What’s your Best EVIDENCE ‘FOR’ or ‘AGAINST’ God? Intellectual debate, please…

Originally posted by PublicDefenseCorp
The idea of a God cannot be proved nor disproved.
There is simply a huge lack of evidence for either.

Thx for the post...so you think ORDER and DESIGN are not evidence of an intelligence?

OT

reply to post by PublicDefenseCorp


This made sense to me...

Proof of God - Nature
So where's the proof of God's existence? In accordance with our familiar axiom and in light of the tremendous advances we've made in molecular biology, biochemistry, genetics and information theory, the proof of God is all around us!

Through the microscope, we observe the E. coli bacterial flagellum. The bacterial flagellum is what propels E. coli bacteria through its microscopic world. It consists of about 40 individual protein parts including a stator, rotor, drive-shaft, U-joint, and propeller. It's a microscopic outboard motor! The individual parts come into focus when magnified 50,000 times (using electron micrographs). And even though these microscopic outboard motors run at an incredible 100,000 rpm, they can stop on a microscopic dime. It takes only a quarter turn for them to stop, shift directions and start spinning 100,000 rpm in the opposite direction! The flagellar motor has two gears (forward and reverse), is water-cooled, and is hardwired into a signal transduction (sensory mechanism) so that it receives feedback from its environment. ("Unlocking the Mystery of Life," video documentary by Illustra Media, 2002.)

When we apply the general principles of detecting specified complexity to biologic systems (living creatures), we find it reasonable to infer the presence intelligent design. Take, for example, the bacterial flagellum's stator, rotor, drive-shaft, U-joint, and propeller. It is not convenient that we've given these parts these names - that's truly their function. If you were to find a stator, rotor, drive-shaft, U-joint, or propeller in any vehicle, machine, toy or model, you would recognize them as the product of an intelligent source. No one would expect an outboard motor -- much less one as incredible as the flagellar motor -- to be the product of a chance assemblage of parts. Motors are the product of intelligent design.

Furthermore, the E. coli bacterial flagellum simply could not have evolved gradually over time. The bacterial flagellum is an "irreducibly complex" system. An irreducibly complex system is one composed of multiple parts, all of which are necessary for the system to function. If you remove any one part, the entire system will fail to function. Every individual part is integral. There is absolutely no naturalistic, gradual, evolutionary explanation for the bacterial flagellum. (Michael Behe, Darwin's Black Box, 1996.)

The bacterial flagellum (not to mention the irreducibly complex molecular machines responsible for the flagellum's assembly) is just one example of the specified complexity that pervades the microscopic biological world. Molecular biologist Michael Denton wrote, "Although the tiniest bacterial cells are incredibly small, weighing less than 10-12 grams, each is in effect a veritable micro-miniaturized factory containing thousands of exquisitely designed pieces of intricate molecular machinery, made up altogether of one hundred thousand million atoms, far more complicated than any machinery built by man and absolutely without parallel in the non-living world." (Michael Denton, Evolution: A Theory in Crisis, 1986, p. 250.)

more: www.allaboutcreation.org...

reply to post by Jordan River


I'll acknowledge you! WELCOME!

As I fly alot and look down on the millions of multitudes on earth like little ants, I have a hard time thinking we are the devine/consciousness...come on, we have FEET for Pete's sake....

Creation is the first evidence of God.
The power of God is displayed in the universe, at night.

Conscience is the second evidence of God.
All beings know right from wrong.

Romans 1:18-32
―Man’s Unrighteousness‖
I. Man’s Natural State
a. ―There are very few errors and false doctrines of which the beginning may not be traced up to unsound views about the corruption of human nature. Wrong views of a disease will always bring with them wrong views of a remedy. Wrong views of the corruption of human nature will always carry with them wrong views of the grand antidote and cure of that corruption‖ (J. C. Ryle).
i. Total depravity: ―The whole personality of man has been affected by the fall, and sin extends to the whole of the faculties – the will, the understanding, the affections and all else‖ (W.J. Seaton).
1. Dead: Rom 5:12; Eph 2:1
2. Lawless: I John 3:4
3. Bound: II Tim 2:26
4. Blind and Deaf: Mark 4:11-12
5. Uninstructable: I Cor 2:14
6. Naturally Sinful: Ps 51:5
ii. John 11:1-45 – Lazarus as a picture of spiritual death
II. (18-23) Man’s Knowledge and Denial of God
a. (18) For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who suppress the truth in unrighteousness…
i. Wrath: God’s determined indignation (An anger aroused by something unjust)
1. From heaven: The flood (Gen 6-8), Sodom (Gen 19), Egypt (Ex 6-12)
ii. Ungodliness: Man’s rebellion against God (Rom 8:7; I John 3:4)
iii. Unrighteousness: The fruit of rebellion – all that is antithetical to God
iv. Suppress the truth: The purposed action of a hardened, foolish heart (Ps 14:1).
1. Can those who have not heard the truth be considered guilty?
b. (19-20) …for that which is known about God is evident within them; for God made it evident to them. For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse.
i. The source of revelation: God
ii. The means of revelation: Conscience and Creation
1. Conscience: The inward testimony of God (within them)
2. Creation: The light of nature, and the works of creation and providence do so far manifest the goodness, wisdom, and power of God, as to leave men inexcusable (WCF 1.1).
iii. Divine revelation is perpetual (since the creation) and perspicuous (clearly seen).
1. Invisible attributes: John 1:18
2. Eternal power: Amos 5:8 Revealed in nature
3. Divine nature: Ps 19:1-6
iv. The effect of revelation: Man is without excuse
c. (21) For even though they knew God, they did not honor Him as God or give thanks, but they became futile in their speculations, and their foolish heart was darkened.
i. They possess the knowledge of God and yet they suppress it in accordance with their unrighteousness (v.18; cf. Heb 10:26).
1. Did not honor: A refusal to acknowledge and worship God
2. Did not give thanks: A refusal to acknowledge the beneficence of God
3. Futile…darkened: Their mind, emotions, and will (heart) are frustrated and worthless.
d. (22-23, 25) Professing to be wise, they became fools, and exchanged the glory of the incorruptible God for an image…
i. (22) Professing to be wise: Corrupted wisdom (Gen 11:4; Prov 9)
ii. (23) Exchanged the glory of God: Corrupted values (Ps 106:20; Jer 2:11)
iii. (23) Image: Corrupted worship (Ex 20:4-5)
iv. (25) Exchanged the truth: Corrupted truth
v. (22) Fools: Corrupted purpose (I Cor 10:31)
1. The sin of idolatry: Exodus 32:1-7; Isaiah 44:10-20
III. (24, 26-32) The Consequences of Denial
a. (24) Therefore, God gave them over in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, so that their bodies would be dishonored among them.
i. The removal of divine restraint:
1. Sinful actions
I Cor 5:5; I Tim 1:20
2. Consequences
ii. The link between idolatry and impurity:
1. A denial of indelible instincts (Gen 1:26)
b. (26-27) For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural, and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function…
i. Unnatural relations:
1. The consequences of sexual impurity:
a. The degrading of one’s body (v.24; cf. I Cor 6:18)
b. The denial of nature (Gen 2:24)
c. The domination of passions (I John 2:16-17)
d. The wrath of God (Lev 18:22; 20:13; I Cor 6:9-10)
i. Due penalty: That which is sown is reaped (Gal 6:7-8)
c. (28) And just as they did not see fit to acknowledge God any longer, God gave them over to a depraved mind, to do those things which are not proper…
i. Did not see fit to acknowledge: Disdain for the knowledge of God (v.18)
1. Disdain for God results in unrestrained depravity
2. A depraved mind gives birth to depraved actions
d. (29-31) …being filled with all unrighteousness
i. The fruit of a depraved mind:
1. Group 1: unrighteousness, wickedness, greed, and evil
a. A refusal to love the Lord—heart, soul, mind, and strength
2. Group 2: envy, murder, strife, deceit, and malice
a. A refusal to love your neighbor as yourself
3. Group 3: gossips, slanderers, haters of God, insolent, arrogant, boastful, inventors of evil, disobedient to parents, without understanding, untrustworthy, unloving, and unmerciful
a. The manifestation of these broken commandments
e. (32) Although they know the ordinance of God…they do the same
i. Their knowledge of the truth (vv.19-20 – conscience and creation)
ii. Those bound by sin lose all fear of judgment.
1. With judgment ―removed‖ sin is free to reign in their bodies.
IV. A Divine Hope
a. God’s purpose in handing them over:
i. The LORD will strike…striking but healing; so they will return (Is 19:22)
b. The hope of the gospel:
i. For it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes (v.16)

reply to post by fmcanarney


Whew.... that's alot!

Thx, I'll summarize, creation, consciousness and man's current state...

OK, GOOD I'll buy that!

OT

Certainly is the universe order IS God, life would be more widespread, but it is not...would you acknowledge the point?

reply to post by OldThinker


Could stars be considered life? Science only has a handle on 10% of what makes up the universe. Is dark energy or dark matter some kind of lifeform, or is it the Hand of God?

reply to post by dusty1


Great questions



I dunno, my frame of reference is God is OUTSIDE space...and time for that matter...

I think reality is there too...so maybe time really is a matrix? Go NEO!

Originally posted by Agree2Disagree

We'll never come close to realising whether or not the Universe is infinite. How does one perceive infinity?

They call it god and give it magic powers.

Originally posted by Agree2Disagree


Well even from the laws of thermodynamics we can see that the Universe will eventually die out from maximum heat entropy. There's always a beginning and an end, ALWAYS - BEGINNING - END. Infinite - Alpha - Omega.

Always contradicts beginning and end. If there is always a beginning and end then how do you believe in a god?

The guy who came up with the whole heat death had this to say...

The result would inevitably be a state of universal rest and death, if the universe were finite and left to obey existing laws. But it is impossible to conceive a limit to the extent of matter in the universe; and therefore science points rather to an endless progress, through an endless space, of action involving the transformation of potential energy into palpable motion and hence into heat, than to a single finite mechanism, running down like a clock, and stopping for ever.

How does an expanding universe ever reach maximum entropy? This question hasnt been answered yet, but you seem to know whats going to happen. Fill us in would you?

Originally posted by OldThinker
What’s your Best EVIDENCE ‘FOR’ or ‘AGAINST’ God? Intellectual debate, please…

As we head to the Thx-giving and Christmas seasons (in America), I think of all the great memories from those holidays.

Are the multitudes grateful/expressing thankfulness to NO ONE?

Also, do ‘believers’ really have the ‘corner’ on goodness?

I thought I’d start an intellectual discussion on the BEST arguments FOR and AGAINST God.

To get us started, here are the Top 4 FOR a Devine Entity…my hope is to have the ATS skeptics/atheists chime in with their best arguments AGAINST a God.

1. Cosmological Argument

The term “cosmological” comes from the Greek word “kosmos” which means “world.”

The cosmological argument for God’s existence goes like this: The world could not exist on its own so there must have been a first cause that brought it into being. This first cause is God. Or put another way, the universe could not just exist on its own—someone or something must have made it. This cause of the universe is God.

Three criticisms of the cosmological argument have been offered. First, some say matter is eternal and is not in need of a “first cause.” Second, some say “If everything needs a cause, what caused God?” Third, some say that even if it is true that some being caused our universe to exist, this does not prove the existence of the Christian God. All it shows is that there is some powerful being that created the universe, but this does not necessarily mean that this creator was the God of the Bible.

2. Teleological Argument

The teleological argument is also known as “the argument from design” (The Greek word “telos” means “purpose” or “design.”). The argument goes like this: The universe evidences great complexity or design; thus, it must have been designed by a great Designer or God.

The argument from design can be likened to a watch. A watch is obviously made by a watchmaker. The world, which is much more complex than a watch, must also have been designed by a great Designer or Divine Watchmaker (God).

In sum, the teleological argument asserts that the universe evidences too much complexity to be the product of random chance. We know that the celestial bodies move with perfect accuracy in their orbits. Our bodies, too, are incredibly complex. According to the teleological argument, there’s just no way all this complexity could “just happen.” God must have created it all.


There have been three responses to the teleological argument. First, some say the teleological argument is guilty of a “weak analogy” because it assumes a significant resemblance between natural objects (ex. rocks, trees) and objects we know have been designed (ex. watches, skyscrapers). Thus, comparing natural objects with objects we know have been created by humans is like comparing apples and oranges. The analogy just doesn’t work. Second, some say that the theories of the big bang and evolution better explain the complexity in the universe. Third, some say that even if the teleological argument is true, it does not prove the existence of the Christian God.


3. Ontological Argument
The third argument for God’s existence is the ontological argument. This argument is unlike the cosmological and teleological arguments in that it does not argue from evidence in the natural world. Thus, it is not a “cause and effect” argument.

The ontological argument can be stated in this way: “God is the greatest being imaginable. One of the aspects of perfection or greatness is existence. Thus, God exists.” Or put another way—“The fact that God can be conceived means that he must exist.”

This argument for God’s existence was developed by the twelfth century theologian and philosopher, Anselm. It is based on Anselm’s declaration that God is “that which nothing greater can be conceived.”

The ontological argument has been very controversial. Even many who believe in God’s existence question its validity. A contemporary of Anselm named Guanilo responded to Anselm. Guanilo said that one could imagine a perfect island but that did not mean a perfect island exists. Others have said you can imagine a unicorn but that does not mean unicorns exist. Thus, many challenge the idea that the idea of God must mean that God exists.


4. Moral Law Argument

Another argument for the existence of God is the moral law argument. It goes like this: Without God morality would be impossible. There must be a Lawgiver (God) who originates and stands by moral law. A universal moral law cannot exist accidentally. There must be a basis behind it—God.

According to this view, every person is born with an inherent understanding of right and wrong. Everyone, for instance, understands that killing an innocent person is wrong. Everyone understands that helping a drowning person is right. Where did this internal understanding of right and wrong come from? According to adherents of the moral law argument, this understanding comes from God. He put it into the hearts of every person.

There have been two responses to the moral law argument. First, some deny that there are universal truths. Many today believe that truth is subjective and relative. Societies and individuals determine what is true for them, but there is no God that does this. Second, some say that the presence of evil in the world argues against a Moral Lawgiver. If God is all-powerful and all-good, how can evil exist in the world?

The arguments and counterarguments for God’s existence remain controversial. The cosmological, teleological, and moral law arguments remain popular with Christian apologists today. The ontological argument is not as well received although some today still asserts its validity.

It should be noted that most Christian theologians and philosophers believe that God never intended for his existence to be something that could be proven with 100% certainty. They point out that faith is an important component in understanding God and his existence.

Let’s strive to make this an intellectual discussion, with no flaming ok?


Link: www.theologicalstudies.org...


The

T

There's over 16 ancient "non-Christian sources" for Christ doing miracles, dying and being raised from the dead.
I'd like to say this part over again, "non-Christian sources."
Thanks,
TT

reply to post by texastig


Appreciate that information...

If you could send me those sources...that would be great...

Post them here, or U2U me, ok?

OT

Originally posted by s373r3d
My best argument which is both for and against it~

How isn't science a religion?

Main Entry: re·li·gion
Pronunciation: \ri-ˈli-jən\
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English religioun, from Anglo-French religiun, Latin religion-, religio supernatural constraint, sanction, religious practice, perhaps from religare to restrain, tie back — more at rely
Date: 13th century

1 a : the state of a religious b (1) : the service and worship of God or the supernatural (2) : commitment or devotion to religious faith or observance
2 : a personal set or institutionalized system of religious attitudes, beliefs, and practices
3 archaic : scrupulous conformity : conscientiousness
4 : a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith

Last I checked science isnt the worship of god or the supernatural. Science deals only with nature. Also last I checked it doesnt take faith to believe in the observable or repeatable. Maybe if you want to get all archaic on us you could call it a religion.

The human genome has 23 paired chromosomes, 20,000-25,000 genes, and about 3 billion base pairs. Life has been on earth about 3-3.5 billion years. So in 3 billion years somehow 3 billion base pairs managed to line up in such a perfect way to allow me to type this message. That is a lot to swallow without a little faith.

There is so much we do not understand. Life is so extremely complex-let alone the universe. It is not the "god" in a normal sense. God to me is the order of the universe.

Every facet of biology is confirming evolution. Down to the molecule. Evolution is a fact. We have observed it. Evolutionary theory deals with the how and why.

I believe in my own kind of god. I believe that there is a fundamental truth to this universe we haven't even began to understand. It is not a mythical god on a thrown. It is an order to the cosmos. The above quote points to the reality of the complexity all around us.

The universe isnt all that ordered. I'm not even sure what you mean by that. What order do you see?

An order to things does not mean "the maker" is still with us, or that he cares. All that matters is that we are left with rules to follow. The whole universe has rules.

I'm not sure Id call them rules. I would just say its the nature of the universe for things to interact in a certain way. For some things to appear ordered could be part of its nature also. We know that its matters nature to clump together. Is that order? We call this gravity, not god.

reply to post by watcher73


The universe will succumb to maximum heat entropy only if there is no big crunch ie. it is an infinite system.

It will occur because according to the second law of thermodynamics, the amount of entropy in a system must always increase.

So, hot to cold, and eventually equilibrium is met, thus, no more work can be accomplished.

edit to add: that is of course assuming that our laws are correct and the amount of entropy in a system cannot decrease.
also, I believe in God and beginning and end, because God is both in one. say it with me...."in-fin-ite"
[edit on 26-11-2009 by Agree2Disagree]

[edit on 26-11-2009 by Agree2Disagree]

Originally posted by texastig
There's over 16 ancient "non-Christian sources" for Christ doing miracles, dying and being raised from the dead.
I'd like to say this part over again, "non-Christian sources."
Thanks,
TT

Christ isnt a name, its a title. There were hundreds of christs in jesus supposed time alone.

No there arent 16 sources. Especially non-christian.

Id like to say this part over again.

No there arent.

There is only one historical non christian reference to jesus AT ALL. Nevermind the miracles. And that one has been proven a forgery. There are a few (3 maybe) references to the christos, or christ in historical texts. But which one? Christ or christos is a title, not a name.

Originally posted by watcher73
.....Every facet of biology is confirming evolution. Down to the molecule. Evolution is a fact.

hmm?? is it sooo cut and dry?

Recent origin of modern humans confirmed through The branch of science that studies the structure and activity of macromolecules essential to life (and especially related to their genetic role).molecular biology


Of or referring to the mitochondria, the organelles that generate energy for the cell.Mitochondrial Deoxyribonucleic acid: the chemical inside the nucleus of a cell that carries the genetic instructions for making living organisms.DNA (Genetic material found in mitochondria, the organelles that generate energy for the cell.mtDNA)
In the late 1980's and early 1990's a number of studies were done examining the Of or referring to the mitochondria, the organelles that generate energy for the cell.mitochondrial Deoxyribonucleic acid: the chemical inside the nucleus of a cell that carries the genetic instructions for making living organisms.DNA ( Genetic material found in mitochondria, the organelles that generate energy for the cell.mtDNA) of women all over the world. These studies, nicknamed the "Eve theory," suggested that the last common ancestor of modern man (actually women) appeared within the last 200,000 years (12-15), much more recently than previously thought. Refinements in the measurements lowered the original estimates to 135,000 years (15) and finally 100,000 years (16). Scientists chose to examine Genetic material found in mitochondria, the organelles that generate energy for the cell.mtDNA because, being enclosed within the subcellular organelle called the The organelle that generates energy for the cell.mitochondrion, there is no genetic recombination (males make no contribution of Genetic material found in mitochondria, the organelles that generate energy for the cell.mtDNA to the fetus). All Genetic material found in mitochondria, the organelles that generate energy for the cell.mtDNA comes from our mothers and is passed down from mother to daughter, since only The organelles that generate energy for the cell.mitochondria from the egg are used to make up the fetus. By tracing the differences in Genetic material found in mitochondria, the organelles that generate energy for the cell.mtDNA from peoples around the world, scientists have calculated the probable date of the last common ancestor of modern humans at 100,000 to 200,000 years ago.

One of the two sex chromosomes that determines maleness in mammals, carried and passed down from males to males.Y-chromosome analysis
In 1995, scientists have examined human origins from the perspective of male genetics (17, 18). Scientists have examined a gene (ZFY), which being on the One of the two sex chromosomes that determines maleness in mammals, carried and passed down from males to males.Y chromosome, is passed down only from father to son. Thirty-eight men were chosen from all over the world (Africa, Asia, Australia, Europe, and Northern, Central, and South America). Scientists determined the actual genetic The order of nucleotides in a DNA or RNA molecule, or the order of amino acids in a protein molecule.sequence in each man for this gene, which is 729 Two nucleotides on opposite complementary DNA or RNA strands that are connected via hydrogen bonds.base pairs long. To their surprise, all men had identical genetic The order of nucleotides in a DNA or RNA molecule, or the order of amino acids in a protein molecule.sequences (over 27,000 Two nucleotides on opposite complementary DNA or RNA strands that are connected via hydrogen bonds.base pairs analyzed). Scientists have calculated the most probable date for the last common ancestor of modern man, given the The order of nucleotides in a DNA or RNA molecule, or the order of amino acids in a protein molecule.sequence diversity from modern apes. Using two different models this date is either 270,000 or 27,000 years ago. However, both these models assume that the male population during this entire period of time consisted of only 7,500 individuals. The date estimates from these models would be significantly reduced if the male population were higher than 7,500, which is very likely. Two separate studies using similar techniques looked at larger pieces of the One of the two sex chromosomes that determines maleness in mammals, carried and passed down from males to males.Y chromosome, which would reduce the uncertainty in the calculation of dates. One study examined a gene which was 2,600 Two nucleotides on opposite complementary DNA or RNA strands that are connected via hydrogen bonds.base pairs and determined a last common ancestor date of 188,000 year ago (minimum of 51,000 and maximum of 411,000 years ago) (19). The other study used a very large piece of the One of the two sex chromosomes that determines maleness in mammals, carried and passed down from males to males.Y chromosome (18,300 Two nucleotides on opposite complementary DNA or RNA strands that are connected via hydrogen bonds.base pairs) and calculated a last common ancestor date of modern man of 43,000 years ago (minimum of 37,000 and maximum of 49,000 years ago) (16). This latter study also examined Of or referring to the mitochondria, the organelles that generate energy for the cell.mitochondrial Deoxyribonucleic acid: the chemical inside the nucleus of a cell that carries the genetic instructions for making living organisms.DNA from women and determined an origination date of 90,000-120,000 years ago.

The non-random association of alleles at two or more genetic loci, in which combinations of alleles or genetic markers occur more or less frequently in a population than would be expected from a random formation of haplotypes from alleles based on their frequencies.Linkage disequilibrium analysis
A study published in 1996 (20) examined The association of genes and/or markers that lie near each other on a chromosome that tend to be inherited together.linkage The non-random association of alleles at two or more genetic loci, in which combinations of alleles or genetic markers occur more or less frequently in a population than would be expected from a random formation of haplotypes from alleles based on their frequencies.disequilibrium at the human CD4 The place on a chromosome where a specific gene is located, a kind of address for the gene.locus (a T-cell associated antigen) as a means to establish the date of modern human origins. This study determined a maximum origin date of 102,000 years ago based upon the assumption that the A family of approximately 300 bp repetitive sequences, found dispersed throughout the human genome.Alu (-) Variant forms of a gene at a particular locus, or location, on a chromosome.alleles arose 5 million years ago, or almost immediately after mankind's split from other An order of mammals including man, apes, monkeys, etc., often characterized by large brains and flexible hands and feet.primates. As they stated, "It is likely that the A family of approximately 300 bp repetitive sequences, found dispersed throughout the human genome.Alu deletion event occurred more recently, in which case our estimates for the date of founding of the non-African populations would also be more recent." Preliminary studies from Threadlike "packages" of genes and other DNA in the nucleus of a cell. Different kinds of organisms have different numbers of chromosomes. Humans have 23 pairs of chromosomes, 46 in all: 44 autosomes and two sex chromosomes. Each parent contributes one chromosome to each pair, so children get half of their chromosomes from their mothers and half from their fathers.chromosomes 19, 11 and 8 show similar results to that seen on One of the threadlike "packages" of genes and other DNA in the nucleus of a cell. Different kinds of organisms have different numbers of chromosomes. Humans have 23 pairs of chromosomes, 46 in all: 44 autosomes and two sex chromosomes. Each parent contributes one chromosome to each pair, so children get half of their chromosomes from their mothers and half from their fathers.chromosome 12 (the The place on a chromosome where a specific gene is located, a kind of address for the gene.locus of the CD4 gene) (21).

Using rare mutations to estimate population divergence times
A study published in 1998 examined population divergence time using rare Permanent structural alterations in DNA, consisting of either substitutions, insertions or deletions of nucleotide bases.mutations between populations to estimate divergence among three Mediterranean populations. The results indicated that Danish people (who are my ancestors) would have diverged from the other groups, at most, 4,500 to 15,000 years ago (22). This number does not necessarily help us establish a date for the appearance of modern humans, but it is likely that future studies in this area (this is one of the first published) may provide accurate numbers for the appearance of human populations in different areas of the world and a lower limit to the date of appearance of modern humans.

more: www.godandscience.org...

Their conclusion?

Therefore, the most accurate date (see note below) for the origin of modern humans indicate that the last common ancestor to modern humans must have existed less than 50,000 years ago (16). Such a recent date left only one potential ancestor for modern humans, that is, An extinct species of the genus Homo, also known as Neanderthal (or Neandertal) man, which appeared approximately 400,000 years ago.Homo neanderthalensis (An extinct species (Homo neanderthalensis) of the genus Homo, which appeared approximately 400,000 years ago.Neanderthals), which lived between 400,000 and 28,000 years ago. Previous anatomical studies had cast doubt on the possibility of An extinct species (Homo neanderthalensis) of the genus Homo, which appeared approximately 400,000 years ago.Neanderthals being the ancestors of modern humans (23-27). These studies showed differences in Belonging to an extinct species (Homo neanderthalensis) of the genus Homo, which appeared approximately 400,000 years ago.Neanderthal's brain case (23) and the presence of an internal nasal margin, a medial swelling of the lateral nasal wall, and a lack of an Being made of bone or referring to the calcification of tissue into bone.ossified roof over the Relating to or located near the organ that produces tears.lacrimal groove (24-25). None of these features are found in The only surviving hominid species, comprising modern human beings and characterized as being a bipedal primate with a large brain capacity, capable of language and the ability to make and use complex tools.Homo sapiens, and the last feature is not found in any other terrestrial mammal! A recent analysis of An extinct species (Homo neanderthalensis) of the genus Homo, which appeared approximately 400,000 years ago.Neanderthal hands has revealed that modern humans and An extinct species (Homo neanderthalensis) of the genus Homo, which appeared approximately 400,000 years ago.Neanderthals differed markedly in the kind of grip they could use (26). An extinct species (Homo neanderthalensis) of the genus Homo, which appeared approximately 400,000 years ago.Neanderthals were limited to grips as one has when holding a stone or baseball. Such a grip would have been powerful (you wouldn't want to shake hands with a An extinct species (Homo neanderthalensis) of the genus Homo, which appeared approximately 400,000 years ago.Neanderthal), but not very dexterous. The anatomy of the Belonging to an extinct species (Homo neanderthalensis) of the genus Homo, which appeared approximately 400,000 years ago.Neanderthal's hands would have prevented them from engaging in fine motor skills, such as carving and painting. Another study showed that An extinct species (Homo neanderthalensis) of the genus Homo, which appeared approximately 400,000 years ago.Neandertals developed much more rapidly than modern humans (or even their own supposed ancestors) (27), further eroding their possible status as mankind's ancestors. In addition, An extinct species (Homo neanderthalensis) of the genus Homo, which appeared approximately 400,000 years ago.Neanderthals had a huge nasal cavity coupled with a brain size larger than our own. However, with their carnivorous lifestyle, it seems likely that much of their brain might have been devoted to the sense of smell, being the "dog" among the Members of the biological family Hominidae, which includes all the "great apes," - extinct and extant humans, chimpanzees, gorillas, and orangutans.hominids (28).

In brilliantly designed and executed independent studies, scientists have extracted Genetic material found in mitochondria, the organelles that generate energy for the cell.mtDNA from four An extinct species (Homo neanderthalensis) of the genus Homo, which appeared approximately 400,000 years ago.Neanderthal skeletons; two from Neander Valley in Germany, another from the northern Caucasus near the Black Sea, and the fourth in Vindija Cave, Croatia, and laid to rest any question of whether An extinct species (Homo neanderthalensis) of the genus Homo, which appeared approximately 400,000 years ago.Neanderthals could have been our ancestors (29-32). The first study examined a 379 Two nucleotides on opposite complementary DNA or RNA strands that are connected via hydrogen bonds.base pair An extinct species (Homo neanderthalensis) of the genus Homo, which appeared approximately 400,000 years ago.Neanderthal Genetic material found in mitochondria, the organelles that generate energy for the cell.mtDNA fragment and compared it with a Genetic material found in mitochondria, the organelles that generate energy for the cell.mtDNA The order of nucleotides in a DNA or RNA molecule, or the order of amino acids in a protein molecule.sequence of 986 One of the structural components, or building blocks, of DNA and RNA. A nucleotide consists of a base plus a molecule of sugar and one of phosphate.nucleotide pairs from living humans of diverse ethnic backgrounds. The results (Table 1) showed an enormous 26 One of the structural components, or building blocks, of DNA and RNA. A nucleotide consists of a base plus a molecule of sugar and one of phosphate.nucleotide Two nucleotides on opposite complementary DNA or RNA strands that are connected via hydrogen bonds.base pair difference between the An extinct species (Homo neanderthalensis) of the genus Homo, which appeared approximately 400,000 years ago.Neanderthal and Human Genetic material found in mitochondria, the organelles that generate energy for the cell.mtDNA (a 6.5% difference) (29). In this region of the Genetic material found in mitochondria, the organelles that generate energy for the cell.mtDNA, modern humans differ from one another in an average of eight Two nucleotides on opposite complementary DNA or RNA strands that are connected via hydrogen bonds.base pairs, and those differences were completely independent of the 26 observed for the An extinct species (Homo neanderthalensis) of the genus Homo, which appeared approximately 400,000 years ago.Neanderthal fossil. However, many of the The order of nucleotides in a DNA or RNA molecule, or the order of amino acids in a protein molecule.sequence variations found in the An extinct species (Homo neanderthalensis) of the genus Homo, which appeared approximately 400,000 years ago.Neanderthals were shared in the Two living species of ape in the genus Pan, including Pan troglodytes, the Common Chimpanzee, and Pan paniscust, also known as Bonobo or Pygmy Chimpanzee.Chimpanzee. A 357 Two nucleotides on opposite complementary DNA or RNA strands that are connected via hydrogen bonds.base pair The order of nucleotides in a DNA or RNA molecule, or the order of amino acids in a protein molecule.sequence of Genetic material found in mitochondria, the organelles that generate energy for the cell.mtDNA was examined from the second An extinct species (Homo neanderthalensis) of the genus Homo, which appeared approximately 400,000 years ago.Neanderthal fossil and was found to vary from modern human The order of nucleotides in a DNA or RNA molecule, or the order of amino acids in a protein molecule.sequences at 23 Two nucleotides on opposite complementary DNA or RNA strands that are connected via hydrogen bonds.bases (6.4%), nineteen of which were identical to those of the first An extinct species (Homo neanderthalensis) of the genus Homo, which appeared approximately 400,000 years ago.Neanderthal. The third An extinct species (Homo neanderthalensis) of the genus Homo, which appeared approximately 400,000 years ago.Neanderthal differed from modern humans by 26 Two nucleotides on opposite complementary DNA or RNA strands that are connected via hydrogen bonds.bases, 23 of which matched the first An extinct species (Homo neanderthalensis) of the genus Homo, which appeared approximately 400,000 years ago.Neanderthal and 20 of which matched the second specimen. The fourth An extinct species (Homo neanderthalensis) of the genus Homo, which appeared approximately 400,000 years ago.Neandertal differed from modern humans by 23 Two nucleotides on opposite complementary DNA or RNA strands that are connected via hydrogen bonds.bases, 22 of which matched the first An extinct species (Homo neanderthalensis) of the genus Homo, which appeared approximately 400,000 years ago.Neanderthal, 20 of which matched the second specimen and 23 of which matched the third specimen. A summary of the findings of the two studies can be found in Table 1, below
www.godandscience.org...

Originally posted by Agree2Disagree
reply to post by watcher73

 

The universe will succumb to maximum heat entropy only if there is no big crunch ie. it is an infinite system.

I wish youd stop contradicting yourself. How does an infinite system ever reach entropy. The laws of thermal dynamics apply only to closed systems. Infinite seems to imply an open system. Besides the fact that an infinite system would have an infinite amount of energy to draw from. You say the universe will end in a heat death by entropy then call it infinite. Which is it?

It will occur because according to the second law of thermodynamics, the amount of entropy in a system must always increase.

A closed system.

So, hot to cold, and eventually equilibrium is met, thus, no more work can be accomplished.

You didnt answer the question of where the indestructible energy/matter goes? Thats a law too. No comment on what Thompson said either? No comment on the change of state and it not ending?

edit to add: that is of course assuming that our laws are correct and the amount of entropy in a system cannot decrease.

[edit on 26-11-2009 by Agree2Disagree]

Entropy on Earth is ever decreasing. Its a system. An open one.

Originally posted by OldThinker


hmm?? is it sooo cut and dry?

Yes, tell me which part of "we have observed it" is confusing you?

Is that whole article just about mtDNA being too young? I stopped reading for a minute to reply. If so try punctuated equilibrium. That would explain it. Maybe it was the 24th chromosome we had fusing with another that sped things up a little? Maybe it was aliens.

From my cursory read of the first few paragraphs all that is called into question is the timeline. Not the fact of evolution.

Text The date estimates from these models would be significantly reduced if the male population were higher than 7,500, which is very likely.

Highly unlikely eh?

Evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins has postulated that human mitochondrial DNA (inherited only from one's mother) and Y chromosome DNA (from one's father) show coalescence at around 140,000 and 60,000 years ago respectively. In other words, all living humans' female line ancestry trace back to a single female (Mitochondrial Eve) at around 140,000 years ago. Via the male line, all humans can trace their ancestry back to a single male (Y-chromosomal Adam) at around 60,000 to 90,000 years ago.[2] This is consistent with the Toba catastrophe theory which suggests that a bottleneck of the human population occurred c. 70,000 years ago, proposing that the human population was reduced to c.15,000 individuals[3] when the Toba supervolcano in Indonesia erupted and triggered a major environmental change. The theory is based on geological evidences of sudden climate change, and on coalescence evidences of some genes (including mitochondrial DNA, Y-chromosome and some nuclear genes)[4] and the relatively low level of genetic variation with humans.[3]

If you take that 15k population and cut in half to represent only males you get exactly 7500. Thats effing amazing. So is the timing.

Originally posted by watcher73
I wish youd stop contradicting yourself. How does an infinite system ever reach entropy. The laws of thermal dynamics apply only to closed systems. Infinite seems to imply an open system. Besides the fact that an infinite system would have an infinite amount of energy to draw from. You say the universe will end in a heat death by entropy then call it infinite. Which is it?

A closed system.


You didnt answer the question of where the indestructible energy/matter goes? Thats a law too. No comment on what Thompson said either? No comment on the change of state and it not ending?

Entropy on Earth is ever decreasing. Its a system. An open one.

I suggest you go read some books about "heat death". May I suggest "The Last Three Minutes" by Paul Davies.

However, since I see you're going to dispute this with me. Let me suggest the opposite..."cold death"...basically the opposite of heat death which accounts for your "infinite system"...

Originally posted by Agree2Disagree

Originally posted by watcher73
I wish youd stop contradicting yourself. How does an infinite system ever reach entropy. The laws of thermal dynamics apply only to closed systems. Infinite seems to imply an open system. Besides the fact that an infinite system would have an infinite amount of energy to draw from. You say the universe will end in a heat death by entropy then call it infinite. Which is it?

A closed system.


You didnt answer the question of where the indestructible energy/matter goes? Thats a law too. No comment on what Thompson said either? No comment on the change of state and it not ending?

Entropy on Earth is ever decreasing. Its a system. An open one.

I suggest you go read some books about "heat death". May I suggest "The Last Three Minutes" by Paul Davies.

However, since I see you're going to dispute this with me. Let me suggest the opposite..."cold death"...basically the opposite of heat death which accounts for your "infinite system"...

So you cant answer my questions and consistently contradict yourself but I need to read more books? Now you say a cold death happens in infinite systems after telling us all for sure it ends in a heat death because of the laws of thermodynamics?

Even the theorist behind heat death disagrees with you and yet you plow on.

So which is it - cold death, heat death, or an infinite universe?