Ralph #fundie

Ralph #fundie behindthebadge.net

Evolution takes more blind faith to believe than the Bible ever will, yet many people blindly believe it and refuse to even look at the Bible.

Look at all the flowers on a spring day. Look at all the different kinds and colors, etc... They all randomly come from the same primordial ooze we did? Nice how evolution with no intelligent mind behind it made bees to cross pollinate the plants don't you think? Since evolution claims that only the strongest and wises of species will evolve (survival of the fittest) aren't we lucky that some managed to survive just so we more advanced species could eat them? Good thing plants are stupid and evolved into edible things too. Evolution would dictate that all plants become poisonous so that they are not eaten, but boy I'm glad most of the plants did not think of that.

I am not trying to make fun of what you believe, I am just trying to show you that logically what you believe is wrong. You can't have it both ways. You can't claim there is not intellect behind what happens and yet claim that things happened in a logical intelligent way. If evolution is true and that is why some animals evolved into poisonous animals, then why not all of them? If that had happened all life would have died!! Yet evolution would at least have proved itself.

42 comments

old comment by Swede

Oh no, not this tired old argument again...

The Theory of Evolution is based on solid evidence, observations, and 150 years and more of testing and perfecting the theory. Many people HAVE looked at the Bible, found it wanting and looked elsewhere for real evidence.

No, Natural Selection caused all the kinds and colors that bees and butterflies and other insects are drawn to. The flowers with the most radiant colors got the most visits from insects, and flourished the most.

Evolution is a natural process, like photosynthesis, it doesn't claim or dictate anything.

And there came yet another old and tired argument. It's survival of the most adaptable, the ones who fit the current environment.

You are no more advanced than those butterflies. Butterflies have about twice the number of color receptors in their eyes, than we do. We can't even imagine what they see.

A couple of billion years ago the atmosphere was suddenly saturated with a very poisonous gas, that killed off almost all life in a very short space of time. That gas was oxygen, stupid.

No, you're not trying to make fun of what we know. You're trying to make yourself look very silly and uneducated, and your succeeding marvelously! It's clear that you don't know the first thing about evolution, that you have only listened to others, who didn't know either, making fun of what they didn't understand.

There is no intelligence behind life or the Universe, it's clearly just "good enough for now", or a VERY SHODDY design.

If all animals have evolved toxicity, all life would have indeed died out, and that is exactly why not all have evolved toxicity.

old comment by

Yes, let's look at the bible:

Exodus 20:13: Thou shalt not kill.

1 Samuel 15:3 Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass.
Numbers 31:17: Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him. (we won't even discuss keeping the 32000 virgins alive to be raped later)
Leviticus 20:9: For every one that curseth his father or his mother shall be surely put to death: he hath cursed his father or his mother; his blood shall be upon him.
Deuteronomy 22:20 But if this thing be true, and the tokens of virginity be not found for the damsel: Then they shall bring out the damsel to the door of her father's house, and the men of her city shall stone her with stones that she die: because she hath wrought folly in Israel, to play the whore in her father's house: so shalt thou put evil away from among you.
Exodus 31:15: 15 Six days may work be done; but in the seventh is the sabbath of rest, holy to the Lord: whosoever doeth any work in the sabbath day, he shall surely be put to death.

Nice consistent message, good christian morals there.

old comment by Canadiest

Lame shit that works only with the mindset that there MUST be an intelligent foreseen plan.

They always try to drag everything into this, "You can't claim there is not intellect behind what happens and yet claim that things happened in a logical intelligent way."

We don't claim that and neither does science, things worked out (FOR SOME ONLY, LOTS OF EXTINCT SPECIES ON RECORD) because the animal or plant could utilize the enviroment and successive generations could MAYBE become even better at it.

It doesn't involve an overseer in any way, evolution theory implies no forethought or reasoned plan, it straight-out says random changes CAN be benifical, not MUST be.

"You can't have it both ways."
YES WE CAN. Changing enviroments, forest fires, landslides into rivers causing diversions, resulting pollutions, volcanoes, Earthquakes reforming landscapes, droughts, Tsaumis, floods, torential stormfronts, etc. These are considered when tracking a species change/forced migration/extinction/merging or seperating populations.

old comment by Anon-e-moose

"Evolution takes more blind faith to believe than the Bible ever will"

Your 'True' Word of God says that insects have four legs:

Count 'em.

You must be fucking 'Faith'-lobotomised, never mind -blinded if you think that 'Faith' can bend Reality to your will.

Therefore a question: If [/Spartan Laconic Wit] everything was just 'poofed' into being as is, unchanging - and as per Genesis, insects were 'created' with just four legs - where did those extra two limbs come from...?! Could they have perhaps... y'know... changed in some way and at some time after their unchanging 'Created' form then, to what exists now; and if so, how...?! You know the only possible way that could've happened: it involves the exclusion of the Big 'G', and the addition of teh ebil 'E'-word...! [/Catch-22]

Enjoy your paradox, Ralphiepoos. >:D

Moral: Reality. No 'Faith' required. Nor 'Belief', for that matter. After all: 'Belief'. You cannot spell that without the word LIE. 'BeLIEf' is a bullshit concept that has no right to exist in my mindset. I only Accept.

Just the facts, ma'am. [/"Dragnet"]

old comment by dionysus

Insects (which is what bees are) existed before flowering plants. Other plants use the wind to assist reproduction. Some plants like the Rafflesia use flies instead of bees. Plants that had a more reliable way of spreading their genetic material (via insects) had a survival advantage. Insects that could eat nectar had a survival advantage. Your mistake is that you think a bee and a lily crawled out of the primordial soup and immediately started acting like bees and flowers. But that's more akin to what creationists believe. Scientists tend to believe that the interaction between insects and plants is complex and that sometimes those interactions become mutually beneficial. When a mutually beneficial interaction is hit upon, creatures will evolve better ways to make sure it keeps happening. At some point the interaction happens so often both creatures become dependent on it. When many different creatures develop these complex interactions we call that an ecosystem.

old comment by GigaGuess

Look at all the flowers on a spring day. Look at all the different kinds and colors, etc... They all randomly come from the same primordial ooze we did?
Each individually? Of course not, that idea is ludicrous. However the thoguht that a few different varieties of proto-flora emerged, and evolved and diversified is more in line to what is the common consensus. Also the thought that they are pretty is more because of a familiar response than because of god-made-perfection. So "Flowers are pretty = God" is prety weak.

Nice how evolution with no intelligent mind behind it made bees to cross pollinate the plants don't you think?
Bees feed off of pollen to survive. In that feeding, they cross pollinate, helping propogate those flowers. It's not intelligent design, it's simple symbiosis.

Since evolution claims that only the strongest and wises of species will evolve (survival of the fittest) aren't we lucky that some managed to survive just so we more advanced species could eat them?
That is a wild misrepresentation of what ToE strates. It is not the strongest will survive, it is the species best fit to fill an environmental niche well enough to live long enough to propogate will better benefit the species. Humans learned how to use tools to survive. The creatures we eat tend to eat grasses and other plants that are abundant. If somethng were to impact those plants, our their food source would be threatened, forcing them...and us...to adapt.

old comment by GigaGuess

Good thing plants are stupid and evolved into edible things too. Evolution would dictate that all plants become poisonous so that they are not eaten, but boy I'm glad most of the plants did not think of that.
But some ARE poisonous. Some horribly so. By your exact same logic, if God made them to be eaten, all plants should be edible. Remember, too...some plants benefit from being consumed, as it allows them to spread their seeds.

You can't claim there is not intellect behind what happens and yet claim that things happened in a logical intelligent way.
The stumbling block here is that you think it works so this is the way it happens. You have it backwards. If something was different, it would work a different way. Look at nylon eating bacteria. Nylon is a very new synthetic material, creating a new environmental niche. Bacteria has adapted to work with it. Something changes, life changes with it.

If evolution is true and that is why some animals evolved into poisonous animals, then why not all of them?
Because exclusively poisonous animals and plants create a static biosphere. Nothing can eat anything else, everything starves, and everything dies. Death is needed for life to continue. It's the way it is.