Religion: what is it good for? Absolutely nothing! Huah!

[RDK]

Red Darkstar Kirby, I don't think you know how evolution works.

Okay: You've got a lifeform with DNA. It reproduces, and there are some mutations in the DNA of its offspring. 98% of the mutations do nothing, or have very little effect, because there is so much redundancy built into DNA. 1.99% of the mutations will mess it up, because just changing something randomly that already works normally results in breaking it. But, 0.01% of the mutations actually improves the organism.

It is that 0.01% of the mutations that mean everything evolves.

I don't know what you mean by "a mutation is always a losing of information--never a gaining of one." Mutations can add information, by duplicating a chromosome or adding in a nucleotide, or they can just replace a nucleotide, or they can delete a nucleotide or even large chunks of the DNA. When you're talking about DNA, it's not the amount of information, but the actual information itself that matters.

And, yes, generally mutations make the organism live a shorter life, or not be born at all. But there are exceptions, and that's why organisms improve over time.

I'm curious as to where you're getting this information from, but for now, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt.

And no, mutations can't magically produce information. Just like you said--it duplicates a chromosome or adds in a nucleotide. It doesn't gain information.

And the chances of multiple benevolent mutations occurring in the same organism is astronomical.

Even the catholic church has accepted evolution, people. And they only just accepted that the sun is in fact the center of the solar system, not the earth. If they can handle evolution, so can you.

The Catholic Church is so screwed up today, it's not even funny. It definetely shouldn't be a role model for what's right and wrong, at least in this situation.

 

[Jammer]

I'm curious as to where you're getting this information from, but for now, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt.

And no, mutations can't magically produce information. Just like you said--it duplicates a chromosome or adds in a nucleotide. It doesn't gain information.

And the chances of multiple benevolent mutations occurring in the same organism is astronomical.

Okay, did your school teach you evolution? Because you don't seem to have even the basic knowledge. Either that, or your beliefs (which, by the way, seem to be very, very, very Christian-conservative on this issue) cause you to ignore what's going on.

Here is a link to the Simple English version of Wikipedia article on evolution. I chose to give you the simple version not to insult your intelligence, but because it spells everything out that you might not already know.

But here's the main thing: Bad mutations are lost because the organism dies or doesn't have as many offspring. Good mutations are kept because they help the organism have more offspring (and live long enough to have those offspring). Competition between members of the same species for food means the most "evolved" members live on, and the lagging ones die off.

 

[RDK]

No, I'm not a Christian conservative. I kind of fluctuate between agnosticism and atheism. But you have to remember that I didn't attend a public high school--my parents were Christians.

And yes, I've researched evolutionary views, but I'll take a look at that article to refresh my mind. I really haven't had one of these debates in a long time.

 

[PukeTShirt]

And no, mutations can't magically produce information. Just like you said--it duplicates a chromosome or adds in a nucleotide. It doesn't gain information.

And the chances of multiple benevolent mutations occurring in the same organism is astronomical.

It also seems that you don't understand how DNA works either. By duplicating a piece of it or replacing some of it you are effectively changing the "code" of the DNA. Like you said, most of the time this ruins something that was working and causes bad reproductions. Once in a very long while though (and this is why evolution takes a very very long time, like millions of years)
the mutation, which changes the code, causes something positive for the creature. It could be something very small, or something very drastic, but if it helps the creature in a way that makes it easier for the creature to survive then that mutation will be passes along to the next generation.

 

[PukeTShirt]

And no, mutations can't magically produce information. Just like you said--it duplicates a chromosome or adds in a nucleotide. It doesn't gain information.

And the chances of multiple benevolent mutations occurring in the same organism is astronomical.

It also seems that you don't understand how DNA works either. By duplicating a piece of it or replacing some of it you are effectively changing the "code" of the DNA. Like you said, most of the time this ruins something that was working and causes bad reproductions. Once in a very long while though (and this is why evolution takes a very very long time, like millions of years)
the mutation, which changes the code, causes something positive for the creature. It could be something very small, or something very drastic, but if it helps the creature in a way that makes it easier for the creature to survive then that mutation will be passes along to the next generation.

 

[Zink]

my Catholic-bash-dar pinged. hi.
it is a lie to say that the Church "only just" accepted heliocentrism. It was accepted way back in the days of Copernicus- he was encouraged by the Church to spread his ideas. Galileo and that whole thing was political- there were some powerful bishops who were against him. The Pope had been protecting him, but then Galileo and the Pope had a falling out, and the rest is history.
What the Church did was officially pardon Galileo.

 

[commonyoshi]

I have a very, very limited knowledge of Egyptian history, but I'll give this whole Israelites in Egypt thing a go as to why there are no historical traces of this.

- The Pharoah may have forbidden any writings.
This certainly wouldn't have been the first time censorship was enforced. And depending on the people's education at that time, it may not have been that hard to enforce.
- Another Pharoah may have destroyed all traces of another Pharoah's reign whom he did not like.
There are pyramids and landmarks in Egypt dedicated to a pharoah whose names on them have been defaced. The name of the Pharoah the monument was built in honor of are either destroyed completely, by people, or destroyed and covered with another ruler's name.
Burnings of the history of another Pharoah's reign is another possibilty.

Of course, these aren't the best of arguments considering they are only possibilities with no proof. I just thought I'd throw them out there.

 

[Zink]

let's put away the pointless debates here for a second and discuss something relevant to the original topic... you all know about Free Rice, right? It's all well and good, and it has sparked off discussion of the efficiency of charities. The problem with this type of charity, meant to benefit poor African nations, is that there are some very good arguments to support the idea that this is in fact enabling the horrible dictatorships there to continue: because their people are provided with many basics, they don't have to worry about doing it themselves and can spend all government funds on themselves. Anyway, think about who would be the best one to distribute charity funds: it would need to be someone who is on the spot, intelligent enough to recognize the problem of the dictatorships, well aquainted with the local villages and problems, benevolently interested in the people, and willing to dedicate huge amounts of time to the problem.
Someone like a missionary.
opinions?

 

[Eor]

I'm not quite sure how this belongs in a religious thread, unless you're implying missionaries have to be religious. I just recently went on a Mission trip to Mexico to build houses for those who live in cardboard boxes, and I'm not religious. It was a religious group, of course, but there is no reason to believe that only religious people can organize them. Peace Corps does even better then most religious groups, and they're not a religious group at all.

Anything else would be a discussion about Africa, which doesn't really fit here.

 

[Zink]

I'm not quite sure how this belongs in a religious thread, unless you're implying missionaries have to be religious. I just recently went on a Mission trip to Mexico to build houses for those who live in cardboard boxes, and I'm not religious. It was a religious group, of course, but there is no reason to believe that only religious people can organize them. Peace Corps does even better then most religious groups, and they're not a religious group at all.

Anything else would be a discussion about Africa, which doesn't really fit here.

Missionaries are religious. You are an exception: an atheist (I use the term to signify all non-religious) who put his beliefs to the side and joined a religious group in order to do community service. I'm sure that's not common, even less so in Africa. In addition, a mission group is not exactly equivalent to a missionary: one is a long term religious representative working with the people, the other is a shorter-term religious group that does community service.
This may be less relevant than I originally thought, but it's good to get us off the track we were going on, which was a sect war.

 

[Eor]

I used myself to show that peace missions don't have to be performed by the religious, and used The Peace Corps to show that not all peace missions are religious in nature. I'm not really sure how a debate on this could proceed, unless we go back to the moral debate we where having

 

[Zink]

Peace Corps are not missionaries. Missionaries are religious by definition.
But I agree, this is getting silly.

 

[cultofrubik]

Mhmm. I'll poke at what commonyoshi is saying and give a try myself as to why there is no evidence of Moses and such:

The library of Alexandria was destroyed: and it was thought to hold over 400,000 scrolls. Not to mention other libraries and historical references have been destroyed and lost throughout history. Of course that doesn't mean there would have been papers on Moses or anything, but it does mean that our history on Egypt is incomplete. Just something one could thing about.

 

[Colino]

I have a very, very limited knowledge of Egyptian history, but I'll give this whole Israelites in Egypt thing a go as to why there are no historical traces of this.

I should have stopped reading right there.

You have a very, very limited knowledge (you say that yourself) yet you can take everything archeology has been studying for the last couple of centuries and throw down the toilet?

I wish I could do something like that with very limited knowledge..

I know what you are saying blakuser, but still. No facts. And exactly what are the chances that exactly the documents that would confirm the whole exodus story were actually destroyed? ALL of them?

I think it would have been a pretty big deal, and that alot of people would have written about it.

We even have documents about embarassing pharaohs and there personal life.. How could we not have anything about a mass exodus and a sea that opens in half?

 

[MegatronPwnsYou]

I won't believe in Jesus till he is confirmed on the Dojo.

 

[Tryptomine]

I won't believe in Jesus till he is confirmed on the Dojo.

Well, Cristmas does fall on a Tuesday...

 

[Air Marshall Fiddy Cent]

And how do you plan to do that?

I believe in God...but you can lick mah balls, nyugga...

 

[teeman92]

you cant eliminate religion,it WILL be created because of though and philosophy

when i was a kid,i was yelling at the lighting cloud,it spark everytime i yelling, i though it was God.

 

[RDK]

I won't believe in Jesus till he is confirmed on the Dojo.

^LMAO.

Spoiler

CHARIXARDS

 

[RazeveX]

haha i was wrong, this thread DID create good things.

ie: my sig.

 

[Gamer4Fire]

you cant eliminate religion,it WILL be created because of though and philosophy

when i was a kid,i was yelling at the lighting cloud,it spark everytime i yelling, i though it was God.

No, you can eliminate religion and replace it with thought and philosophy. If nobody ever exposed you to a god concept, you'd be thinking the clouds themselves were communicating with you (like most ancient civilizations did) until you asked someone and they told you about electricity.

 

[choknater]

I won't believe in Jesus till he is confirmed on the Dojo.

Jesus for Brawl!!

 

[Aesir]

you cant eliminate religion,it WILL be created because of though and philosophy

when i was a kid,i was yelling at the lighting cloud,it spark everytime i yelling, i though it was God.

Lol....

Religion is one of the social constructs needed but it's need becomes less and less as the society advances.

 

[commonyoshi]

I should have stopped reading right there.

You have a very, very limited knowledge (you say that yourself) yet you can take everything archeology has been studying for the last couple of centuries and throw down the toilet?

I wish I could do something like that with very limited knowledge..

You sound like one of those people who refused to believe the possibility of a heliocentric sstem just because Plato's ideas had been around for so much longer.

By all means, explain to me where you stand. And explain how I couldn't possibly be right as well. It shouldn't be that hard for you considering how confident you are in this.

 

[KrystalRules]

No, you can eliminate religion and replace it with thought and philosophy. If nobody ever exposed you to a god concept, you'd be thinking the clouds themselves were communicating with you (like most ancient civilizations did) until you asked someone and they told you about electricity.

no most ancient cultures believe their God was speaking to them! not the cloud..thats why any of you arguments are void, because you dont have facts or even know what your a talking about

 

[Zink]

No, you can eliminate religion and replace it with thought and philosophy. If nobody ever exposed you to a god concept, you'd be thinking the clouds themselves were communicating with you (like most ancient civilizations did) until you asked someone and they told you about electricity.

Yeah, dude, that was animism. Not talking clouds.

 

[Gamer4Fire]

no most ancient cultures believe their God was speaking to them! not the cloud..thats why any of you arguments are void, because you dont have facts or even know what your a talking about

Psst, early people considered the objects themselves to be spirits (lesser gods).

And I took a class world religions in college which included a section on the anthropology of ancient religions. Most early religions were polytheistic, with few exceptions, and anthropomorphised objects in nature into human forms. Good examples of this would be the nature gods of the Greek religion and the modern Hindu religion.

I have no idea where you come from and just say, "No, you're wrong," and expect it to work.

 

[Zink]

Psst, early people considered the objects themselves to be spirits (lesser gods).

And I took a class world religions in college which included a section on the anthropology of ancient religions. Most early religions were polytheistic, with few exceptions, and anthropomorphised objects in nature into human forms. Good examples of this would be the nature gods of the Greek religion and the modern Hindu religion.

I have no idea where you come from and just say, "No, you're wrong," and expect it to work.

Well, the problem here is one of distinction. For example, the Mesoamericans were also polytheistic, having a maize god, rain god, etc, BUT they also had gods for abstract concepts like the Underworld, which obviously were not objects.
PS, this isn't helping your point, because they were still thought of as gods nonetheless. If people will naturally postulate nature to the actions of gods, that would imply a reason for it, especially considering the universality of this concept. What I'm trying to say is, there is a reason for anthropomorphism.
PPS Aesir, I hope you're going to back that up with some evidence to show you aren't just trolling.
PPPS Jammer, any reply yet?

 

[Eor]

You sound like one of those people who refused to believe the possibility of a heliocentric sstem just because Plato's ideas had been around for so much longer.

I'm sorry, but I find his sad you'd use that when you yourself deny evolution. Not that your analysis makes any sense, it's long been established that the bible is correct word for word, it's only the recent discoveries that have contradicted it that have been "refused to believe". The problem, Common, with all you have said about this is that there is no proof. You started with a conclusion, then hasted off to find evidence for it. That alone is grounds to ignore your entire argument.

There are plenty of more embarrassing things to happen to Egypt, there is no reason at all to believe they where covered up. If the loss of the Library of Alexandria was large enough to hide something this traumatic, then there would be many more blank spots in history. Besides that, the library had a practice of copying all books that came into Alexandria, not of just stealing them. And the Library wasn't created until third century BC, meaning that original knowledge of it would have been around for so long before the library that it would have been mentioned elsewhere.

 

[Zink]

I'm sorry, but I find his sad you'd use that when you yourself deny evolution. Not that your analysis makes any sense, it's long been established that the bible is correct word for word, it's only the recent discoveries that have contradicted it that have been "refused to believe". The problem, Common, with all you have said about this is that there is no proof. You started with a conclusion, then hasted off to find evidence for it. That alone is grounds to ignore your entire argument.

There are plenty of more embarrassing things to happen to Egypt, there is no reason at all to believe they where covered up. If the loss of the Library of Alexandria was large enough to hide something this traumatic, then there would be many more blank spots in history. Besides that, the library had a practice of copying all books that came into Alexandria, not of just stealing them. And the Library wasn't created until third century BC, meaning that original knowledge of it would have been around for so long before the library that it would have been mentioned elsewhere.

I don't see how we can be expected to debate this intelligently. None of us are Egyptologists. Nor do we know what sources are credible.

 

[Jammer]

PPPS Jammer, any reply yet?

Let me check... Nope.

Do you think they'll even bother answering? I think it's clear that I would never (at least that I can imagine) convert to Catholicism, no matter what they say.

 

[Eor]

I don't see how we can be expected to debate this intelligently. None of us are Egyptologists. Nor do we know what sources are credible.

Of course none of us are. But if I was, would what I have said made any difference? Of course not, because I am not making this up. Egyptologists have spoken that there is no evidence of a massive exodus of Jewish slaves, but that doesn't matter now does it?

 

[KrystalRules]

did you really use a college course to prove yourself?! haha

 

[PsychoIncarnate]

Well, to be on topic. Religion can provide a sense of peace of mind and ease for the soul.

Whether it is true or false, it provides a sense of security...

Otherwise, it is as if wandering aimlessly trying to survive long enough without purpose other than reproduction and security of offspring, knowing that eventually all it will be for nothing anyway...

I mean, we know that humanity won't survive forever...Our species is self-destructive

 

[Zink]

Let me check... Nope.

Do you think they'll even bother answering? I think it's clear that I would never (at least that I can imagine) convert to Catholicism, no matter what they say.

I'm sure they would answer, with the hope of conversion in the future, or even regardless, just to increase knowledge of Catholicism. I sure hope they didn't stop doing it or something.
@Eor- I wouldn't think you'd make stuff up, but we have no way of knowing whether the people who say this are credible, etc. Either way, moot point.

 

[commonyoshi]

I'm sorry, but I find his sad you'd use that when you yourself deny evolution. Not that your analysis makes any sense, it's long been established that the bible is correct word for word, it's only the recent discoveries that have contradicted it that have been "refused to believe". The problem, Common, with all you have said about this is that there is no proof. You started with a conclusion, then hasted off to find evidence for it. That alone is grounds to ignore your entire argument.

It was never an arguement, only a possibility, and it very well is possible, which I chose to believe because the Bible supports itself in so many other areas. A little faith in this small matter is not too much of me.

I have a question that goes along with this, and the thought I am having may or may not be right. How do scientists know what era a certain dinosaur belongs to?

There are plenty of more embarrassing things to happen to Egypt, there is no reason at all to believe they where covered up.

This is what I was asking about. Examples would be nice. I'd like to know if there were any other incidents in which Pharoah's son, thought to be a god of sorts, was also supposedly killed by the God of the people whom they had enslaved.

I'm not talking about wars here. I'm talking about their polytheistic religion being completely overpowered by a weaker people than they.

If the loss of the Library of Alexandria was large enough to hide something this traumatic, then there would be many more blank spots in history. Besides that, the library had a practice of copying all books that came into Alexandria, not of just stealing them. And the Library wasn't created until third century BC, meaning that original knowledge of it would have been around for so long before the library that it would have been mentioned elsewhere.

I offered explainations that collaborate that it wasn't the loss of the library of Alexandra which may have caused Israel's history in Egypt to disapear. You dont have to take my word for it as there is absolutely no proof. I'm just stating where I stand on this matter.

 

[Gamer4Fire]

[...]when i was a kid,i was yelling at the lighting cloud,it spark everytime i yelling, i though it was God.

If nobody ever exposed you to a god concept, you'd be thinking the clouds themselves were communicating with you until you asked someone and they told you about electricity.

no most ancient cultures believe their God was speaking to them! not the cloud..thats why any of you arguments are void, because you dont have facts or even know what your a talking about

Psst, early people considered the objects themselves to be spirits (lesser gods).<-Minor Point, thus the size

[...]

I have no idea where you come from and just say, "No, you're wrong," and expect it to work.

Well, the problem here is one of distinction. For example, the Mesoamericans were also polytheistic, having a maize god, rain god, etc, BUT they also had gods for abstract concepts like the Underworld, which obviously were not objects.

Say what? I have no idea what you are trying to debate here, but you seem to have strayed away from the point of discussion, "religeon, wut iz et gud fer?" One of my original points is that: "If nobody ever exposed you to a god concept, you'd be thinking the clouds themselves were communicating with you[...]" I don't personally care if you call them demi-gods, honored ancestors, great spirits, spooks, specters or ghosts.

The fact that crazy blue dude just comes out and says, "u r rong becuz i sez so" just rubbed me the wrong way.

did you really use a college course to prove yourself?! haha

You are absolutely right, education and learning has nothing to do with religion. Point taken.

 

[KrystalRules]

you know Government controls what goes into those books and the gov. wants more money...the money religion is evolution(yes religion) so they put evolution in those books as fact(which it is obviously not) it is only a theory, no proff whatsoever for it and so on a so forth. even though we werent talking about Evolution, my example shows you how a nonchristian college can not be taken completely serious at all...

 

[Gamer4Fire]

you know Government controls what goes into those books and the gov. wants more money...the money religion is evolution(yes religion) so they put evolution in those books as fact(which it is obviously not) it is only a theory, no proff whatsoever for it and so on a so forth. even though we werent talking about Evolution, my example shows you how a nonchristian college can not be taken completely serious at all...

And what exactly does this have to do with the trade options of harp seal skin stocks in Russia?

Your last post was a non sequitur.

 

[Zink]

G4F, the point is, if nobody told you about gods you'd invent your own. Semantics are semantics; great spirits, revered ancestors, whatever, you'd come up with something to worship and attribute nature to.
Also, does anyone else have NO IDEA WHATSOEVER what this blue person is trying to say? There's some random junk about evolution, mixed in with some bizarre concept about non-christian colleges, or something. It's not right, that's for sure.

You are absolutely right, education and learning has nothing to do with religion. Point taken.

See, it's snide little asides like this that I hate. Why do anti-theists always take an imaginary intellectual high ground? It's demeaning and in poor spirit.