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.

 

‘Variability’ % proves God is the SPECIAL CAUSE, skeptics, why are you ignoring?

page: 5
16
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 12:29 AM
link   
OK...

OK...

It is very late here...

OT is old


I need my beauty sleep


Talk (post) to you tomorrow, thx for engaging me...


Night!

Heres one to sleep on tonight- "5 WORDS" take um to heart ok? www.youtube.com...




posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 12:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by traditionaldrummer

Originally posted by OldThinker
You see, 94% of ALL data and the outcome of variability has at its root a statistical thing called…you ready?


You see, 99% of human DNA is chimpanzee. Additionally, in non-Africans 1-4% of homo sapiens sapiens DNA is Neanderthal. I wonder why the bible left out the part about how we evolved from other species and mated with other now extinct hominid species. I mean, since the bible is true and all.


Actually, it's not. That's old science about 99% DNA. Check here: www.answersingenesis.org... There are massive differences, especially when you consider that a small variation in just a few can make huge differences.



posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 12:41 AM
link   
reply to post by OldThinker
 


Oh OldThinker, ... so stubborn in your ways,

You hold on to an idea you think you understand and run tell the world as if to singlehandedly save Christianity.

First of all, ... Special and Common Causes have to do with variation in process's, It does not relate to evolution or the possibility of life.

Thats a far leap friend.

Where does all this 94/6 stuff come from ?? Common cause does not dictate wether a process is possible, ... but only shows the statistic's for variations in a certain process. The ratio would change from one process to another. This would be something used in manufacturing or predicting statistical outcomes.

You say that the " Enviroment " is suited perfectly for us, .... have you ever considered that we Evolved TO suit the enviroment ?? I guess we would be forced to wouldn't we ?? adapt or die.

Sure, .. this world is perfect for us, but it wouldn't be for a creature who evolved somewhere else.

Think man, ... think. Don't let a book or a preacher do that for you. God has given us everything we need from birth. Seek, and ye shall find.



posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 12:44 AM
link   
reply to post by Jim Scott
 


Here's an even newer news article that says only 96% chimp/human DNA similarities.
NatGeo

I don't think citing a 7 year old creationist website as a source will get you very far in ATS but maybe I'm wrong.

To clarify, I'm not a christian hater (I used to be a lutheran) but I don't believe something as fact without proof and I started reading this thread because OP said he had proof God created everything, which I have yet to see.

Edit for spelling.

[edit on 8/12/10 by thov420]



posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 12:59 AM
link   
The essential problem with most "discussions" of Creators is that the proponents are always blind to the fact that time, as we perceive it, is not necessarily linear. In fact, time tends to move forward and backwards in small, apparently random bursts, which we perceive as forward motion, since our perception of such things is so limited.

So there is no need for any kind of creator. Everything happens all at once, and is only sorted out by our consciousness. Nothing ever needed to be created, or guided, because it has always existed and will always exist, at least in a general way.

From a personal perspective, the universe was "created" when I became conscious of it, and will vanish when I die. All in the same instant.

The believers in creation consistently have such limited views and understanding of the way time works.



posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 01:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by Blue Shift

From a personal perspective, the universe was "created" when I became conscious of it, and will vanish when I die. All in the same instant.







posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 01:29 AM
link   
Star Blue Shift!

We are insignificant specks in an insignificant solar system in an infinite universe. To think we are special in any way is just egotistical and arrogant.



posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 01:49 AM
link   
reply to post by OldThinker
 


Hi and welcome back my friend.

One of the huge hurdles to our bigger-picture understanding lay with our immaturity as a species, having been technology-capable for such an extremely short timeframe compared to even the cycles of our planet.

And so we have developed Theories based on observations of things we simply do not understand, and as yet do not have the means to understand... simply because of our "youth" in existence.

So, given the above it would seem illogical to anticipate Voyager finding anything as yet or ever.. ever being relative to our perception of a lifetime.

Basically, we are still far too young to know anything for sure. We are like new born infants in our capacity to perceive clearly beyond the physicality we find ourselves in. And therefore we must accept that for now we cannot truly know anything, despite our egoic-intent to believe we know a lot already.

This offered perception applies to all human endeavours, our sciences, our religions and faiths and the knowledge of our evolution as an unsustainable life-form on this Blue Dot.



posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 03:51 AM
link   
reply to post by OldThinker
 


Hey,
Your OP is very frantic and doesn't really validate the bible over any other system of belief. Also, the video doesn't help to reaffirm or elaborate on your idea. Its just some preacher going on and on about how big the universe is and relating that to the "greatness" of god. If this post was intended to help christians find some shaky validity to their creation story, then so be it, however those of us who want some empirical evidence are very much left out. I'm not knocking your faith or anyone's, for that matter, I'm just confused. Why do people feel the need to provide proof in matters of faith. Its a paradox, its like searching for a pot of gold underneath every single rainbow. Faith is certainly special and its unique to every individual, so why would christianity trump buddhism, hinduism, or even greek mythology? Applying probability and statistics to something of faith never turns out pretty.
Thanks,
iamoverrated



posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 05:52 AM
link   
wow the OP makes really no sense. No offense to you OT, but in my point of view religion limits people mind.

Your proof is faith, but... faith wpuld be fact if you could proove it.

I completely join the oppinion of Intastellaburst



posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 06:06 AM
link   
okay

for sake of argument well say that your numbers of 94/6 are correct and you argue we have not found intelligent life anywhere else even though we have sent out voyager....

well considering that our galaxy makes up less than %1 of the universe its likely that we are the only intelligent life in our galaxy and your numbers state it is highly LIKELY intelligent life living in the other %93 of other galaxies which we have absolutely no way of detecting with current technology

so until we have the technology to explore said %96 percent of the universe and prove there is no life there then your theory cannot be backed up



posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 06:15 AM
link   
Sorry to burst your bubble, but over the recent months scientists have been finding earth-like planets in the dozens. We just never had the means to do that before due to our lacking technology.

Source

Fact is, so far we were able to explain a lot of happenings scientifically even though previously they were attributed to "god" because we couldn't understand them, or because we perceived them as too "complex".

The whole "we can't explain this...ergo it's a sign for god" mentality is seriously flawed, yet I see it more and more on ATS.

If you don't have the scientifically, objective answer to a question, the only correct course of action is to say "we just don't know yet".



posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 06:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by OldThinker



...Skeptics, wanna join the conversation?


No, not really.

Just because you believe something is so, doesn't mean it is so.

Have you visited every solar system in the universe?

Can you share your proof we are the only solar system with intelligent life?

Speculation does not equal proof.



posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 07:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by OldThinker
reply to post by Sinter Klaas
 





Since voyager left our solar system, did it see any...sure it's gotta a ways to go...but it should find some huh?

OT



Dude you must be trying to reel people to comment or you are just one special kid but are you really ssaying that because voyager hasnt found life in our solar system that it means theres no life elsewhere?

Because as you probably know theres like a billion solar systems like ours so you don't make any sense.



posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 07:04 AM
link   
reply to post by imdeceived
 


a billion is probably a huge unerestimate just to further your point

second line



posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 07:09 AM
link   
Skeptics,

Thank you for the replies over night...

I will get to each of you later today...

you say evolution is probable...ok? If it is the time and chance thing that uses VARIABILITY to bring about life, right? According to the statistics that life should be the norm 94 out of 100 times, period...sorry, we just don't see it?

If we can send a prob OUT of our solar system, if they are there, why haven't they? Maybe they pointed it in the wrong direction?

OT



posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 07:14 AM
link   
reply to post by OldThinker
 



“You see if RANDOMNESS created intelligent life here, it should create it 94% of the time EVERYWHERE.”


Shouldn't we, for mathematical sake, at least have to known the exact size of our universe and the number of stars within it??

I mean, our closest neighbor could be 100 light years away and it could still count as "pretty close by" depending on your point of reference, right?

Peace



posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 07:19 AM
link   
reply to post by OldThinker
 


as i said in my earlier post our galaxy is less than %1 of the universe and our solar system is just a minimul amount, the 'voyager' is barely out of our solar system so it stands to reason it hasnt found anything of alien origin by your statistics

to validate your 'theory' as i have already said we would need to explore and prove that there is no other life throughout the universe which is a monumental task if not impossible

so without any evidence of the lack of et life your theory doesnt hold water

you cannot state it as fact from a statistic that im not even sure is correct in the first place

just to point out that i believe in a creator of some sorts but i believe your theory is complete hogwash
good day to you sir



posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 07:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by OldThinker
reply to post by Indellkoffer
 


Voyager is waaaaaayyy out there....

what has it seen?

Not much....

related to intelligent life....




Voyager has only just broken through our Solar System perihelion bubble. In other words it has travelled the equivalent of a drop in the ocean compared to the Universe that is out there.

It hasn't seen anything because it hasn't gone anywhere yet. Duh.



posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 07:52 AM
link   
OT, I think you seriously underestimate how large the universe is. There's more galaxies in the sky than sand corns on earth...and we've only examined a tiny tiny tiny fraction of them. And even those we examined still weren't examined in full because our technology is still lacking.

You can't just assign percentages like that given our ridiculously small sample size.

Here's a clip you should watch to better understand the sheer size:



(Crucial part is at 8:25)




top topics



 
16
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join