It just doesn't happen

a reply to: carsforkids

Idiot. EOM

originally posted by: TzarChasm
a reply to: cooperton

Humans haven't been around long enough to observe it first-hand except in insects and microbiology. There's a hundred sources to browse through in a simple Google search. The truth is that some people just refuse to accept what the data shows, you have already stated your conviction that evolution is a philosophy of futility and nihilism and robs life of any value whatsoever. As long as you cling to that idea you will never listen.

No the articles I've read all involve the emergence of traits that are reversible. Further investigation showed that it was not the organisms evolving (as was implied by the reversibility of the emerging trait) but instead was a simple epigenetic alteration. Epigenetics allow variation of the already established genome to give organisms a vast array of adaptability. There are no new genes, it is simply an increase or decrease to various genes that already exist.

Take for example high altitude acclimation.. People do not evolve to allow them to inhabit high altitude, instead it is an epigenetic alteration that increases the expression of a protein that allows them to acclimate to the lower oxygen levels (source 1). Also take for example antibiotic resistance, it is not a permanent random mutation as theorized by evolution, instead it is an epigenetic alteration that increases the expression of a detoxification pump to allow the microbes to be more resilient to antibiotics (source 2). It is proven to not be evolution because these traits are reversible.

Again, no science shows the possibility of evolutionary theory. Organisms have pre-set genes and epigenetic possibilities that allow adaptability to all sorts of environmental extremes.

I want to continually stress that no fruit fly, or any insect for that matter, has ever gradually evolved into something else in a laboratory setting. Nor has any microbe gradually evolved into something else, despite millions of generations of these organisms being artificially selected. Evolution is faith not science.

originally posted by: Phantom423
Intelligent design is the right philosophy for you

Yup, and unintelligent design is apparently the best fit for you.

originally posted by: Phantom423
a reply to: carsforkids

Idiot. EOM

Not winning any awards for maturity or accuracy ant time soon.
lol

originally posted by: cooperton

originally posted by: TzarChasm
a reply to: cooperton

Humans haven't been around long enough to observe it first-hand except in insects and microbiology. There's a hundred sources to browse through in a simple Google search. The truth is that some people just refuse to accept what the data shows, you have already stated your conviction that evolution is a philosophy of futility and nihilism and robs life of any value whatsoever. As long as you cling to that idea you will never listen.

No the articles I've read all involve the emergence of traits that are reversible. Further investigation showed that it was not the organisms evolving (as was implied by the reversibility of the emerging trait) but instead was a simple epigenetic alteration. Epigenetics allow variation of the already established genome to give organisms a vast array of adaptability. There are no new genes, it is simply an increase or decrease to various genes that already exist.

Take for example high altitude acclimation.. People do not evolve to allow them to inhabit high altitude, instead it is an epigenetic alteration that increases the expression of a protein that allows them to acclimate to the lower oxygen levels (source 1). Also take for example antibiotic resistance, it is not a permanent random mutation as theorized by evolution, instead it is an epigenetic alteration that increases the expression of a detoxification pump to allow the microbes to be more resilient to antibiotics (source 2). It is proven to not be evolution because these traits are reversible.

Again, no science shows the possibility of evolutionary theory. Organisms have pre-set genes and epigenetic possibilities that allow adaptability to all sorts of environmental extremes.

I want to continually stress that no fruit fly, or any insect for that matter, has ever gradually evolved into something else in a laboratory setting. Nor has any microbe gradually evolved into something else, despite millions of generations of these organisms being artificially selected. Evolution is faith not science.

originally posted by: Phantom423
Intelligent design is the right philosophy for you

Yup, and unintelligent design is apparently the best fit for you.

.

Nowhere does the theory of evolution say that it's not reversible. Evolution can often backtrack if circumstances favor the original genetic disposition, which is to say the mutated organisms die off faster without reproducing.

originally posted by: TzarChasm

Nowhere does the theory of evolution say that it's not reversible. Evolution can often backtrack if circumstances favor the original genetic disposition, which is to say the mutated organisms die off faster without reproducing.

Nice try to nit-pick the whole point of what I said. The reversibility was the hint to the researchers that it was not evolution... in the case of the microbes becoming antibiotic resistant it was reversible very quickly. After further investigation they found antibiotic resistance is due to epigenetics, and not random mutations. So even the science of antibiotics has no benefit from evolutionary theory. Evolutionary theory is useless both functionally and philosophically. It has also never been demonstrated in a lab, and therefore is a system of belief.

a reply to: carsforkids

If Intelligent Design proponents are willing to accept that an extremely complex entity (God) can exist free of any intelligent forces, then they must also logically conclude that less complex entities (the Universe, atoms, man, etc.) could also exist free of any intelligent agents.

originally posted by: toktaylor
a reply to: carsforkids

If Intelligent Design proponents are willing to accept that an extremely complex entity (God) can exist free of any intelligent forces, then they must also logically conclude that less complex entities (the Universe, atoms, man, etc.) could also exist free of any intelligent agents.

This is why God is considered "un-beggotten", which means God was never born because God always existed (Alpha-Omega). Therefore, God never had to come to be, because God always was and always will be. We struggle to fully fathom this concept because we are so familiar with the restrictions of time and space in our current dimension.

a reply to: cooperton

lol...if something must always exist it must be the thing that exist. What exist? What is proven to exist?...The Universe.

A man’s complexity has a lot of requirements, a God will always have far more. Cells exist from active elements that exist throughout the Universe; man is built from cells, and acquires knowledge gradually. God is built of a mysterious supernatural substance that has never been observed, made of elements that are invisible, and somehow receives his knowledge magically.

a reply to: toktaylor

Maybe Gods just a Boltzmann brain.

originally posted by: toktaylor
made of elements that are invisible

The laws of nature are all invisible yet we see their effect. God is also invisible and his effect is humankind. Humans are the embodiment of this Creator Spirit, as is shown by the fact our bodies are the ideal vessels for creating things. Not to mention the visible light spectrum is a small 400 nanometer band of frequency among an infinitude of varying frequencies that constitute all detectable reality. To base the entirety of reality on just vision is therefore kinda silly.

a reply to: cooperton
The so called laws of nature can be studied and manipulated. Therefore to say it is invisible is stretching the truth. Can god be studied and manipulated? no..because he does not exist in any form, invisible or otherwise. The science of evolution has given mankind many scientific breakthroughs which you uses every day and take for granted...including the internet, medicine created by DNA studies and replication, our understanding of the solar system...changing the course of diseases, viruses etc.
The God proponent is in the awkward position (and even more silly) of having to argue that extremely complex designs (e.g. God) can come about without cause, while far less complex designs (e.g. humans) require a designer. Isn’t it more reasonable to assume that the less complex thing would come about first? In much the same way that an amoeba is more likely to arise than a man?

a reply to: TzarChasm

Unless you found a email address or a phone number hidden in your DNA that connects to the HR department of heaven, evolution is not a divine miracle or anything supernatural at all. And leaving a calling card like that would definitely suggest intelligent design.

I don't think you'd wanna find that in your DNA!

But if you're really interested the Lord of Hosts has provided that as well.



You're catching on Chaz. You just might make HR 1st class after all.

originally posted by: toktaylor
a reply to: cooperton
The so called laws of nature can be studied and manipulated. Therefore to say it is invisible is stretching the truth. Can god be studied and manipulated? no..because he does not exist in any form, invisible or otherwise.

The laws of physics have remained constant for the past known history. We can play off them, but we can't change them as far as I know.

The science of evolution has given mankind many scientific breakthroughs which you uses every day and take for granted...including the internet, medicine created by DNA studies and replication, our understanding of the solar system...changing the course of diseases, viruses etc.

None of that has come from evolutionary theory. As I was saying to tzarchasm, even antibiotic resistance has been found to be an epigenetic phenomenon, which does not involve theorized evolutionary mechanisms because epigenetic mechanisms are already existent in a genome. Evolutionary theory grasps at straws but has no fundamental observation that shows it is even remotely possible

The God proponent is in the awkward position (and even more silly) of having to argue that extremely complex designs (e.g. God) can come about without cause, while far less complex designs (e.g. humans) require a designer. Isn’t it more reasonable to assume that the less complex thing would come about first? In much the same way that an amoeba is more likely to arise than a man?

God is unbegotten, meaning God never was created. God always existed. This is tough for our temporal brains to understand because we are so familiar with representing things as having a beginning and an end, but God encompasses the entirety of the temporal construct, which is why God is called 'Alpha-Omega'. I'm not sure I can describe it more simply than that.

a reply to: cooperton

The laws of physics are what they are down to the constants of our universe.

It takes 26 dimensionless fundamental constants to explain our universe.

But they still don't tell us everything.

a reply to: cooperton

How ironic is it that you should argue that specified complexity cannot exist without a designer, while simultaneously maintaining that complexity can exist without a cause or designer.

Fixed it for You:
The Universe is unbegotten, meaning the Universe never was created. The Universe always existed. This is tough for our temporal brains to understand because we are so familiar with representing things as having a beginning and an end, but the Universe encompasses the entirety of the temporal construct.

If something must always exist...it must be the thing that exist.

No amount of belief can justify the following questions:

Supernatural spiritual beings can exist?
Spiritual beings can exist eternally without cause?
Spiritual beings can create new matter and energy from nothing?
Spiritual beings can exist outside of space and time?
Spiritual beings can store, retrieve, and creatively process information?
Spiritual beings are constantly learning, or are able to somehow have knowledge without ever being educated?
Spiritual beings have needs or emotions that lead them to create things?

a reply to: toktaylor

If Intelligent Design proponents are willing to accept that an extremely complex entity (God) can exist free of any intelligent forces, then they must also logically conclude that less complex entities (the Universe, atoms, man, etc.) could also exist free of any intelligent agents.

Well I admire your thinking outside the box on this one.
But God as the Creator wouldn't be captured in his own creation.
So being outside of this universe or able to transcend dimensions.
This would be attributable to his being of Spirit. At any rate he
would be the ultimate power over those "Less complex entities"
as the author of the laws that bind them.

It's pretty evident to me that our existence here in this universe is
lacking guidance.

Would you agree?

The Universe always existed.

Now both The Bible and science are wrong.

a reply to: carsforkids
No I do not agree...I will given an example. Pick up a rock. What I do know is that the rock exists now. Its very existence testifies to the fact that it can exist, it does exist, and it’s possible that it has always existed. The number of variables that must be true in order for the rock to “just exist” are certainly no more than the number required for a god to “just exist.” There will always be far more variables required for an invisible, intelligent, eternal God to create something, than for that thing to have just always existed, in some form, on its own.
I can hold a rock in one hand, and while I may not know where it came from, it’s difficult to imagine a time when each of its atoms simply did not exist in some form or another.

originally posted by: toktaylor
a reply to: cooperton

How ironic is it that you should argue that specified complexity cannot exist without a designer, while simultaneously maintaining that complexity can exist without a cause or designer.

You're going against a lot of philosophical powerhouses throughout history with your objection to this fairly straight-forward concept. Plato laid it out very coherently in the lecture in Timaeus:

"we must agree that there is first the unchanging idea, unbegotten and imperishable, neither receiving aught into itself from without nor itself entering into aught else, invisible, nor in any wise perceptible" (Plato - Timaeus 52A)

Fixed it for You:
The Universe is unbegotten, meaning the Universe never was created. The Universe always existed. This is tough for our temporal brains to understand because we are so familiar with representing things as having a beginning and an end, but the Universe encompasses the entirety of the temporal construct.

Sure, if calling God "Universe" helps you conceptualize this, then go ahead. It seems we are referring to the same Being with either word. Would you agree the Universe must be intelligent? Because intelligence surely exists, and intelligence cannot come from unintelligence. Therefore this Primordial Cause which always existed which you call the Universe, is the Intelligent Designer of all physics, biology, and cosmology.

No amount of belief can justify the following questions:

Supernatural spiritual beings can exist?

Our entire vision consists of a small 400 nanometer band along the infinite electromagnetic spectrum. If we think the visible light spectrum is the totality of all reality that is very naive... There certainly exists other forms of sentience that we cannot see with our eyes.

Spiritual beings can exist eternally without cause?

If It had no beginning, it would certainly not have an end.

Spiritual beings can create new matter and energy from nothing?

This Alpha-Omega is the totality of all things, and lacks nothing, and therefore has an abundance to create from. An eternal spring if you will

Spiritual beings can exist outside of space and time?

Outside might be the wrong word, I would say extra-dimensional beings encompass these elements, just like a 3D object encompasses the 2D with it's attribute of width.

Spiritual beings can store, retrieve, and creatively process information?

Definitely more so than the beings that It created.

Spiritual beings are constantly learning, or are able to somehow have knowledge without ever being educated?

Omniscience implies a totality of understanding, totally lacking any ignorance.

Spiritual beings have needs or emotions that lead them to create things?

A Father has no need for a Son, but it is the Father's good will to have a Son that can also develop and grow into the same inheritance that the Father has. In doing so the tree of life expands and generates new exhibitions of consciousness (you and I, etc). The Gift of God is greater than the things we think we want.

a reply to: toktaylor

I didn't really expect a rock to be capable of any kind of
guidance. And to be frank anyone who denies our obvious need
for guidance is blow'n smoke up his own ass. Definitely not
mine.

a reply to: cooperton

Except there is no intelligence to the Universe or evolution. It is all random design of trial and error over millions of years. e.g. a flightless birds. It might make sense from a design prospective, but from an evolutionary prospective, evolution must use what’s already there.
Does a whale have arms, wrists and 5 fingers just like a mammal because it’s more creative than giving him fins, or because they gradually evolved from arms and hands? Likewise, does it breathe air because it’s more creative to make a “fish” that can’t breathe underwater, or because it once breathed air as a land animal?

• Is the recent evolution of all dog breeds from the gray wolf evidence of God’s interest in creating different dogs, or evidence of DNA’s ability to rapidly change?

• Is the platypus an example of God’s creativity in mixing genes, or a surviving transitional form that proves birds and mammals once shared a common ancestor? (It has the body of a mammal, but the sex genes of a bird.)