Consciousness Cannot Have Evolved

[26 Inf]

Perhaps it was another god who gave me the choice !

" God standeth in the congregation of the mighty. He judgeth among the gods "

Psalm 82:1 KJV

The Psalmist, Asaph, wasn't saying there is more than one God.

"Morning stars" and "sons of God" were ancient Hebrew and Ancient Near East motifs for angels, or the divine council referred to in Psalm 82.

[Mick Boon]

The Psalmist, Asaph, wasn't saying there is more than one God.

"Morning stars" and "sons of God" were ancient Hebrew and Ancient Near East motifs for angels, or the divine council referred to in Psalm 82.

The only difference between god and gods is one is singular and the other plural.

[SteyrAUG]

https://iai.tv/articles/consciousnes...lved-auid-1302

The overwhelmingly validated theory of evolution tells us that the functions performed by our organs arose from associated increases in survival fitness. For instance, the bile produced by our liver and the insulin produced by our pancreas help us absorb nutrients and thus survive. Insofar as it is produced by the brain, our phenomenal consciousness—i.e. our ability to subjectively experience the world and ourselves—is no exception: it, too, must give us some survival advantage, otherwise natural selection wouldn’t have fixed it in our genome. In other words, our sentience—to the extent that it is produced by the brain—must perform a beneficial function, otherwise we would be unconscious zombies.

Phenomenal consciousness cannot have evolved. It can only have been there from the beginning as an intrinsic, irreducible fact of nature. The faster we come to terms with this fact, the faster our understanding of consciousness will progress.

Most evolutions are arbitrary and random. Also waving about absolutes in science shows a limited understanding of science.

[Caduceus]

First off, I know there are things we cannot understand. Having said that, I believe that God's creation day may not have been the same as our 24 hour day.

The thing about evolution that I have never understood is where are all the half ape/half men? I mean how does it go, at some point nature says 'okay, all done, everybody in the pipeline that hasn't yet fully evolved, your out of here? And you there, you stay an ape - forever, sorry dude.'

Same thing about the big bang theory, so who put those atoms into play?

Because evolution talks about branch points not linear changes.

Remember, it's not like theres just ONE of "whatever" when a mutation happens. There's more. So mutated whatever keeps breeding and over time additional mutations keep going and you get a new species.

But the other Whatevers kept breeding too. So their species survives.

But there's nothing that says there's only one branch point. Or that something doesn't wipe out Whatever, or Mutated Whatever.

Take two identical ARs. One is your stock "go to" that you leave alone. The ither, you swap hand guards, rail, trigger, sights, paint job. At the end of the day one is markedly differe t from the other. But .... it's still identifiable as an AR, and they both started off the same.

[Mick Boon]

Because evolution talks about branch points not linear changes.

Remember, it's not like theres just ONE of "whatever" when a mutation happens. There's more. So mutated whatever keeps breeding and over time additional mutations keep going and you get a new species.

But the other Whatevers kept breeding too. So their species survives.

But there's nothing that says there's only one branch point. Or that something doesn't wipe out Whatever, or Mutated Whatever.

Take two identical ARs. One is your stock "go to" that you leave alone. The ither, you swap hand guards, rail, trigger, sights, paint job. At the end of the day one is markedly differe t from the other. But .... it's still identifiable as an AR, and they both started off the same.

Excellent reply !

Psalm 139:13-15
13 For Thou hast possessed my reins. Thou hast covered me in my motherÂ’s womb.

14 I will praise Thee, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made; marvelous are Thy works, and that my soul knoweth right well.

15 My substance was not hid from Thee when I was made in secret, and intricately wrought in the lowest parts of the earth.

Whatever happened to this ? Â….. To argue with a person who renounced the use of reason is like administering medicine to the dead. ~ Thomas Paine

[LMT Shooter]

So what was the first step in evolution? How exactly did the change from inorganic to organic occur? How exactly did the change from nonliving inorganic to life occur?

Without knowing these answers, evolution seems a lot like a faith-based belief system to me.

[Mick Boon]

So what was the first step in evolution? How exactly did the change from inorganic to organic occur? How exactly did the change from nonliving inorganic to life occur?

Without knowing these answers, evolution seems a lot like a faith-based belief system to me.

it's known as the theory of evolution because it's a theory. Even though there are unanswered questions it makes far more sense than an invisible man in the sky certainty.

[LMT Shooter]

it's known as the theory of evolution because it's a theory. Even though there are unanswered questions it makes far more sense than an invisible man in the sky certainty.

How, exactly, is it that evolution, "makes far more sense?" All I did was ask a few questions that no one who believes in evolution knows the answers to, and point out that therefore evolution is as much a faith-based belief system as any other religion. Evolution is a religion where science is God. My intent was to either get a believer in evolution to answer the questions (which you cannot do), or at least admit that their belief in evolution is faith based. I fully expected to get neither in any convincing fashion. I also expected to get insulting and demeaning answers, such as referring to God as, "an invisible man in the sky." The greatest weakness in the theory of evolution is the inability of most of those who believe in it to debate the topic without insulting or demeaning religion. Richard Dawkins loves the phrase, "flying spaghetti monster," to refer to God because Richard Dawkins likes to be an insulting ass to religious folks. He has actually argued that aliens may have started life on Earth, as if that makes more sense. When pressed, he, like many other atheists who believe in evolution, will come up with any BS to bolster his belief in evolution, no matter how ludicrous. Sounds pretty faith-based to me.

As for myself, the God I believe in could have made us via the proces we call evolution, and I'm totally cool with that idea. I don't go to church, nor do I want to. I call myself an agnostic when pressed to describe my beliefs, only because I feel that the word agnostic describes my beliefs better than most other words. I do believe that the world is a better place because of Judeo-Christian beliefs and those who practice them.

[Mick Boon]

How, exactly, is it that evolution, "makes far more sense?" All I did was ask a few questions that no one who believes in evolution knows the answers to, and point out that therefore evolution is as much a faith-based belief system as any other religion. Evolution is a religion where science is God. My intent was to either get a believer in evolution to answer the questions (which you cannot do), or at least admit that their belief in evolution is faith based. I fully expected to get neither in any convincing fashion. I also expected to get insulting and demeaning answers, such as referring to God as, "an invisible man in the sky." The greatest weakness in the theory of evolution is the inability of most of those who believe in it to debate the topic without insulting or demeaning religion. Richard Dawkins loves the phrase, "flying spaghetti monster," to refer to God because Richard Dawkins likes to be an insulting ass to religious folks. He has actually argued that aliens may have started life on Earth, as if that makes more sense. When pressed, he, like many other atheists who believe in evolution, will come up with any BS to bolster his belief in evolution, no matter how ludicrous. Sounds pretty faith-based to me.

As for myself, the God I believe in could have made us via the proces we call evolution, and I'm totally cool with that idea. I don't go to church, nor do I want to. I call myself an agnostic when pressed to describe my beliefs, only because I feel that the word agnostic describes my beliefs better than most other words. I do believe that the world is a better place because of Judeo-Christian beliefs and those who practice them.

That the theory evolution makes more sense than an invisible man in the sky is obvious to any sane person. It's a clinical fact that any adult person who has an invisible friend is a certifiable lunatic.

I can not answer your questions of "So what was the first step in evolution? How exactly did the change from inorganic to organic occur? How exactly did the change from nonliving inorganic to life occur" because I don't know, and neither do you.

I have no beliefs, I simply know what I know and everything else will remain a theory until proven one way or the other.

As for faith , Faith is believing what you know ain't so. … Mark Twain

PS it's extremely difficult not to give what you describe as "demeaning answers "when confronted with idiotic religious doctrine.

[Alex V]

Using a fictional book written by man about a magic deity in the sky in order to explain phenomena that his lack of knowledge otherwise could not in order to discredit fact base science. Classic.