Proof that evolution is a bunch of crap.
The molecules then got together to form a cell. The cell then started taking in other molecules in order to sustain the chemical reactions going on inside of it. What goes on inside a cell is nothing more than a chemical reaction.
The cells then got together to form an organism. The organism started taking in nutrients, which is nothing more than a bunch of molecules, in order to sustain the chemical reactions going on inside of it. What goes on inside an organism is nothing more than a chemical reaction. Every thought, every memory, every emotion, that pops into your head is nothing more than a chemical reaction.
Sentient life is thus nothing more than a set of self sustaining chemical reactions.
So when a scientist tells you that evolutionary traits that are beneficial to a species tends to become prevalent among that species, what he means is that a trait that is beneficial to a set of self sustaining chemical reactions tends to become prevalent among that set of self sustaining chemical reactions. And being able to think is one of those traits.
In other words, a set of self sustaining chemical reactions evolved the ability to think purely by chance and it became prevalent because thinking helps the set of chemical reactions to sustain itself. In fact, every set of self sustaining chemical reactions came into existance by pure chance. Every step that gave rise to sentient life was due to pure chance.
Is this making any kind of sense to you yet?
Makes total sense to me.
Side Score: 3
|
Who came up with that crap?
Side Score: 5
|
|
|
|
What part is not accurate? It's crap because each step is based on an accident and because the end result of all those accidents is sentient life. It's like saying that eventually the internet will become sentient once we add enough nodes. Given the creator is jolie, this debate is ment to stir the pot and I've gotten about all I can get out of the "Proof that intelligent design is a bunch of crap" debate ;) Side: Makes total sense to me.
1
point
It's crap because each step is based on an accident and because the end result of all those accidents is sentient life. You seem to misunderstand what evolution is trying to explain. You're saying evolution is a bunch of crap because it account for the beginning of sentience. The theory of evolution doesn't claim to account for the beginning of sentience. Side: Who came up with that crap?
each step is based on an accident For each step to be an accident there must be intent. If a picture hanging on the wall falls to the floor, you wouldn't say it "accidentally fell", it just fell. By contrast if I'm walking and slip and fall, I could say I "accidentally" fell because my intent was to remain standing. Side: Makes total sense to me.
|
choose your poison ... https://www.youtube.com/ Side: Who came up with that crap?
|