Gaps in Evolution

  • Thread starter Thread starter SoulBeaver
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
curioosbadger said:
yup, he says so right in the clip, even explains why he thinks so, if anyone hasnt bothered: watch it. (and the rest of the clips Ive been littering this thread with)
Click to expand...
Well, I watched a part of it, but how does it explain why he’s RC (I hope you realize I believe in evolution)?
 
josie_L said:
I take it you can’t answer my question? 😃 😃 😃
Click to expand...
What question? If you want to know how the brain works go read up on neuroscience, not “the case for the creator” LAMO.

Can you not look it up yourself, would you like to find it for you.

Man… my cars not working, God makes cars go! Break out the “the case for the creator” so i can find out how my car works!!!🤷
 
Charles_Darwin said:
YOUR RIGHT!

There just about so swoop off to heaven!!!:harp::angel1: :extrahappy::angel1::harp:

Oh wait!! bioedonline.org/news/news.cfm?art=2460 :rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:
Click to expand...
The article doesn’t have any definitive answers and doesn’t rule out spiritual possibilities.

“Dr. Ken Ring published a paper in the Journal of Near-Death Studies (Summer, 1993) concerning near-death experiencers who, while out of their bodies, witness real events that occur far away from their dead body. The important aspect to this phenomenon is that these events seen far away are later verified to be true. Experiencers not only witness events from great distances, but they have been documented to hear conversations between people at the same events. Conversations such as these have also verified to be true. An even more fascinating phenomenon occurs when the experiencer actually appears in spirit to someone, usually a loved one, during their NDE and it is verified to be true by the experiencer and the loved one. It is evidence such as this, if scientifically controlled, that can provide absolute scientific proof that consciousness can exist outside of the body. A scientifically controlled NDE that can be repeated which provides such evidence would be the scientific discovery of all time. However, science does not yet have the exact tools to accomplish this. But, science is coming very, very close. This kind of evidence and others provide very strong circumstantial evidence for the survival of consciousness.”

near-death.com/evidence.html
 
josie_L said:
The article doesn’t have any definitive answers and doesn’t rule out spiritual possibilities.

“Dr. Ken Ring published a paper in the Journal of Near-Death Studies (Summer, 1993) concerning near-death experiencers who, while out of their bodies, witness real events that occur far away from their dead body. The important aspect to this phenomenon is that these events seen far away are later verified to be true. Experiencers not only witness events from great distances, but they have been documented to hear conversations between people at the same events. Conversations such as these have also verified to be true. An even more fascinating phenomenon occurs when the experiencer actually appears in spirit to someone, usually a loved one, during their NDE and it is verified to be true by the experiencer and the loved one. It is evidence such as this, if scientifically controlled, that can provide absolute scientific proof that consciousness can exist outside of the body. A scientifically controlled NDE that can be repeated which provides such evidence would be the scientific discovery of all time. However, science does not yet have the exact tools to accomplish this. But, science is coming very, very close. This kind of evidence and others provide very strong circumstantial evidence for the survival of consciousness.”

near-death.com/evidence.html
Click to expand...
Perhaps the final word should go to Nancy Evans Bush, an experiencer with the International Association for Near-Death Studies, who said:

“There is no human experience of any description that can’t simply be reduced to a biological process, but that in no way offsets the meaning those experiences have for us - whether it’s falling in love, or grieving, or having a baby.” Or coming close to death and having a transcendental experience.
 
Charles_Darwin said:
What question? If you want to know how the brain works go read up on neuroscience, not “the case for the creator” LAMO.

Can you not look it up yourself, would you like to find it for you.

Man… my cars not working, God makes cars go! Break out the “the case for the creator” so i can find out how my car works!!!🤷
Click to expand...
I’m asking how matter (as an atheist such as yourself views it) can bring about consciousness? And I’m not asking how the brain works per se but where and how consciousness originated from if naturalists (those who believe in nothing more than the material) affirm matter is dead and mindless and subject to the laws of nature?
 
Charles_Darwin said:
Perhaps the final word should go to Nancy Evans Bush, an experiencer with the International Association for Near-Death Studies, who said:

“There is no human experience of any description that can’t simply be reduced to a biological process, but that in no way offsets the meaning those experiences have for us - whether it’s falling in love, or grieving, or having a baby.” Or coming close to death and having a transcendental experience.
Click to expand...
This doesn’t tell me anyting, and for a scientist she is rather rhetorical. If everything can be reduced to a biological process, i.e., we are only material objects, then has material objects we are subject like all other matter to the laws of nature which deprives us of free will. I would think that such determinism would indeed offset our human experiences.
 
josie_L said:
I’m asking how matter (as an atheist such as yourself views it) can bring about consciousness? And I’m not asking how the brain works per se but where and how consciousness originated from if naturalists (those who believe in nothing more than the material) affirm matter is dead and mindless and subject to the laws of nature?
Click to expand...
I’ve told you countless times. The brain is responsible for consciousness. Whether you like it of not, it is a fact that consciousness is directly linked to the brain. If you dont care how the brain works then you are never going to learn anything about consciousness.
 
josie_L said:
This doesn’t tell me anyting, and for a scientist she is rather rhetorical. If everything can be reduced to a biological process, i.e., we are only material objects, then has material objects we are subject like all other matter to the laws of nature which deprives us of free will. I would think that such determinism would indeed offset our human experiences.
Click to expand...
Of couse we are subject to the laws of nature? And everything CAN be reduced to biological processes, thats a fact.
 
Charles_Darwin said:
I’ve told you countless times. The brain is responsible for consciousness. Whether you like it of not, it is a fact that consciousness is directly linked to the brain. If you dont care how the brain works then you are never going to learn anything about consciousness.
Click to expand...
The brain is the mechanism that manifests the mind (consciousness). Do you know who Wilder Penfield is? He was the father of modern neurosurgery, and he at first believed that the brain accounted for the mind. But having done countless (thousands) surgeries on epileptic patients he discovered that the brain and the mind are actually distinct from each another.

"Penfield would stimulate electrically the proper motor cortex of conscious patients and challenge them to keep one hand from moving when the current was applied. The patient would seize this hand with the other hand and struggle to hold it still. Thus one hand was under control of the electrical current and the other hand under the control of the patient’s mind fought against each other. Penfield risked the explanation that the patient had not only a physical brain that was stimulated to action but also a nonphysical reality that interacted with the brain.

.
 
josie_L said:
So you’re saying we have no free will?
Click to expand...
I’m not even sure what you mean by free will? We have to live within the rules of a cooperative society. So i guess we have the right to live our lifes they way we want as long as we don’t impede others rights.

If yur talking about the biology of it all, free will has nothing to do with it. Everything CAN be reduced to biological processes. That is a fact, no matter how it makes you feel.
 
Charles_Darwin said:
I’m not even sure what you mean by free will? We have to live within the rules of a cooperative society. So i guess we have the right to live our lifes they way we want as long as we don’t impede others rights.

If yur talking about the biology of it all, free will has nothing to do with it. Everything CAN be reduced to biological processes. That is a fact, no matter how it makes you feel.
Click to expand...
May I ask a question, were you always an atheist? And if you weren’t, were you a Christian? And if you were, how do you not know what free will is? What type of Christian were you?
 
josie_L said:
The brain is the mechanism that manifests the mind (consciousness). Do you know who Wilder Penfield is? He was the father of modern neurosurgery, and he at first believed that the brain accounted for the mind. But having done countless (thousands) surgeries on epileptic patients he discovered that the brain and the mind are actually distinct from each another.

"Penfield would stimulate electrically the proper motor cortex of conscious patients and challenge them to keep one hand from moving when the current was applied. The patient would seize this hand with the other hand and struggle to hold it still. Thus one hand was under control of the electrical current and the other hand under the control of the patient’s mind fought against each other. Penfield risked the explanation that the patient had not only a physical brain that was stimulated to action but also a nonphysical reality that interacted with the brain.

.
Click to expand...
“Penfield risked the explanation that the patient had not only a physical brain that was stimulated to action but also a nonphysical reality that interacted with the brain.”

Your going back nearly 40 years and you can find one scientist that “risked” the explanation. Instead of digging to find things that support your predefinded conclusion. Forget the conclusion, start fresh, and look at what consensus of modern scientists is.
 
josie_L said:
May I ask a question, were you always an atheist? And if you weren’t, were you a Christian? And if you were, how do you not know what free will is? What type of Christian were you?
Click to expand...
I’ve never been religious, i was allowed to form what ever beliefs i wanted. Thats why i didn’t start with any conclusions. I look at the evidence and let that form my beliefs. I don’t understand why you even look at the evidence. Whats the point when you’ve already made your mind up? It’s like convicting someone of murder then looking at the evidence. When you find there is none, you still says their guilty because that was your inital conclusion.
 
Charles_Darwin said:
“Penfield risked the explanation that the patient had not only a physical brain that was stimulated to action but also a nonphysical reality that interacted with the brain.”

Your going back nearly 40 years and you can find one scientist that “risked” the explanation. Instead of digging to find things that support your predefinded conclusion. Forget the conclusion, start fresh, and look at what consensus of modern scientists is.
Click to expand...
Actually, I’ve been doing some digging, and so far what I found states that scientists are trying to locate the “seat” of consciousness within the brain. I will also be reading up on near death experiences as I find it truly compelling. What do you do for a living or are you a student?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top