What's wrong with the God of the gaps that Darwinist like to say when losing a debate

originally posted by: Phantom423
a reply to: and14263


Give me the links.

You know what you posted. If you didn't then one of my points is proven.

Your lack of manners and demanding to be shown your own links, like a petulant little child is exactly why this forum is dying on its knees.

I'll keep reading this thread because the majority of contributors are posting really good content. But you, your not worth my time and I no longer want to contribute to your modus operandum.

Best wishes for the future.

originally posted by: neoholographic

originally posted by: ManFromEurope
The presence of a code does not imply that there is a creator.

Especially with such a faultprone code like DNA. Of course, nature has found ways to remove faulty parts of the DNA, because otherwise the elimination rate of fetuses would be devastating, but if you look at the DNA like a computer scientist, you see a lack of basic error-correcting code that would make a second-year student blush in their own software.

Assembler is a not very forgiving language, errors can combine to complete chaos and without obvious causes.

There is a cause why assemblercoding is a niche today. It is a low-level coding language.

And DNA is a low-level code itself. Nothing is obvious. Bad designer!

It does have error correction. If it didn't, DNA would be overrun with errors and we wouldn't be here. It has things like mismatch repair, proofreading and more.

In the first video he talks about how DNA has layers of error correction like they have in Google email or Microsoft Word LOL!

I have to laugh because you're just making my point stronger.

"DNA would be overrun with errors and we wouldn't be here"

You mean like the trillions of humans who have suffered from cancer and infection and birth defects?

originally posted by: Phantom423
And yes, repeatable experiments.

Proving evolution? Please name the one.

I know you can't. It would be the most famous experiment in history. Even a dumbass (no disrespect to our very own Dumbass) like me would be aware of it. In fact, I'd hazard a guess we wouldn't even be discussing Evolutionary Fallacy ... if it were proven Scientifically.

a reply to: Snarl

This creased me. Well played.

a reply to: TzarChasm

Nobody denied errors.

The point made was that error controls are in place.

Watch the videos and they explain exactly what the poster was discussing.



Actually, you know what? DON'T watch the videos. Don't watch them because it will make no difference to your approach to this thread.



EVERY SINGLE thread on this site gets hijacked by people like you who don't take the information in. He posted the videos to give you information AND YOU ARE NOT TAKING IT IN.

Forget it ATS. Just forget it.

a reply to: Snarl

Your post suggests that you have never read a scientific journal on evolutionary biology nor will you ever.
Idiot.

a reply to: and14263

I posted several links. Unless you tell me which one you're referring to, I don't know what you're talking about.
I'm not a crystal ball operator. I'm a scientist.

originally posted by: and14263
EVERY SINGLE thread on this site gets hijacked by people like you who don't take the information in. He posted the videos to give you information AND YOU ARE NOT TAKING IT IN.

Forget it ATS. Just forget it.

Apologies for giving back their way. You're right about it detracting from the quality of the boards.

a reply to: Snarl

In an effort to avoid semantic debate, these here are compelling studies involving real world elements which can be reproduced in a suitable environment for your own purposes. Some call it "proof" and some will undoubtedly find reason to dismiss its credibility without conducting additional study.

amp.theatlantic.com...

www.sciencealert.com...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...

Personally I would be fascinated to see an experiment designed to evoke and measure any substantial form of cosmic intelligence or divine agency. The bigger the results, the better. Anyone up for that?

originally posted by: TzarChasm
www.sciencealert.com...

Had hopes for this one. The science is there. Adaptation is there. Evolution ... 'fraid not. They're still E. coli bacteria at the end of the day.

Personally I would be fascinated to see an experiment designed to evoke and measure any substantial form of cosmic intelligence or divine agency. The bigger the results, the better. Anyone up for that?

Since Evolution has failed us ... God wins out in the process of elimination, doesn't he? That's a rhetorical dig, my friend.

a reply to: Snarl

Oh darn, and I was really hoping you would change your mind too. it's too bad I predicted your reaction. Note the lack of spiritual studies involving real world elements that can be reproduced with dependable results like the experiments I linked above.

originally posted by: TzarChasm
a reply to: Snarl

Oh darn, and I was really hoping you would change your mind too. it's too bad I predicted your reaction.

The E. coli experiment was truly an extraordinary effort. I had high hopes for it.

Had to be about ten (maybe more ... maybe less ... memory's fading) years ago, a friend of mine takes me on a little road trip and introduces me to God Himself. Talk about being taken by surprise. He didn't say a word to me. Didn't tell me He was my Creator. Didn't tell me to be good. Didn't tell me He had guided the hand that wrote the Bible. He was just there. And, I was utterly overwhelmed.

That's pretty off-topic, but it might help. Maybe.

People like the poster are afraid . The longer humans have been studying earth and space the more we learn .
There have been 1000 s of god now just a hand full . People know the time is coming when they will have no other choice but stand on there own 2 feet ( as If any god ever saved a drunk a drug addict or a baby who never gets to draw its first breath .

Really they are so desperate to hold on they totally ignore the fact the Gods have saved no one and if you pick a god and read about what that god did they all had the same MO do what i say or ill kill you .

Humans have killed millions of our self God killed them all but 5 makes the worst human look like a saint .

originally posted by: Snarl

originally posted by: TzarChasm
a reply to: Snarl

Oh darn, and I was really hoping you would change your mind too. it's too bad I predicted your reaction.

The E. coli experiment was truly an extraordinary effort. I had high hopes for it.

Had to be about ten (maybe more ... maybe less ... memory's fading) years ago, a friend of mine takes me on a little road trip and introduces me to God Himself. Talk about being taken by surprise. He didn't say a word to me. Didn't tell me He was my Creator. Didn't tell me to be good. Didn't tell me He had guided the hand that wrote the Bible. He was just there. And, I was utterly overwhelmed.

That's pretty off-topic, but it might help. Maybe.

Doesn't help at all, it just sounds like you missed some pretty glaring opportunities to get real answers. And you didn't bring anything useful back to share with us.

originally posted by: TzarChasm

originally posted by: Snarl

originally posted by: TzarChasm
a reply to: Snarl

Oh darn, and I was really hoping you would change your mind too. it's too bad I predicted your reaction.

The E. coli experiment was truly an extraordinary effort. I had high hopes for it.

Had to be about ten (maybe more ... maybe less ... memory's fading) years ago, a friend of mine takes me on a little road trip and introduces me to God Himself. Talk about being taken by surprise. He didn't say a word to me. Didn't tell me He was my Creator. Didn't tell me to be good. Didn't tell me He had guided the hand that wrote the Bible. He was just there. And, I was utterly overwhelmed.

That's pretty off-topic, but it might help. Maybe.

Doesn't help at all, it just sounds like you missed some pretty glaring opportunities to get real answers. And you didn't bring anything useful back to share with us.

Well, that was my 'first' encounter with him. And since you were Snarky with me, you'll have to look elsewhere on the boards to find what he shared with me.

originally posted by: and14263
a reply to: Phantom423

Your approach to this debate is incredible.

You are clearly not reading the links provided and you are not reading the links you are posting.

It took me over an hour to get through these 12 pages and half of that hour was researching your links, which you didn't explain and from what I eventually understand, where discussing a different topic.

I respect your enthusiasm and I'm sure you're great fun in the pub, but please for the love of [insert preferred belief] just go over the thread again with an open mind.

Exactly!

The same nonsense regurgitated and it's clear he doesn't understand what he's posting. This is why he just blindly posts Abstracts and doesn't explain how it relates to anything in the thread.

Dawkins said:

"Biology is the study of complicated things that have the appearance of having been designed with a purpose."

So the logical inference to make while looking at biological systems is that they were designed for a purpose. This is from the world's biggest atheist. There's no reason to go against this logical and reasoned inference for the materialist trope "Given enough time anything can happen."

This shows they know a natural interpretation of evolution is not about reason or logic.

These threads are pointless they will not make someone believe nore make someone stop believing .
If it makes you feal all Nice and fuzzy believe in a god . On the other hand if you would rather deal with reality ( and Not challenge and god to save you when you cross the road open your eyes and look both ways .

The road is a metaphor For life Following God BLINDLY leads to being killed by 1001 and one ways .
Because every last person knows they try to stay safe and reduce risk or they DIE being the fool who ties a rubber band to his rear and jumps off a bridge .

Go get your poison snake tell us how evil has no effect as the snake bites you .
See how long it takes till your dead .
the snake is just a snake not evil or good you on the other hand are the fool who picked it up and got bit .
Snake idea book praying when even the books says HELP your self shows just how silly these post are EVEJN when I believed in a God I KNEW what i got or did not get from life would be by my own hand . He could have the credit for creating it all . I had the credit for knowing how to Use what he gave me .

But now I just go by natures rules and add the fact I can use my intelligence to over ride my instincts . Which means I can choose not to fight when my body tells me Kick his but .

originally posted by: TzarChasm

originally posted by: neoholographic

originally posted by: ManFromEurope
The presence of a code does not imply that there is a creator.

Especially with such a faultprone code like DNA. Of course, nature has found ways to remove faulty parts of the DNA, because otherwise the elimination rate of fetuses would be devastating, but if you look at the DNA like a computer scientist, you see a lack of basic error-correcting code that would make a second-year student blush in their own software.

Assembler is a not very forgiving language, errors can combine to complete chaos and without obvious causes.

There is a cause why assemblercoding is a niche today. It is a low-level coding language.

And DNA is a low-level code itself. Nothing is obvious. Bad designer!

It does have error correction. If it didn't, DNA would be overrun with errors and we wouldn't be here. It has things like mismatch repair, proofreading and more.

In the first video he talks about how DNA has layers of error correction like they have in Google email or Microsoft Word LOL!

I have to laugh because you're just making my point stronger.

"DNA would be overrun with errors and we wouldn't be here"

You mean like the trillions of humans who have suffered from cancer and infection and birth defects?

What?

Let me explain to you how error correction works. It doesn't mean error free, it minimizes the errors that occur. Without it a system would be overrun with errors.

You have what's called a BER or Bit Error Rate.

As an example, assume this transmitted bit sequence:

0 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 1

and the following received bit sequence:

0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 1,

The number of bit errors (the underlined bits) is, in this case, 3. The BER is 3 incorrect bits divided by 10 transferred bits, resulting in a BER of 0.3 or 30%.

en.wikipedia.org...

This is important to reduce the amount of errors that occur as your code is copied. This is a hallmark of design.

Here's an example of DNA's layered error correction.

You have an enzyme that will look for a mismatch error. A always pairs with T and G always pairs with C. A mismatch occurs when the code is copied wher A is paired with G. The enzyme corrects this error. This is why you have redundency or extra bits.

It goes even deeper. After this mismatch error occurs other enzymes comes along and proofreads the code to check for any errors the first enzyme may have missed.

This is why most of the population doesn't have cancer. The errors that cause cancer are spread throughout the population. Without error correction, the population would be overrun with cancer and all sorts of other things.

Without error correction, your code will never populate the environment.

So you can have a 5% error rate. This means 95% of the time your code will be copied without error and the 5% error rate will be spread throughout the population whether that population is computers or biological systems.

This again shows why a natural interpretation of evolution is illogical.

A layered system of error correction is a hallmark of design by an intelligent agent that wants to ensure their system that transmits data is being copied with a small BER.

a reply to: neoholographic

You have an enzyme that will look for a mismatch error. A always pairs with T and G always pairs with C. A mismatch occurs when the code is copied wher A is paired with G. The enzyme corrects this error. This is why you have redundency or extra bits.

It goes even deeper. After this mismatch error occurs other enzymes comes along and proofreads the code to check for any errors the first enzyme may have missed.

Without error correction, your code will never populate the environment.

So you can have a 5% error rate. This means 95% of the time your code will be copied without error and the 5% error rate will be spread throughout the population whether that population is computers or biological systems.

You're another one who thinks nothing is possible without the intervention of some god, goddess or alien.

Genomic error-correcting code is another example of survival of the fittest (thank you, evolution). The efficiency of error-correcting code defines how robust an organism is. If some alien had to intervene and trigger the code every time it was required, we should have seen "it" by now. And we haven't. And you haven't. And you never will because that's not how nature works.

You claim to be an expert in quantum mechanics but all you got out of the link I posted was "stringy stuff" that you thought had nothing to do with your "god of the gaps" scenario.

There is no "god of the gaps". It's a made up phrase by religious zealots who thought it proved that a god existed. But in fact, as these "gaps" are filled in with new knowledge, it buries your hypothesis in the trash bin of history. Any idiot could tell you that there will always be "gaps" in knowledge. You're also another one who couldn't imagine a flushing toilet unless it was forced upon you.