Are we an experiment ?

Discussion in 'Pandora's Box' started by supbra, Aug 21, 2011.

  1. There's more to this guardians of the earth. Either they've been here for so long before our race. They just like to have some contact. We're dangerous. Or they break down once and awhile and we see through their technology for a moment. I'm speaking from a few experiences that I've had in the wilderness.
     
  2. No. We are a creation.
     
  3. We're just another life form that has evolved from the primal ooze. Hell we're not even the dominant life form on the planet. That would be bacteria, or if you want to talk multi-cellular life then it is insects.
     
  4. All of which are creations as well... ;)
     

  5. Did you say...CREATIONS?????

    [​IMG]
     
  6. Yes, random creations of evolution. Anything else requires proof that you cannot offer.
     

  7. You really think existence is random? You seriously believe all of those violators of innocent lives who are lucky/intelligent enough to avoid being brought to justice here on Earth are home free the second their heart stops beating? Or perhaps every man and woman will face judgment.
     
  8. I believe what the application of the scientific method tells me, not random made up mythologies.
     

  9. Random is the worst word for it.



    Not our fault the world doesn't make sense to you otherwise.
     

  10. As do I. When not one Scientist can find fault in something, or when something becomes a scientific fact, I will bet my life on it.
     

  11. I will not be the judge of that.
     
  12. There is zero evidence for anything other than evolutionary forces in the form of natural selection with regards to our being here. I do think life is inevitable and we'll find it all over the places if we ever get out there to look, but I do not think it was 'created' arbitrarily by any intelligent guiding force. There is no evidence at all for the latter.
     

  13. Well you are much older than me (I am assuming by your username), so I will respectively disagree with you and call it that.
     
  14. Age doesn't matter, and in any civil debate two parties can agree to disagree.
     
  15. If one doesn't have a firm opinion/belief on said topic, then I would agree that age doesn't matter. But in my experience (backed by statistics, fwiw), people reach a certain age where their religious beliefs (or lack thereof) are carried with them until death. While this isn't always the case, I'll make an exception to my opposition to gambling and go ahead and place a bet on this one... ;)
     
  16. I never said I didn't have religious beliefs, so you're making false assumptions.
     
  17. #17 Skyler Vant, Aug 21, 2011
    Last edited by a moderator: Aug 21, 2011
    Seeing how you like to start and stop debates at your own liking, I won't bother getting any deeper into this than this. Playing passive aggressive isn't nice. You can't just imply it's outrageous NOT to believe in divine judgment, then say you respectfully disagree and no longer wish to talk about it. There is nothing respectful about it, it's disrespectful in fact, it's wasting people's time.

    Also, your reply makes no sense given the context of my comment.

    Wait, wait, wait, let me get this straight. The reason why you wanted to drop this with oldskool is because you saw his name and are now assuming he is stuck in his ways? If so, you're quite the intellectual.
     
  18. To be fair he wasn't debating. Debating involves offers of proof. While there is ample evidence for evolution, there is zero evidence that can be offered that says we were consciously created by some force or entity, so it really can't even be a stance for valid debate.
     

  19. I did no such thing. I offered the only two possible categories you could fit into: Religious beliefs or lack thereof. Either you have religious beliefs or you don't. Regardless, you seem confident enough in your beliefs. That's good enough for me.
     
  20. I'm throwing around debate like people do the word theory, you know what I mean so let's not get into the semantics of it. He implied what he implied, and then he tried to drop it. He was being passive aggressive, and lord knows what he is trying to say with people being set in their ways, and how that is relevant to the "discussion" you two are having.
     

Share This Page