It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

creationism, where is the evidence???!!! i see none

page: 19
5
<< 16  17  18    20  21  22 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 17 2008 @ 04:40 AM
link   
reply to post by dakota jim
 


wow...this proves absolutely nothing except for...well, your lack of understanding of both science and richard dawkins...
dawkins has actually stated that he'd believe in god if there was evidence...
so, if richard dawkins bumped into god he'd probably say "oh, sorry i didn't believe in you, now i have evidence"

and can you really prove god created people? or created people out of dirt? or created dirt in the first place?




posted on Jan, 17 2008 @ 07:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by Xtrozero
lol ok so what 2 per galaxy? Still a very lonely place...


I don't know, do you? A recent estimate was for about 30 billion in our galaxy alone. With something like 125 billion galaxies that we can see, each with a potential 30 billion habitable planets. With periods of billions of years and billions of simultaneuous trials on each planet. You do the maths.

I happen to think that some form of life was almost certain under such circumstances. But that's my opinion. When we can fully assess other planets for life, we will have a better understanding. At this point we have n=1.


Hawkins stated… Here


And I state, 'so what'? I'll take the quote at face value first.

Hawkins is one scientist, and that is his opinion. What is the random process about it? If he's saying it has unknown long-term specific outcomes, yeah, probably. I'm sure if we could wind back time to the first bacteria and run it over again, we would be unlikely to find the same outcome.

If he's saying that the natural selection is random, then, no. He's basically saying that intelligence was very unlikely. What type of intelligence? An octopus can problem solve. How do we define it?

Or does he mean human intelligence? In which case, he's playing with a BS argument. If we calculate post hoc the probability of various specific events we would find unlikely odds. If I deal a pack of cards out 5 times, each particular order in that particular sequence will be highly unlikely. If I deal them out 1 million times, each single order would be unlikely, and the 1 million orders in that sequence would be very very very very very unlikely. Indeed, if I calculated odds backwards post-hoc, it would appear almost impossible.

But some outcome was certain. Of all the sperm in your daddy's gonads, with the odds of being one in that particular ejaculate of 500 million on that day, and also one of the maybe 50% motile ones, it was the one that made you that found its way to fertilise the egg, which happened to be ready for fertilisation on one of those few days every month, and was also a good viable egg, then the odds of this egg going full term is still unlikely, indeed, this is all so unlikely that only a supernatural stork could have done it, heh.

However, he's not even arguing about abiogenesis, he's trying to explain why we haven't been visited by intelligent life, heh. You actually sort of quotemined him.

He's basically saying why it might be unlikely for all planets with basic life to produce human-like intelligence, all it would have took is a major extinction style event to wipe the evolutionary process out in its infancy, and it's likely that evolution doesn't specifically aim for human-style intelligence. But it did produce human intelligence on earth, therefore, so what? We still might be wiped out, maybe we're going to be comparable to ape-like ancestors to some future form of superintelligent homonid and a comet might smash into the earth before we make it there. Oh, the humanity!

This whole type of anthropic argument stinks of Adam's puddle:


. . . imagine a puddle waking up one morning and thinking, 'This is an interesting world I find myself in, an interesting hole I find myself in, fits me rather neatly, doesn't it? In fact it fits me staggeringly well, must have been made to have me in it!' This is such a powerful idea that as the sun rises in the sky and the air heats up and as, gradually, the puddle gets smaller and smaller, it's still frantically hanging on to the notion that everything's going to be alright, because this world was meant to have him in it, was built to have him in it; so the moment he disappears catches him rather by surprise. I think this may be something we need to be on the watch out for.

Douglas Adams

[edit on 17-1-2008 by melatonin]



posted on Jan, 17 2008 @ 07:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by dakota jim
Richard Dawkins ran into God one day and told him that since he was so smart he did'nt need Him anymore. So God asked him if he could make a man out of dirt. Richard Dawkins said "sure I can. I am a scientist." And he scooped up some dirt and started on his way. But God stopped him and said,"get your own dirt."


Actually quite a funny joke. Has no real-world application, but funny nonetheless.



posted on Jan, 17 2008 @ 08:54 AM
link   
Extending the divine biochemist idea, now I see you are a Xian.

We have some intelligent god dude, who uses his divine hands (remember, it's not magic, so it's all constrained by physics, no think n' poof allowed) to make organisms. He gets in his interdimensional space-ship, equipped with his ACME universe generator, and creates a new universe. He waits for almost a dozen billion years until the universe has 125 billion galaxies. Then he selects one out of all those available he thinks looks nice, it looks like a spiral. Ooooh, 'xcitin. He then picks one of all the 30 billion habitable planets to seed with his special created bacteria, specifically with the aim of humans in mind. Nothing else really, just humans. They're special - the universe of 125 billion galaxies is their playground.

He lets evolution take over. Waits 3 billion years more. Humans eventually emerge, along with little worms that eat the eyeballs of children. Yet 99% of all species are now extinct in his effort to create these little ape-like things. He then waits thousands of years, whilst they fight for survival, they form all different types of basic religions and language and have spread all over this planet.

He then decides it's time to intervene. He goes to one little area of the earth and gives one man a stone with rules, and goes into publishing with a book. He's left people for hundreds of thousands of years without these rules, but he chooses this time and place. He selects one group of people in one little area of the earth, jews. He sends information through people's minds with his ACME telepathone. He tells them how to keep slaves, sell raped daughters, and not to mix two cloths, along with a few gooduns - the absolute rule to not kill others.

Then he decides to smite lots of naughty people who don't like jews, or like bottom sex, sending people on divine missions to slaughter women and children, turns people to salt and stuff. Big miracles 'non-magic divine events' are happening during this period. The message stays within this one population.

He decides a few thousands of years later to produce a god-son thing. He picks some woman in some little place to impregnate. He sends one of his elves angels to introduce the sperm in a sort of IVF-like procedure. 30 or so years later, a god-man he produced is killed on a cross after raising the dead, curing lepers, and walking on water without magic. The 'non-magic divine events' are relatively small time now, no smiting of cities, Romans might have noted that. However, the blood sacrifice was meant to happen to make us better people because of some other event to do with apples and talking snakes. His zombifies jesus. He has brought a message for the whole of the earth. He gives it the jews. Most of whom thinks it's all BS.

The message says 'worship me - accept the blood sacrifice, or suffer eternal pain'. But he's an awesomely good god, 'cause if you pray to him he'll do favours for you, like saving one person in thousands of dead in natural disasters and allowing particular athletes win the olympics. He says 'I'll be back' in true arnie style.

Some people write some scripts a few decades later. People add and take away from this information. People take the message, set up socio-politcal institutions, force conversions, burn witches, kill muslims, jews, and others who question the authoritar. We eventually have multiple denominations using this message 2000 years later. 'Non-magic divine events' are reduced to faces on pancakes and bloody hands. Human endeavours eventually start curing all kinds of ills with the new scientific method, god watches on and should think 'why didn't I think of putting that in my books?'

He's a bit incompetent. Indeed, it all seems a bit, might I say, improbable. I think with the same 'natural' abilities I might have done a little better. Hey-ho. But, honestly, if it gives you a warm feeling to think this is about right and you are so special that a universe was created for you, cool.

Hwyl fawr


[edit on 17-1-2008 by melatonin]



posted on Jan, 17 2008 @ 09:50 PM
link   
reply to post by melatonin
 


A true genius...well said......


Everyone needs to watch this…….

George Carlin - Religion is bull#.
www.youtube.com...



posted on Jan, 17 2008 @ 10:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by melatonin

. . . imagine a puddle waking up one morning and thinking, 'This is an interesting world I find myself in, an interesting hole I find myself in, fits me rather neatly, doesn't it? In fact it fits me staggeringly well, must have been made to have me in it!' This is such a powerful idea that as the sun rises in the sky and the air heats up and as, gradually, the puddle gets smaller and smaller, it's still frantically hanging on to the notion that everything's going to be alright, because this world was meant to have him in it, was built to have him in it; so the moment he disappears catches him rather by surprise. I think this may be something we need to be on the watch out for.


I must be emotional because I almost cried at that! Poor little puddle.
But then I started to think...

He might no longer be a puddle but that is a good thing. Now he is free from the hole that confined him and no longer mingled with mud. He is taken up to the heavens through evaporation, changed into small water particles, travels throughout the clouds, and later becomes parts of a river where he is reunited with all the other little puddles that have gone before.

Death is never the end. Live on little puddle. Roam free!



posted on Jan, 17 2008 @ 10:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by melatonin


I'm trying to figure out what your stance is in all this.

For us to define intelligence I would say it would need to be the type and level that we would not only be able to communicate with but also connect with in either a physical or with some other method, and if not, it really doesn’t matter. The greatest intelligence in the universe might be a spongy ball in a pool of muck, and in a case like that it does us no good for it might as well be spongy ball with zero intelligence.

Two examples would be either a space faring capable intelligence, or one that had either an organic ability or a technological ability to communicate over vast distances. This also kind of dwindles down the intelligence that would be useful to us in the universe. But before we start in about the universe I think we need to just think in terms of our own galaxy.

I understand your point but I do really feel you play off the odds. Yes Hawkins is just one guy, but he is a guy that understands numbers much better than you or I and most everyone in the world but a small list of people.

He calculated a lot of things into whether intelligent life can be out there. Such items as carbon in the universe appeared about only 9 billion years ago and it took about 5 billion for us to form and that we would never have formed if not for a catastrophic event, and we are still here because the lack of another one. What this means is a life form like mold that has been here for billions of years since it was quicker to evolve than us, due to its simplistic nature, and that catastrophic events that would kill us off in a heartbeat bothers it little, would be a much better pick to what is out there when we talk about alien life.

When you take this all into account along with the many other modifiers that continue to increase the already slim odds of other intelligent life out there the 100s of billions of stars quickly start to not be enough needed. I do believe in the theory that the fact that we are here is proof that there is intelligent life out there, but it most likely at a level that we may never run into one for billions of years of searching if we survive that long.

Now that is what it is like of life is just a random event in the universe. I tend to believe events are not so random…


[edit on 17-1-2008 by Xtrozero]



posted on Jan, 18 2008 @ 01:16 AM
link   
Ummmmm just wondering…why is this thread still going.. I mean….it’s not like a Christian is going to magically show actually solid scientific evidence that creation is the slightest bit feasible… and so why are you even wasting your time…al they’re going to say….faith….or some other BS….it’s honestly like talking to a brick wall



posted on Jan, 18 2008 @ 01:21 AM
link   
reply to post by andre18
 


andre18....looks like it's dying out...natural selection??

BTW, loved your links, especially the George Carlin and the lecture...forgot his name, but excellent finds! I think I starred you for those...



posted on Jan, 18 2008 @ 01:45 AM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 


Here's more if you'd like

Theory of Evolution Explained
www.youtube.com...

4 billion years of evolution summarized in a few minutes.


[edit on 18-1-2008 by andre18]



posted on Jan, 18 2008 @ 01:51 AM
link   
reply to post by andre18
 


andre, great again!! And a star for you!!!



posted on Jan, 18 2008 @ 02:07 AM
link   
I really, really hate to do this……but I need to show why Christians and the basic people who believe in creation…are going to go no where in life….

www.youtube.com...



posted on Jan, 18 2008 @ 03:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by andre18
I really, really hate to do this……but I need to show why Christians and the basic people who believe in creation…are going to go no where in life….

www.youtube.com...


That video (especially the part with the oar and computer) made me laugh so hard I had tears in my eyes and my sides were hurting.

But seriously- lighten up, Guys. It was obviously a gag video.



posted on Jan, 18 2008 @ 06:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by Xtrozero
I'm trying to figure out what your stance is in all this.

....

Now that is what it is like of life is just a random event in the universe. I tend to believe events are not so random…


I thought I'd made my own stance fairly clear. Oh well, no worries.

My opinion is that with such circumstances (billions of galaxies, billions of habitable planets in each, billions of years, billions of simultneous trials) life was pretty much inevitable solely via natural tedencies of chemistry and physics. The same reasons why the universe appears to be teeming with the building blocks even in relatively harsh environments like space.

As I pointed out, Hawkins isn't saying that life itself is improbable, just that intelligent life may be due to the odds of evolution taking species to this level. It was one scenario he raised to explain why we might not be visited by intelligent aliens. He also raises other scenarios which come to different conclusions. That's why what you did is a bit of a quotemine.

I also think these events are not so random. I think chemical and physical laws tend towards areas of complexity. For example, I don't think it is random that the universe is full of organic building blocks. But that doesn't mean it was a directed teleological process.

For example, I don't think it is random that: 4Na + 4H20 ----->4NaOH + 2H2

It doesn't require the hand of a divine biochemist. However, evolutionary processes would be under the pressure of fairly random processes. Like uncontrolled comets smashing into planets, the life and death of stars etc, and the random features of evolution itself selected by the non-random features.

Moreover, the point with playing with odds is that even if we pull odds out our asses of 1 in 10^-50, there is nothing stopping it happening the first time, and with multiple simultaneous events and long periods, it would be quite likely a few times


It isn't a case of 'improbable, therefore god'.

So, anyway...yeah, if you think it is 'directed' (which is a better word for you than random), that's your perogative, but this sort of idea is not evidence for intelligent design creationism. It's really just another god of the gaps argument. As I said, place him there with peril, they always tend to be plugged with time.

[edit on 18-1-2008 by melatonin]



posted on Jan, 18 2008 @ 01:09 PM
link   
Here is a good question. Someone tell us what kind of feasible, scientific evidence is needed to show a divine creation. How does one prove a miracle that happened before man existed? What kind of scientific evidence and proof are you looking for? Let us know.

What kind of scientific evidence do you think exists to prove something being spoken into existence? You tell us how to prove this scientifically. No sci-fi requirements (time travel with a video recorder as this does not exist). No "magic" (Christians or Jews replicating the creation process by speaking something into existence as only God has the power to create life). No miraculous requirements (God showing up one day and creating hundreds of new species instantly).

Using scientific methods only, how can divine creation be proven? This cannot be done which is why this entire thread is illogical.

[edit on 1/18/2008 by AshleyD]



posted on Jan, 18 2008 @ 01:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by Clearskies
reply to post by melatonin
 


You've just proven that some people have stronger bones than others,
AND that genes are involved.
God gave everyone genes..........


I now this was quite early on but how do you thinkg some humans got stronger bones tha others?

If a gene changes so that another human has stronger bones then a mutation has occured.



posted on Jan, 18 2008 @ 01:37 PM
link   
reply to post by monkey_descendant
 

Yes, but bone strength is mostly affected by diet and physical activity.
Use it or lose it.



posted on Jan, 18 2008 @ 01:37 PM
link   
reply to post by AshleyD
 


Ashley, a little circular logic there.

BUT, consider this: The Universe, the one we can see, at least, is vast, will you not agree? We live in the 'suburbs' of a spiral arm of a galaxy that comprises about 400 billion stars...and there are billions of other galaxies, all consisting of billions of stars...

What about this reality makes us so special? It is the anthropomorphic principle, and it relies on incredible hubris.

The ability to love, to create art, to do all the beautiful things that Humans are capable of, that is not at issue here. What I think people are trying to convey, here, is that a belief in a 'creation' scenario is too simplistic. It focuses on US, and us alone. We Humans aren't the 'be all' and 'end all' of the grander equation, whatever that may be. BUT, we have the capacity to search and strive to learn more...and to also strive for understanding. I simply do not think that a rigid 'belief' in some supernatural power is the way to increase understanding.

Yes, there are powers and forces at work that we do not fully understand...yet...probably won't happen in my or your lifetimes. Could I understand the 'mind of god'? NO. I can take a class and learn calculus, but can I then teach calculus to my cat? I love my cat, but he just does not have the capacity to understand calculus. We, also, have a similar limitation when it comes to comprehending things on Grand scale...



posted on Jan, 18 2008 @ 02:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Clearskies
Yes, but bone strength is mostly affected by diet and physical activity.
Use it or lose it.


And also by genes.

The environmental factors (diet, physical activity etc) act with the genes to produce the phenotype (overall bone strength).

Thus, identical environment factors will see differences due to genes. Identical genes will see differences due to environment (e.g., identical twins).

Both interact. But you're only really obfuscating anyway.



posted on Jan, 19 2008 @ 02:13 AM
link   
Ummmm why are there 2 damn threads on the same damn topic......




new topics

top topics



 
5
<< 16  17  18    20  21  22 >>

log in

join