, you keep repeating that scientific inaccurate statement, “we were once pond scum,” while I keep correcting you – I can only assume you’re a slow learner, and that you got that phrase from one of your religious cult-gurus.
When you asked, “Why does life fight to survive?” clearly you weren’t bright enough to see that you answered your own question – Why does life fight? To Survive. “What is the cause of that drive that all of evolution is based on?” – again, survival. Obviously, you’re trying to imply that some guy in the sky gave us a special spark, and that without it, if you were in a convenience store that was being robbed and the robber put a Glock to your head, you’d say, “Sure, go ahead and blow my brains out!” I was hoping someone would do that today.” What a doorknob!
“it’s much easier to believe, without proof, in a Creator Who loves us” – Yes, Kathy, it is —
“Whatever we cannot easily understand, we call God; this saves much wear and tear on the brain tissues….Belief in the supernatural reflects a failure of the imagination.”
— Edward Abbey —
author/environmentalist
The real truth is that you’re unloved, Kathy – loving and being loved requires hard work, something of which you don’t seem overly fond. The first step to becoming someone who CAN be loved, is help where you’re needed, give without expecting to receive in return; eventually, you’ll run across someone who can like you exactly as you are – love may or may not arise from that, but at least you will have done good things. I’ll readily admit that it’s easier to imagine some invisible being who loves you unconditionally – that way, you don’t really have to DO anything. Delusion is a great pacifier.
“Where did the dna come from to form a wing or an eye?”, “He conveniently starts out with light sensitive cells.. where’d they come from?”, “Why does life fight to survive? What is the cause of that drive that all of evolution is based on?”
I think these are great questions and I’m not being facetious. I have some time later today and will offer some thoughts on these. I know that Paul has warned everyone that Kathy is just messing with us, but this is Nate’s blog and I think he asked somewhere that we give her the benefit of the doubt. Even if our comments are brushed aside by Kathy, I for one have learned things on these threads. The comments on giraffes and turtles by Arch and Gliese were very interesting. I’d never heard of an Okapi before. I looked up photographs of it and showed them to my kids. It’s a remarkable animal. Thanks for sharing.
In the book God’s Debris the author says something along these lines: We can’t convince anyone to change their opinions, all we can do is learn and share new information about reality. The more information we have the more insight we will have. It is up to each of us to process this information and make, as Brandon would say, a “grand subjective choice”. We may not agree on the latter, but I think that’s okay. Pointing fingers and claiming we are not being “objective” has no value. We are all subjective and it would be beneficial to all if we moved past that point.
tee, hee, hee
oh, you guys are doing a smashing job taking care of Kathy.
arch, you never did answer Kathy’s question.
in isaiah, when god said he created evil
what’s your point?
oh, Nan, thanks for that alien v god link.
I do I lot of reading on the subject and from what I gather the majority of evangelical Christians believe that aliens are a demonic force, most likely the original of the 1/3 aliens that fell to earth with satan.
interestingly they use the noah flood story as an example of this. genesis 6:4 The Nephilim were on the earth in those days—and also afterward—when the sons of God went to the daughters of humans and had children by them. They were the heroes of old, men of renown.
as a child I had to go to a southern Baptist church and sunday school, I never really believed, but after the abduction I never believed.
and I never took anything very seriously ever since.
Also, making broad claims about atheists/believers in general is not helpful. It’s not helpful to the one making the claim nor the people it’s being claimed about.
There are lots of atheists here with varying views(as demonstrated by the freewill conversation) about a great many things.
There are several believers here with varying views on what salvation really is, how it is applied, and whether or not belief is even objective or subjective.
Finding Truth 
RE: “It’s still a giraffe.”
You really don’t get it, do you Kathy? I know I listed ignorance (above), but I probably should have mentioned obtusity, as well. Here – let me try and put so that even YOU can understand, when is a red letter no longer red?
LikeLike
“Arch… it’s still a letter.”
LikeLike
“Verse of the day..
Isaiah 45:7
“I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace and create evil: I the Lord do all these things.”
Your point??
LikeLike
Where did the dna come from to form a wing or an eye?
LikeLike
“Where did the dna come from to form a wing or an eye?” – I have neither the time, nor the inclination, Kathy, to provide you with the education with you should have provided for yourself during the first 40 or 50 years of your life. Read Richard Dawkins’ “The Ancestor’s Tale,” and you will have the answer to that question – then come back and give me a book report.
LikeLike
Another book recommendation instead of an answer.. what a surprise.
LikeLike
DNA is the Truth, All hail DNA!
LikeLike
Kathy, what did you do in school? Were you never given book assignments? Do you not read anything besides Twitter and blog postings? What do you expect Arch to do? Copy and paste the entire contents?
It’s like your comments related to Thomas Paine’s book. You wanted us to post passages from the book so you could “comment,” but that simply doesn’t work. As you have repeatedly said, It’s the CONTEXT — a paragraph or two here and there isn’t going to tell you anything.
LikeLike
RE “book recommendation”: That’s right, Kathy – see, what you want is for me to read it for you, summarize it for you, type it it out for you, and deliver it to you on a silver platter on the internet. You’re simply not important enough for me to do that. You asked a question, and I told you where to find the answer – the rest is up to you.
LikeLike
Kathy, when I read The Ancestor’s Tale which, admittedly, is not a light read, I had a point at which it clicked. The theory of evolution by natural selection explains how all of life is related. Dawkins’ book takes the reader from where life is now, with all the current forms having evolved to their present state, back through time to the beginning of life. I can’t summarize a 700+ page book for you, but I can tell you Dawkins drew a line of reasoning that I was able to follow from homo sapiens to the common ancestor of all life on Earth. I know where I fit in. I’m an ape with a big brain who can walk erect and isn’t yet extinct.
I am full of more awe now than I ever was. Life, and what it does to survive, is almost unbelievable. Just because you don’t understand it doesn’t make it untrue. The overwhelming amount and quality of evidence supporting the scientific theory of evolution by natural selection is what makes it true. My mind can make use of good information when it exists. if the Bible or Christians had provided that kind of information, I might have come to different conclusions. I gave them a chance, and they didn’t.
Even now, if I find out I am wrong, I will change my mind. Will you?
LikeLike
Excellent question, gliese!
LikeLike
Well said, gliese!
LikeLike
Thanks!
LikeLike
I’ll make it simple for you, Kathy:
LikeLike
I KNOW you’re not much of a reader —
LikeLike
Our Kathy has disappeared, to go harass someone else. She’ll return, and if she can’t pretend she didn’t see our comments to her, she’ll at least find a way to dismiss them.
LikeLike
He conveniently starts out with light sensitive cells.. where’d they come from? Just as atheists try to explain how it all began by pointing to the Big Bang.. it’s not a valid answer.
Also, Gliese said:
“I am full of more awe now than I ever was. Life, and what it does to survive, is almost unbelievable. ”
Why does life fight to survive? What is the cause of that drive that all of evolution is based on?
And Gliese, I’ve never stated I don’t believe in evolution.. it’s macro evolution that I don’t agree with.. we have no proof.. and if I’m going to believe that we were once pond scum, I’d like proof of that.. it’s much easier to believe, without proof, in a Creator Who loves us. It’s much easier and makes much more sense that there is meaning and purpose behind our existence.
LikeLike
Where’d God come from? Does postulating another even more complicated, complex and untestable mystery really answer the question? No, it deepens the mystery.
It’s much easier to reason, with evidence, that people experience death anxiety.
It’s much easier to reason that death anxiety can cause people to need meaning and purpose in order to appreciate life.
Defenses Against Death Anxiety
LikeLike
Kathy, stating you don’t believe in macro evolution is tantamount to saying you don’t understand how evolution works. It’s not about belief.
Ok. let’s say there is a big storm and several tortoises are blown across a span of open ocean from a mainland to an island offshore. There, they find a particular set of circumstances that may be different from the mainland. The source of food may be taller, the amount more plentiful, etc. Over time, these turtles would, presumably change, little by little, to have a higher curve in their shells so they can reach the food, as each individual that has a mutation in that direction is better able to feed, live, and reproduce.. these turtles may also become larger, with different shells to accommodate their size or to thwart predators. Over time, and this is what you don’t seem to understand, these turtles would have changed enough that they would no longer be able to produce fertile offspring with their mainland ancestors. They would have become a different species.
Reproduce that process over and over throughout geologic time, which is millions and millions of years, and micro evolution happens. Of those new turtles on the island, some may move to yet another island and change again. After many years again, they would be a different species from the first species to leave the mainland. They would be even more different from the mainland ancestors.
Eventually, the turtles on the 7th or 8th island, or part of an island, may resemble the mainland turtle only remotely. when they cannot produce fertile offspring, each becomes a different species. If you think this is improbable, please read Voyage of the S.S. Beagle by Charles Darwin. It’s not as heady as The Origin of Species, but it tells what Darwin saw on his fateful voyage that contributed to his development of the scientific theory of evolution by natural selection.
If you say you’re not talking about one kind of turtle vs another kind of turtle, that is understandable given you obvious ignorance of how evolution works. With enough time, some of the species that develop off of that original group that left the mainland will no longer be turtles at all, and macro evolution will have happened.
Good scientific theories have predictive value, and this is one way that the theory of evolution by natural selection has been so significantly supported. The changes that will happen due to geographic separation, changes in food source, climate, predators, competition, etc. will eventually change, say, a small, tree-dwelling primate to homo sapeins, but not a crocodile into a duck. It doesn’t work that way. One kind of ancestral bird developed into many birds, including ducks, and another animal evolved into reptiles, including crocodiles. If you go back far enough, however, crocodiles and ducks have a common ancestor. If you go back far enough, all life is related.
The evidence is overwhelming. Even a non-scientist like myself can understand it. Just because you do not understand it does not mean it is not true. I don’t understand federal tax law, but I still have to pay taxes.
LikeLike
Dear Kathy,
it’s much easier to believe, without proof, in a Creator Who loves us. It’s much easier and makes much more sense that there is meaning and purpose behind our existence.
You know what? I get that. It is much easier [for you] to believe this. That does not make you more objective. It makes you a believer. And that is fine.
For many of us, though, we have studied these things in-depth. That doesn’t make us smarter than you. It just means that we have actually taken the time to really consider both sides of the argument instead of doing the easy thing.
That’s right. It is harder to do the due diligence and come to your own conclusions than it is to listen to soundbites, read a couple of paragraphs here and there, and then dismiss it all as nonsense.
How much study of macro-evolution have you done? I would like to know specifically what publications or material you have read from a scientific perspective.
LikeLike
Strangely, Kathy, you keep repeating that scientific inaccurate statement, “we were once pond scum,” while I keep correcting you – I can only assume you’re a slow learner, and that you got that phrase from one of your religious cult-gurus.
When you asked, “Why does life fight to survive?” clearly you weren’t bright enough to see that you answered your own question – Why does life fight? To Survive. “What is the cause of that drive that all of evolution is based on?” – again, survival. Obviously, you’re trying to imply that some guy in the sky gave us a special spark, and that without it, if you were in a convenience store that was being robbed and the robber put a Glock to your head, you’d say, “Sure, go ahead and blow my brains out!” I was hoping someone would do that today.” What a doorknob!
“it’s much easier to believe, without proof, in a Creator Who loves us” – Yes, Kathy, it is —
LikeLike
The real truth is that you’re unloved, Kathy – loving and being loved requires hard work, something of which you don’t seem overly fond. The first step to becoming someone who CAN be loved, is help where you’re needed, give without expecting to receive in return; eventually, you’ll run across someone who can like you exactly as you are – love may or may not arise from that, but at least you will have done good things. I’ll readily admit that it’s easier to imagine some invisible being who loves you unconditionally – that way, you don’t really have to DO anything. Delusion is a great pacifier.
LikeLike
“Where did the dna come from to form a wing or an eye?”, “He conveniently starts out with light sensitive cells.. where’d they come from?”, “Why does life fight to survive? What is the cause of that drive that all of evolution is based on?”
I think these are great questions and I’m not being facetious. I have some time later today and will offer some thoughts on these. I know that Paul has warned everyone that Kathy is just messing with us, but this is Nate’s blog and I think he asked somewhere that we give her the benefit of the doubt. Even if our comments are brushed aside by Kathy, I for one have learned things on these threads. The comments on giraffes and turtles by Arch and Gliese were very interesting. I’d never heard of an Okapi before. I looked up photographs of it and showed them to my kids. It’s a remarkable animal. Thanks for sharing.
In the book God’s Debris the author says something along these lines: We can’t convince anyone to change their opinions, all we can do is learn and share new information about reality. The more information we have the more insight we will have. It is up to each of us to process this information and make, as Brandon would say, a “grand subjective choice”. We may not agree on the latter, but I think that’s okay. Pointing fingers and claiming we are not being “objective” has no value. We are all subjective and it would be beneficial to all if we moved past that point.
LikeLike
tee, hee, hee
oh, you guys are doing a smashing job taking care of Kathy.
arch, you never did answer Kathy’s question.
in isaiah, when god said he created evil
what’s your point?
oh, Nan, thanks for that alien v god link.
I do I lot of reading on the subject and from what I gather the majority of evangelical Christians believe that aliens are a demonic force, most likely the original of the 1/3 aliens that fell to earth with satan.
interestingly they use the noah flood story as an example of this.
genesis 6:4 The Nephilim were on the earth in those days—and also afterward—when the sons of God went to the daughters of humans and had children by them. They were the heroes of old, men of renown.
as a child I had to go to a southern Baptist church and sunday school, I never really believed, but after the abduction I never believed.
and I never took anything very seriously ever since.
LikeLike
Also, making broad claims about atheists/believers in general is not helpful. It’s not helpful to the one making the claim nor the people it’s being claimed about.
There are lots of atheists here with varying views(as demonstrated by the freewill conversation) about a great many things.
There are several believers here with varying views on what salvation really is, how it is applied, and whether or not belief is even objective or subjective.
LikeLike