Kevinb Posted December 11, 2017 Group: Seeker Followers: 4 Topic Count: 5 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 423 Content Per Day: 0.17 Reputation: 70 Days Won: 0 Joined: 04/18/2017 Status: Offline Share Posted December 11, 2017 28 minutes ago, enoob57 said: People who claim the Scripture (Bible Genesis- Revelation) is circular have never read the Bible: The Bible begins with the creation by The God Who has never had beginning and tells us all things pertaining to life and Who God 'IS' and who we are... then it takes us all the way to an eternity without end... there is nothing about circular reasoning within it! You see The bible 'IS' God's Word and as it is examined by perfect reason it passes as such without begin and end in limitless resource. You see only a book ... open the pages and seek God within it and you will find what you say does not exist Assertion from authority. Reading a book doesn't mean the book is true coz it says it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HAZARD Posted December 11, 2017 Group: Royal Member Followers: 11 Topic Count: 320 Topics Per Day: 0.04 Content Count: 6,830 Content Per Day: 0.84 Reputation: 3,570 Days Won: 1 Joined: 02/16/2002 Status: Offline Author Share Posted December 11, 2017 9 hours ago, Kevinb said: This is a shifting of the burden of proof. Nor can you not prove I don't have invisible pixies in my garden. If I made that claim it's not true till you disprove it. If I make such a claim I must prove it. So theists of all denominations and creeds make God claims they take on a burden of proof. So you don't believe in God, His creation, His Word the Bible, your an atheist. Why are you even here? In my opinion, and according to Scripture there's no such thing as an atheist. Romans 1:20-21, “For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse. Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.” You, according to your posts simply just refuse to believe! It is these who simply refuse to believe there is no God that He will deny knowing as well on the last day. Matthew 10:33, But whosoever shall deny me before men, him will I also deny before my Father which is in heaven. Psalm 14:1, "The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none that doeth good." Psalm 53:1, "The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God. Corrupt are they, and have done abominable iniquity: there is none that doeth good." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HAZARD Posted December 11, 2017 Group: Royal Member Followers: 11 Topic Count: 320 Topics Per Day: 0.04 Content Count: 6,830 Content Per Day: 0.84 Reputation: 3,570 Days Won: 1 Joined: 02/16/2002 Status: Offline Author Share Posted December 11, 2017 7 hours ago, Kevinb said: Assertion from authority. Reading a book doesn't mean the book is true coz it says it is. I have a book which says, 1 x 1 = 2, 2 x 2 = 4, 4 x 4 = 16, 16 + 16 = 32 etc. Another which says, If I jump of a high cliff gravity will cause me to fall to the bottom. So according to you, because these things are written in books, these things may not be so? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HAZARD Posted December 11, 2017 Group: Royal Member Followers: 11 Topic Count: 320 Topics Per Day: 0.04 Content Count: 6,830 Content Per Day: 0.84 Reputation: 3,570 Days Won: 1 Joined: 02/16/2002 Status: Offline Author Share Posted December 11, 2017 21 minutes ago, Saved.One.by.Grace said: Hazard, you have an error in your math. 16 + 16 = 32; 16 x 16 = 256. Sorry mate, I meant to write 16 + 16 = 32. I will fix that 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevinb Posted December 11, 2017 Group: Seeker Followers: 4 Topic Count: 5 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 423 Content Per Day: 0.17 Reputation: 70 Days Won: 0 Joined: 04/18/2017 Status: Offline Share Posted December 11, 2017 (edited) 2 hours ago, HAZARD said: I have a book which says, 1 x 1 = 2, 2 x 2 = 4, 4 x 4 = 16, 16 + 16 = 32 etc. Another which says, If I jump of a high cliff gravity will cause me to fall to the bottom. So according to you, because these things are written in books, these things may not be so? These things can be demonstrated in reality.... things fall at a known speed under gravity. This is demonstrable and falsifiable... maybe peer reviewed by others. Please do this with your God claims... lots wife turned to a pillar of salt. Adam and eve claims. People living to many hundred years. No... you can't? Accept on faith? See the difference? In addition to the math correction...1 x 1 is 1 not 2. This is why it's testible.... you've inadvertently proven my point...priceless ? Edited December 11, 2017 by Kevinb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HAZARD Posted December 11, 2017 Group: Royal Member Followers: 11 Topic Count: 320 Topics Per Day: 0.04 Content Count: 6,830 Content Per Day: 0.84 Reputation: 3,570 Days Won: 1 Joined: 02/16/2002 Status: Offline Author Share Posted December 11, 2017 30 minutes ago, Kevinb said: These things can be demonstrated in reality.... things fall at a known speed under gravity. This is demonstrable and falsifiable... maybe peer reviewed by others. Please do this with your God claims... lots wife turned to a pillar of salt. Adam and eve claims. People living to many hundred years. No... you can't? Accept on faith? See the difference? In addition to the math correction...1 x 1 is 1 not 2. This is why it's testible.... you've inadvertently proven my point...priceless ? Only proves I'm human and make mistakes, God doesn't. . . . I meant to write 1 + 1 = 2 Who ever created DNA, God, can do anything at all, as He clearly says in His Word. And science has proved this. Charles Darwin’s theory of natural selection may be able to explain how living creatures can evolve from one form to another, but it cannot explain how something that was not alive evolved into the first life on Earth. Stephen C. Meyer, a Cambridge trained scholar in the philosophy of science, does have an explanation for how life on Earth began: the DNA in every cell of every creature shows unmistakable evidence of having been deliberately designed by an intelligent being. Meyer lays out his analysis in a new book, Signature in the Cell: DNA and the Evidence for Intelligent Design. In 1953, James Watson and Francis Crick achieved what appeared impossible—discovering the genetic structure deep inside the nucleus of our cells. We call this genetic material DNA, an abbreviation for deoxyribonucleic acid. The discovery of the double-helix structure of the DNA molecule opened the floodgates for scientists to examine the code embedded within it. Now, more than half a century after the initial discovery, the DNA code has been deciphered—although many of its elements are still not well understood. What has been found has profound implications regarding Darwinian evolution, the theory taught in schools all over the world that all living beings have evolved by natural processes through mutation and natural selection. As scientists began to decode the human DNA molecule, they found something quite unexpected—an exquisite ‘language’ composed of some 3 billion genetic letters. “One of the most extraordinary discoveries of the twentieth century,” says Dr. Stephen Meyer, director of the Center for Science and Culture at the Discovery Institute in Seattle, Wash., “was that DNA actually stores information—the detailed instructions for assembling proteins—in the form of a four-character digital code” (quoted by Lee Strobel, The Case for a Creator, 2004, p. 224). It is hard to fathom, but the amount of information in human DNA is roughly equivalent to 12 sets of The Encyclopaedia Britannica— an incredible 384 volumes” worth of detailed information that would fill 48 feet of library shelves! Yet in their actual size—which is only two millionths of a millimeter thick—a teaspoon of DNA, according to molecular biologist Michael Denton, could contain all the information needed to build the proteins for all the species of organisms that have ever lived on the earth, and “there would still be enough room left for all the information in every book ever written” ( Evolution: A Theory in Crisis , 1996, p. 334). Who or what could miniaturize such information and place this enormous number of ‘letters’ in their proper sequence as a genetic instruction manual? Could evolution have gradually come up with a system like this? It is good to remember that, in spite of all the efforts of all the scientific laboratories around the world working over many decades, they have not been able to produce so much as a single human hair. How much more difficult is it to produce an entire body consisting of some 100 trillion cells! Evolution has had its run for almost 150 years in the schools and universities and in the press. But now, with the discovery of what the DNA code is all about, the complexity of the cell, and the fact that information is something vastly different from matter and energy, evolution can no longer dodge the ultimate outcome, God exists, always was, always will be. Exodus 3:14, "And God said unto Moses, I am that I am," 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Enoch2021 Posted December 11, 2017 Group: Royal Member Followers: 11 Topic Count: 19 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 3,396 Content Per Day: 0.90 Reputation: 730 Days Won: 4 Joined: 12/21/2013 Status: Offline Birthday: 12/26/1963 Share Posted December 11, 2017 40 minutes ago, Kevinb said: These things can be demonstrated in reality.... Really? So: 1 - 6 = -5 ... show us -5 Apples in "Reality"?? Quote things fall at a known speed under gravity. Yes and dark matter is created from nothing by luminescent gerbils. Which 'gravity'... Einstienian or Newtonian ?? THEN... a. Is gravity a Force? b. Is 'gravity' a Scientific Law or Scientific Theory? c. What is the CAUSE of 'gravity'...? Quote This is demonstrable and falsifiable. I'd say there's a better chance of Liberace being resurrected sporting a purple tutu and jumping on a chartreuse hobbled unicorn and riding around the Sombrero Galaxy. Quote maybe peer reviewed by others. 1. Show the "Peer-Review" Step in the Scientific Method...? 2. The Scientific Method was created to RID the landscape of BIAS: Loudest Voices, Ruling Class, Majority (Votes/Consensus), 'Opinions' ect ---- (The Subjective) by instituting A Method SOLELY focused on the (The Objective) EMPIRICAL: Observable, TESTABLE, Repeatable, Falsifiable; The PROCESS of The Scientific Method. You and your 'cohorts' appeal to it because it's the only way to get your FAIRYTALES into the mix, Whereby, BASTARDIZING IT! 3. "The author describes the three-legged stool of scientific error correction as experimental care, reproducible experiment, and peer review. Like Occam’s razor, PEER REVIEW is a TEMPORAL EXPEDIENT for judging scientific work at a given time. Peer review serves the temporal interests of publishers, funding agencies, and employers. The ultimate arbiter of scientific validity is REPEATABLE EXPERIMENT ALONE." Courtney, A et al: Comments Regarding “On the Nature of Science”; Physics in Canada, Vol. 64, No. 3 (2008), p 7-8.https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/0812/0812.4932.pdf Quote Please do this with your God claims... Do what? Quote lots wife turned to a pillar of salt. Adam and eve claims. People living to many hundred years. You can't Scientifically Validate Historical Evidence because you can't breach the First Step of The Scientific Method: "Observe a Phenomenon". By the mere fact that you queried this is a Screaming Testimony that you'd "FAIL" 5th Grade General Science. Quote No... you can't? Accept on faith? See the difference? 1. No we can't because the question is Nonsensical (See discussion directly above). 2. You're Equivocating Fallacy with the word "Faith". Blind Faith vs Biblical Faith. See the difference ? Quote In addition to the math correction...1 x 1 is 1 not 2. Astonishing! Quote This is why it's testible.... 1 x 1 = 1 is not a TEST . And it's spelled "TESTABLE". Quote you've inadvertently proven my point...priceless ? What?? ... that you couldn't Pass 5th Grade General Science? Sure is Priceless regards Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevinb Posted December 12, 2017 Group: Seeker Followers: 4 Topic Count: 5 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 423 Content Per Day: 0.17 Reputation: 70 Days Won: 0 Joined: 04/18/2017 Status: Offline Share Posted December 12, 2017 (edited) 1 hour ago, HAZARD said: Who ever created DNA, God, can do anything at all, as He clearly says in His Word. And science has proved this. Science has shown the natural world is complex. Science has not shown God did it. 1 hour ago, HAZARD said: Charles Darwin’s theory of natural selection may be able to explain how living creatures can evolve from one form to another, but it cannot explain how something that was not alive evolved into the first life on Earth. Correct. That's abiogenisis. However cannot is a finite assertion. Thus far is more accurate or have you decided it never will? If you say it never will.. you have to demonstrate all variables and know all conditions and test. Quite a project. 1 hour ago, HAZARD said: Stephen C. Meyer, a Cambridge trained scholar in the philosophy of science, does have an explanation for how life on Earth began: the DNA in every cell of every creature shows unmistakable evidence of having been deliberately designed by an intelligent being. A philosopher ... really? Let me guess a creationist? How about an Christian Francis Collins whilst head of the genome project said dna evidence alone proves common ancestry. How do you prove an intelligent agent designed? Just looking isn't enough... how do you test that? A car looks designed right but we could investigate an agent there ...a factory... manufacture of alloys.. watching robots rivet panels together. We haven't seen cars form in nature... they don't reproduce. We have no evidence a god created life.. in this design way... you admit you animals change from one form to another over time. How are you leveraging in God did or guided? How do we test that? 1 hour ago, HAZARD said: As scientists began to decode the human DNA molecule, they found something quite unexpected—an exquisite ‘language’ composed of some 3 billion genetic letters. “One of the most extraordinary discoveries of the twentieth century,” says Dr. Stephen Meyer, director of the Center for Science and Culture at the Discovery Institute in Seattle, Wash., “was that DNA actually stores information—the detailed instructions for assembling proteins—in the form of a four-character digital code” (quoted by Lee Strobel, The Case for a Creator, 2004, p. 224). Yes the building blocks. Therefore agent? You know there is vestigial dna too... like humans have the dna to produce vit c as apes do and make egg yolks as reptiles do? Links to activate have been evolved out. Besides again... still gotta show God did this. 1 hour ago, HAZARD said: t is good to remember that, in spite of all the efforts of all the scientific laboratories around the world working over many decades, they have not been able to produce so much as a single human hair. How much more difficult is it to produce an entire body consisting of some 100 trillion cells! Not sure where this gets us. If we don't know we never will? Are we at the finish line of scientific understanding? What might we achieve in 100 years...1000 years. You could be in medieval times and say with all our tech we can't fly. Yet now we can with our progress fly... at what speed.. gotta be a good few thousand miles an hour at our best. 1 hour ago, HAZARD said: Who or what could miniaturize such information and place this enormous number of ‘letters’ in their proper sequence as a genetic instruction manual? Could evolution have gradually come up with a system like this? What so you don't know therefore God did it? That's an argument from ignorance fallacy. Please prove God doing this to avoid it. 1 hour ago, HAZARD said: Evolution has had its run for almost 150 years in the schools and universities and in the press. But now, with the discovery of what the DNA code is all about, the complexity of the cell, and the fact that information is something vastly different from matter and energy, evolution can no longer dodge the ultimate outcome, God exists, always was, always will be. Exodus 3:14, "And God said unto Moses, I am that I am," I was with you through the 1st bit but then just leapt to God did it again. So we have an observation... how do we prove an intelligent agent did it? Faith maybe? Edited December 12, 2017 by Kevinb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
enoob57 Posted December 12, 2017 Group: Worthy Ministers Followers: 35 Topic Count: 99 Topics Per Day: 0.02 Content Count: 41,064 Content Per Day: 7.97 Reputation: 21,392 Days Won: 76 Joined: 03/13/2010 Status: Offline Birthday: 07/27/1957 Share Posted December 12, 2017 10 hours ago, Kevinb said: Assertion from authority. Reading a book doesn't mean the book is true coz it says it is. interesting .... everything you claim to know from your own self came from books... what of your premis now? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Enoch2021 Posted December 12, 2017 Group: Royal Member Followers: 11 Topic Count: 19 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 3,396 Content Per Day: 0.90 Reputation: 730 Days Won: 4 Joined: 12/21/2013 Status: Offline Birthday: 12/26/1963 Share Posted December 12, 2017 1 hour ago, Kevinb said: Science has shown the natural world is complex. Science has not shown God did it. 1. "Science" isn't an ENTITY or a result, It's a Method; The Scientific Method. "Science doesn't: "SHOW", say, jump, run, swim, point to, or do the hokey pokey. To do such things takes, Sentience, Prescience, and Intelligence...to be ALIVE. Science isn't ALIVE, Ergo...Reification Fallacy. 2. We're not talking about mere Complexity, we're talking about Functional Sequence/Specified Complexity. (See below) 3. You don't have the "Natural World" (Matter) without a KNOWER (Creator) First. (SEE: Quantum Mechanics below) Quote How about an Christian Francis Collins whilst head of the genome project said dna evidence alone proves common ancestry. Really?? Post the Citation...? THEN, Most Importantly...Post the Scientific Evidence he provided, in this Format Please... a. What Phenomenon was Observed...? b. Post the Formal Scientific Hypothesis then EXPERIMENT that validates your claim...? c. Highlight the "Independent Variable" that was used in the TEST...? d. Post the Null Hypothesis that was Rejected/Falsified...? Quote How do you prove an intelligent agent designed? By the presence of Functional Sequence/Specified Complexity. (SEE below) And, Errr...is there another kind of DESIGN?? Since Intelligent Design is Painfully Redundant. Quote Just looking isn't enough... how do you test that? Does it contain Information (Functional Sequence/Specified Complexity)? Is it a Functional Interlinked System? Does it contain Redundancy and Contingency? If the Answer is YES to any of the above...then, you have your answer. Design Hallmarks reveal: Intent, Purpose, Planning, Choice, often with Contingency, CONTRIVED; without deterministic law like necessity. Example: Functional Interlinked Systems. Quote A car looks designed right Not only "LOOKS"... it contains the Hallmarks of Design listed above. Quote but we could investigate an agent there ...a factory... manufacture of alloys.. watching robots rivet panels together. We don't need to investigate that since it contains the Hallmarks of Design listed above. Quote 1.) We haven't seen cars form in nature... 2.) they don't reproduce. 1.) That's Right. 2.) What does "reproduction" have to do with it?? You need the "IT" first to reproduce (Asexually), Two "IT's" for Sexual. Quote We have no evidence a god created life... Yes, we surely do... 1. Scientific Law: Information/"CODE"/Software is ONLY ever ever ever CAUSED by Intelligent Agency, Without Exception! That is...whenever we find INFORMATION existing and trace it back to it's source...it invariably leads to an Intelligent Agent EVERY SINGLE TIME !! SUPPORT: 1. Library of Congress. 2. ALL Books. 3. ALL Newspapers. 4. ALL Languages. 5. ALL Computer Software. 6. THE INFORMATION AGE !!! Null Hypothesis in Support: Nature/Natural Phenomena Causation CAN NOT create Algorithmic Cybernetic CODING and de-CODING Schemes --- (INFORMATION). If you 'cry foul' and claim there is No "Information" or "CODE" in the " Genetic CODE ", you're screwed... "DNA has two types of DIGITAL INFORMATION — the genes that encode proteins, which are the molecular machines of life, and the gene regulatory networks that specify the behaviour of the genes." Hood, L., Galas, D.,: The Digital Code of DNA: Nature 421, 444-448 (23 January 2003) | doi :10.1038/nature01410 "The genetic code performs a mapping between the sequences of the four nucleotides in mRNA to the sequences of the 20 amino acids in protein. It is highly relevant to the origin of life that the genetic code is constructed to confront and solve the problems of communication and recording by THE SAME PRINCIPLES found both in the GENETIC INFORMATION SYSTEM and in MODERN COMPUTER and COMMUNICATION CODES." Yockey, HP; Origin of life on earth and Shannon's theory of communication. In open problems of computational molecular biology. Computers and Chemistry; 24(1):105-123, Jan 2000 I have roughly 1.8 Million more in SUPPORT, if needed. Sooo... Theist Position-- The Null Hypothesis: Nature/Natural Phenomena causation CAN NOT create Algorithmic Cybernetic CODING and de-CODING Schemes. (DNA -- Transcription & Translation) Your Position --Alternative Hypothesis: Nature/Natural Phenomena causation *CAN* create Algorithmic Cybernetic CODING and de-CODING Schemes. So essentially, you MUST SHOW: Ink/Paper/Glue Molecules Authoring Technical Instruction Manuals/Blueprints...? We'll wait. 2. Quantum Mechanics: a. Observe a Phenomenon: Photons/elementary particles/atoms/molecules exhibit both "Wave-Like" and a Particle behavior. b. Alternative Hypothesis: If the "which-path Information" is KNOWN or can be KNOWN then we will observe "No Interference" (Wave-Function Collapse: Matter Existing); Conversely, If the "which-path Information" is NOT Known and never can be KNOWN then we will observe "Interference" (Wave Function Intact: No Matter). Null Hypothesis: If the Environment is the mechanism for Wave-Function Collapse (i.e., "Decoherence" --- interaction of quanta with a physical measuring device "Slit Detectors") then we WILL NOT observe any change in pattern (All Detectors will denote ' No Interference '). c. Experiment: Which one of the Thousands (Without Exception !!) would you like?? 1. Xiao-song Ma et al. (2013): Quantum erasure with causally disconnected choice. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 110, pp. 1221-1226. "The presence of PATH INFORMATION anywhere in the universe is sufficient to prohibit any possibility of interference. It is irrelevant whether a future observer might decide to acquire it. The mere possibility is enough."https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3557028/ [THEREFORE, The LACK of 'which-path' Information anywhere in the Universe is sufficient enough to prohibit any possibility of Wave Function Collapse. i.e. Formation of Matter!!] 2. Kim, Y-H. et al. (2000). A Delayed Choice Quantum Eraser; Physical Review Letters 84, pp. 1–5. The authors show not only that "Knowledge" of 'which-path' Information SOLELY collapses "The Wave Function" but can accurately predict future actions of "wave-like" and particle behavior after the Signal Photon has registered and before it's twin Idler has arrived; i.e., QM phenomena transcend Time and Space. SEE also: Walborn SP et al 2002, Scarcelli G et al 2005.http://cds.cern.ch/record/381875/files/9903047.pdf In conclusion, this Experiment Unequivocally Validates: a. Knowledge (Knowing) the 'WHICH-PATH' Information ALONE causes Wave Function Collapse. b. Decoherence (physical interaction with the measuring devices) DOES NOT cause Wave Function Collapse. c. QM Phenomena transcend Time and Space. i.e., Space-Time has NO MEANING in Quantum Mechanics. Ergo: "Matter" (Our Reality) doesn't exist without, FIRST: A "Knower"/Existence of the "Which-Path" Information. That is MATTER is Derivative (The Consequent). Consciousness is Primary (Necessary Antecedent). To overturn the Scientific Falsification of "Locality" and by direct proxy ---- Philosophical Naturalism/Realism (atheism); whereby invalidating Idealism "Christianity" (which is not a "religion", btw) and as an ancillary benefit collect yourself a 'Feather in your Cap' Nobel Prize... Please take up the Quantum Randi Challenge (arXiv:1207.5294, 23 July 2012)https://arxiv.org/abs/1207.5294http://www.science20.com/alpha_meme/official_quantum_randi_challenge-80168 .... ( "The Quantum Randi Challenge, hence forth QRC, challenges any pseudo-scientist [ YOU, as it were ] who claims that quantum physics is not true and that quantum entanglement experiments can be explained by a classically realistic and locally causal model."https://arxiv.org/vc/arxiv/papers/1207/1207.5294v1.pdf A Nobel Prize AND $1,000,000(USD) is being offered: All you have to do is... Prove Naive Realism or Local Realism is True and not Observation Dependent. 4 Years + and still no takers, I wonder why? Alice in Wonderland has more veracity and is more tenable than your position. 3. Functional Sequence/Specified Complexity: Hallmarks reveal: Intent, Purpose, Planning, Choice, often with Contingency, CONTRIVED; without deterministic law like necessity. Example: Functional Interlinked Systems. There are 3 Types of Complexity 1) random sequence complexity (RSC), 2) ordered sequence complexity (OSC), or 3) Functional Sequence/Specified Complexity (FSC)." Random (RSC): fgskztosbclgdsk. e.g., Aftermath of a Tornado. Order (OSC): hhhhhhdddddduuuuuu. e.g., Crystals, Snow Flakes, Sand Dunes, Fractals. Functional Sequence/Specified Complexity (FSC): "It Puts The Lotion in the Basket", Sand Castles, The Genetic CODE, Barbecue Grills, Indy Cars, Hyper-NanoTech Machines and Robots (Kinesin, ATP Synthase, Flagellum, Cilia....ad nauseam) et al. So RSC and OSC = "Nature" construct. FSC = Intelligent Design Construct. "In brief, living organisms are distinguished by their SPECIFIED COMPLEXITY. Crystals are usually taken as the prototypes of simple well-specified structures, because they consist of a very large number of identical molecules packed together in a uniform way. Lumps of granite or random mixtures of polymers are examples of structures that are complex but not specified. The crystals fail to qualify as living because they lack complexity; the mixtures of polymers fail to qualify because they lack specificity". Leslie E. Orgel; The Origins of Life: Molecules and Natural Selection, pg. 189 (Chapman & Hall: London, 1973) "The attempts to relate the idea of order...with biological organization or SPECIFICITY must be regarded as a play on words that cannot stand careful scrutiny. Informational macromolecules can code genetic messages and therefore can carry information because the sequence of bases or residues is affected very little, if at all, by [self-organizing] physico-chemical factors". H.P. Yockey; "A Calculation of Probability of Spontaneous Biogenesis by Information Theory"; Journal of Theoretical Biology 67, 1977; p. 390. No amount of RSC or OSC or the combination thereof, will EVER lead to Functional Sequence/Specified Complexity (FSC). Examples FSC: Cholecystokinin: is a Peptide Hormone "Functional Protein" produced in the mucosal epithelium of the small intestine and stimulates release of Digestive Enzymes from the Pancreas vital for digestion and absorption... Without it, you die. Albumin: a "Functional Protein" is ONLY produced by the Liver. It's consists of a single polypeptide chain of 580 amino acids. Of it's many functions, it's Main Function is to maintain intravascular oncotic (colloid osmotic) pressure. It's vital to homeostasis... Without it, you die. They are Functionally Specific/Sequentially Complex...you cannot interchange them. They are Specifically Designed for their Specific Roles and Specific Functions. If anyone is having a case of the 'Willful Stupids', please call/email the SETI Institute (Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence) and ask them how they tell the difference between RSC/OSC and Functional Sequence/Specified Complexity (FSC); they'll Tighten their Shot Group, right quick. btw, "INFORMATION" (All of Biology (LIFE) ): The Genetic Code ---Replication/ Transcription/Translation, Metabolic Pathways ect; All of Physics: Quantum Mechanics, Basically...the foundation of ALL OF REALITY, is the Quintessential Example of Functional Sequence/Specified Complexity (FSC) I got roughly 30 more But they would be Painfully Redundant in lieu of the above. Quote you admit you animals change from one form to another over time. 1. What do you mean by "Change Form"...? 2. Everything "Changes over time"...it's called the Laws of Entropy, 2nd Law of Thermodynamics. Saying things "Change Over Time" is tantamount to saying H2O Molecules contain Hydrogen. Quote How are you leveraging in God did or guided? How do we test that? See Above. Quote Yes the building blocks. Therefore agent? More like YES "Matter"; Therefore A Creator. (SEE QM above.) Quote You know there is vestigial dna too... 1. I'd say there's a better chance of Liberace being resurrected sporting a purple tutu and jumping on a chartreuse hobbled unicorn and riding around the Sombrero Galaxy. 2. Begging The Question Fallacy: Where'd you get DNA? Start here... 1. "Functional" DNA/RNA/Proteins NEVER spontaneously form "naturally", outside already existing cells, from Sugars, Bases, Phosphates, and Aminos, respectively. It's Physically and Chemically "IMPOSSIBLE". That's just the Hardware! To refute, Please show a Functional 30 mer- RNA or Protein (most are 250 AA or larger) that formed Spontaneously/Naturally "Outside" a Cell/Living Organism from: Sugars, Bases, Phosphates, and Aminos, respectively: CITE SOURCE! The smallest "Functional" DNA (Genome) is a little over 100,000 Nucleotides... so that ain't happenin ! Conclusion from the Grand Poobah's of OOL Research... "We conclude that the direct synthesis of the nucleosides or nucleotides from prebiotic precursors in reasonable yield and unaccompanied by larger amounts of related molecules could NOT BE achieved by presently known chemical reactions." Gerald F. Joyce, and Leslie E. Orgel, "Prospects for Understanding the Origin of the RNA World," p. 18 The RNA World, R.F. Gesteland and J.F. Atkins, eds. Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press, 1993. Do you know the reasons WHY that is? Of the ~50 obstacles precluding the Natural/Spontaneous formation, what are the Two ELEPHANTS IN THE ROOM here...? Dr. Leslie Orgel's last Published Words (Literally), after more than 50 Years of OOL Research... "However, solutions offered by supporters of geneticist or metabolist scenarios that are dependent on “If Pigs Could Fly” hypothetical chemistry are unlikely to help." Orgel LE (2008): The Implausibility of Metabolic Cycles on the Prebiotic Earth, PLoS Biology.http://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/article?id=10.1371/journal.pbio.0060018 So after showing us "PIG'S FLYING" ... Then the WOOLLY T-REX in the Room... 2. How Did Stupid Atoms Write Their Own Software....? In other words, show how Ink/Paper/Glue Molecules can Author Technical Instruction Manuals/Blueprints...? “DNA is not a special life-giving molecule, but a genetic databank that transmits its INFORMATION using a mathematical code. Most of the workings of the cell are best described, not in terms of material stuff — hardware — but as INFORMATION, or SOFTWARE. Trying to make life by mixing chemicals in a test tube is like soldering switches and wires in an attempt to produce Windows 98. It won’t work because it addresses the problem at the wrong conceptual level.” Paul Davies PhD Physics; How we could create life.https://www.theguardian.com/education/2002/dec/11/highereducation.uk Quote Are we at the finish line of scientific understanding? You are at the beginning of figuring out what ACTUAL "Science" is. Quote What might we achieve in 100 years...1000 years. 1. Argument to the Future (Fallacy). 2. And what does future 'Achievement' have to do with any of your Trainwreck Arguments? Quote You could be in medieval times and say with all our tech we can't fly. Yet now we can with our progress fly... at what speed.. gotta be a good few thousand miles an hour at our best. What in the World is this?? Quote What so you don't know therefore God did it? Just the Opposite...it's what WE DO KNOW (See above); Therefore GOD. Quote That's an argument from ignorance fallacy. The Entire Foundation of your "Scientifically Falsified" Fairytale Religion: Philosophical Naturalism/Realism aka: atheism Quote So we have an observation... how do we prove an intelligent agent did it? Faith maybe? By the Presence of Functional Sequence/Specified Complexity. (SEE Above) Faith?? Yes...Biblical Faith --- Substance and Evidence. regards Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts