TheAlmightyFeaz

Ok, normally I could take on a fundie in debate myself, but this one is SMART. We've been debating in a forum for over a month now, and I have several agnostics and wiccans on my side, yet I keep having to give ground. Please, you all are more experienced with debating than I am...I need your help!

Over the next few days I shall be posting what he's saying.

KnightWhoSaysNi

Hi TheAlmightyFeaz,

The FD Challenge & Setup forum is normally meant for making formal debate challenges and setting up debate parameters. It is not intended for a discussion of ongoing debates.

Your thread is being moved to GRD for now. Perhaps you may want to ask your theist friend to come to IIDB to declare a formal debate challenge.

Jason

TheAlmightyFeaz

Here are the first of the "Legend Keeper" (his online name) arguments against evolution.



Okay, my best arguement.

Why don't animals have science? If we truely come from some animal, then why does no other species have science? It's so advantageous that it allows us to overcome our physical weaknesses. Yet no other creature has gained this enormously advantageous ability to observe and draw conclusion.

Here's some more.

Why are humans so physically weak? Compared to animals, we are some of the weakest creatures on Earth. If we evolved, shouldn't we be stronger?

Science has shown us that systems tend to break down over time, not grow more and more complex as evolution suggests.

enrious

He's saying animals can't observe and draw conclusions?


Mind you I haven't asked lately, but I'm quite sure if an animal touches a flame, they're able to observe and then conclude that fire=pain/bad thing.



He also seems to make the common error of thinking that evolution produces "better" and then arbitrarily defines what better is.

I ate Pascal's Wafer

Other animals have a basic scientific method, although it is not very sophisticated as compared to our own because other animals do not have the same capacity for abstract thought that we have. However, animals are able to observe and draw conclusions. For example, some chimpanzee populations are able to observe that termites live in hills. They are able to observe that sticks are better able to dig into their holes than chimp fingers are. They are able to observe that some sticks are better than others at digging into these holes, and that they can make better sticks by modifying them. Then they are able to test their predictions by prying the termites out of the hole for food. Sure, it's not as impressive as our own discoveries, but I would classify this as a basic scientific approach.

No. The reason we are smarter is because we are relatively weak physically. Strong animals do not have the need to be smart. They can just overpower (or outrun, or whatever) anything that threatens them. Weak humans had to resort to other means. By relying on our brains over our physical strength, it turns out that those individuals who were smarter tending to survive over the stupid ones. By working smarter instead of harder, we didn't need to develop great physical strength. So, our species becoming physically stronger is not to be expected.

-Nick

Quantum Ninja

Exactly. Because of our physical limitations, it's amazing our species survived at all. Comparatively speaking, we're not that strong, not that fast, not too agile, and we don't have any great defense mechanisms (fangs, claws, etc.) If it weren't for the development of advanced intelligence, nature probably would have "given up" on us, i.e. we'd become extinct real fast.

Quantum Ninja

Tell him to look up at the night sky. The seemingly random placement of stars throughout the vast void of space doesn't look like a system tending toward order. I look up at the night sky and recognize a system moving in the other direction, toward disorder. Each little star you see is just a little blip of order in a storm of chaos.

Sure, humans and all organisms on the Earth are higly complex, ordered objects, but when you compare these to the immensity of the universe, it really makes you realize how tiny we are. And it's not really that surprising that small bits of order should develop in a system as large as the universe.

If you want an analogy, just look at the decimal expansion of Pi. It's a large (infinite) seemingly random system of digits, but you can find little bits of order dispersed throughout it. For instance, go to the link below and do a search for the sequence 123456 (be warned, the link may take awhile to load).

http://www.hepl.phys.nagoya-u.ac.jp/docs/pif500.text.gz

The sequence appears exactly twice in the first 5 million digits of Pi. A small, tiny amount of order in a system of disorder. Ok, this probably isn't the greatest analogy, but I think it gets the point across.

Doctor X

Sometimes it is best to take the offensive.

Have him define the alternative.

--J.D.

TheAlmightyFeaz

Thanks, all. I've posted the response, and I'm waiting for him to return.

Biff the unclean

Why don't animals have science?
Since I spend all day working with apes I can tell you that it is shear nonsense.
Watch a squirrel trying to get at a bird feeder some day. They will study the problem and then experiment with various solutions until it has solved the problem. That is the scientific method.
On the other hand when was the last time you saw an armadillo on it's knees praying to Jesus?

If we truely come from some animal,
We truly ARE an animal.

Why are humans so physically weak?
Evolution.
The survival tactic we evolved was not brute force, nor camouflage, nor speed, nor the power of flight. We evolved intelligence as a survival tactic and it works just great thank you.
If we evolved, shouldn't we be stronger?
No, it would make no sense for us to be. Great strength would be superfluous and a waste of resources needed to support our intelligence.

Science has shown us that systems tend to break down over time, not grow more and more complex as evolution suggests.
Science has shown us that if you take a system-lets say a tiny baby-and add energy to it--let's say food--then it will grow and grow and become more and more complex.
If it is a closed system--let's say a baby with duct tape over it's nose, mouth and bottom- and you don't add energy to it then it will surely break down.
That, I believe, was one of Darwin's points--dead animals don't evolve.
I'm surprised that your Xian hasn't noticed that he is somewhat more complex than he was at his birth. Does he think this happened by magic? I wouldn't let him cat sit for you if that's the case.

Evolution doesn't mean becoming more complex by the way. It only means "changing." Some things evolve more complexity some become simpler. I went to a Steven Jay Gould lecture once where he described it as a drunken man staggering down the side walk. The buildings represent life as simple as can be, single celled. The gutter=astonishing complexity. The drunk might stagger into the building but he can't go beyond it. Eventually, if he staggers long enough, he will surely topple into the gutter.
There is no plan to evolution, there is no goal. But there are only so many options and complexity is one of them.