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.

 

Creator or Chance Accident - I will prove this to you!

page: 14
22
<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 19 2011 @ 05:01 PM
link   
reply to post by SuperiorEd
 




As for proving that we are created with design, I have done this on this thread.


No, like others have pointed out, all you accomplished was to show that you don't really understand the word "proof"




There is no question that life requires information that could not have arisen by chance.


No one's saying it happend "by chance"...we're saying "we don't have the answer yet". Either way, you completely fail at presenting any objective evidence supporting your claim




Nature is governed by laws. Again, another proof.


If anything, it serves as evidence that magic (aka god) isn't required. We know how humans evolved, we know how mountains form, we know why planets circle around stars and how fast...all based on our understanding of natural laws. No magic whatsoever





Life flows against the current of entropy.


And people have posted numerous examples showing what a bunch of hogwash that claim is...yet you continue to ignore it because it goes against your irrational belief




Examples like the fig wasp verify design and negate evolution. There are over 900 species of fig wasp and only one fig wasp for each of the over 900 species of fig tree. The oldest fossil we have is 35 million years old and it is identical to the fig wasp of today in every way.


Just because it looks the same doesn't mean it's "the same". Take the crocodile for example, it looks the same as millions of years ago, yet the croc from 250mil years ago could not produce offspring with todays croc. But who cares about facts, right?


Furthermore, if the fig wasp is perfectly adapted to the fig tree...and the fig tree doesn't change...why would the wasp evolve? It makes perfect sense if it stayed pretty much the same if it adapted so perfectly to its surroundings.



I am just repeating the post here but the overall picture continues to deny a chance accident. We are designed and highly ordered in a universe that is in a constant movement increased entropy and disorder.


All claims that are demonstrably wrong...yet you continue to spread your lies out of blind, ignorant belief like a broken casette player




Give me the sequence of events that moved inanimate substance to contain encoded information; moved it to reproduce; moved it to generate by fractal mathematics and you have an argument against the proofs.


Seriously, can you read??? We've already mentioned multiple times that scientists don't have the answer to how life started...that doesn't mean you can use the god of the gaps (aka magic) to explain it. You're just as foolish as the ancient people who claimed comets are a sign of god because they didn't have all the facts. You have ZERO objective evidence to support your claims, so all you're doing is preaching your personal belief. And what's even worse, your personal belief has been completely debunked several times in this thread.

You obviously can't deal with the FACT that we don't have all the answers, and rather choose to blindly believe in magic. If it makes you happy, fine...but I can't believe how silly it makes you look claiming a bunch of stuff that is demonstrably wrong.



But, before you do this, you need to explain the governing laws of the universe and the immovable force that animates the movable to motion.


Apart from the fact that your claim is a prime example of god of the gaps (again), the entire notion is ridiculous. We know what moves stuff...gravity, energy, thermodynamics, and the list goes on. All rationally explained without the need to make up stuff or use the old god of the gaps




Otherwise, the evidence is so strong for design from a creator that you have NO ground to stand against the assertions here.


And of course you end it with another example of god of the gaps


"Scientists can't explain that...ergo god did it!"

The track record of these statements is beyond ridiculous:

- Comets...not a sign of god.
- Plagues...not caused by god.
- Floods...not caused by god.
- Earthquakes...not caused by god.
- Humans showing up on earth in their current form through god....simply not true.
- Women made from the rib of a man...complete and utter nonsense.
- People possessed by the devil...hogwash...it's called schizophrenia and mental disease.

...and the list goes on. Not a single thing has been proven to be attributable to a deity or supported by objective evidence. Yet you, like all the Muslims, Hindus, and guys who believe in the mighty spaghetti monster continue to preach their nonsense as truth when in reality they're just as clueless (often even more so as you so nicely showed with this thread) as the rest of us. I guess some people have a hard time coping with reality and need magic to keep going. Fine if it makes you happy, but posting a bunch of nonsense posts on here just makes you look incredibly silly.
edit on 19-4-2011 by MrXYZ because: (no reason given)




posted on Apr, 19 2011 @ 05:12 PM
link   
In a multidimensional universe, our infinite probability space in this fourth dimensional reality of time is only a glimmer of what likely exists. Looking out from the seventh dimension, we are only a point in space. The point here in this 4th dimensional 'now' is to create a sculpture of choices in time. This then reflects to our new reality somewhere else in the infinity of possible timelines and universes. This may be hard to conceptualize, but watching the two linked videos helps. I take God at His word that my beliefs and actions matter when creating my ever changing past. Future choices dictate this sculpture. Although I only see one slice at a time, God sees all in it's entirety. Watch these videos with this context in mind. Time is an illusion of collapsing waves of probability which form choices that change our future past. You are an eternal creation. The body is material. It dies. You do not. This life is and engine of education for what comes next. If you demonstrate unworthiness, you miss taking the next step in the kingdom of God. I believe in transmigration. I believe that this is what John was referring to in John 3 where he talked about baptism in the water. The water is the body. You only escape by being born again in the spirit. This is my personal perspective.

1 Corinthians 2:9

However, as it is written: "No eye has seen, no ear has heard, no mind has conceived what God has prepared for those who love him"--

Video 1

VIDEO 2




Originally posted by graphuto
The Bible suggests that there is more to our being than this very short time we spend on earth. In relation to what we know of how old the universe is, what are our lives? Meaningless. Imagine there is no God. Next imagine that the sun supernovas. What was it all for?

edit on 19-4-2011 by SuperiorEd because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 19 2011 @ 05:17 PM
link   
reply to post by SuperiorEd
 


But all those claims aren't backed up by objective evidence


We don't even know how many dimensions there are, and even if there's 100, it's still not proof of god's existence. So in essence, you're filling a gap in knowledge with magic...again...god of the gaps at its best


Also, I'm not sure you noticed, but you're not actually discussing. You post hogwash, me and others completely debunk it (like I did in my previous post), and you then go on completely ignoring the content of those replies...and instead continue to post more garbage

edit on 19-4-2011 by MrXYZ because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 19 2011 @ 06:11 PM
link   
I don't think you can debunk the science I use to back my claims about God. This totally dismisses any hope you have in backing your own claims. I have spent countless moments in time activating my bio-mechanical distal phalanges providing the science that backs my claims. In any other context besides a God context, this would be met with overwhelming adoration, singing the praises of science over all other thought. The difference here is bias. Bias blinds the connection between the reflection of God to what we currently know of Science. It matches, yet bias is the chasm between. I am happy to discuss anything you bring to the table. So far, nothing but bias. This is not a counter proof that negates the other as fallacy.

Answer one question at a time if you can.

First question.

Where do the governing laws of motion originate? For motion to take place, there must be a fixed object to set the other in motion.

Second question.

Assuming you get through this first question with any success, answer this: How can we explain information with purpose encoded into all life and how can this information match the governing laws from question one (apart from a knowledge of them)?

I have said enough with my proof that points directly at a creator. How about a negation to my proof by answering these two questions. Let's discuss with some science.


Originally posted by MrXYZ
reply to post by SuperiorEd
 


But all those claims aren't backed up by objective evidence


We don't even know how many dimensions there are, and even if there's 100, it's still not proof of god's existence. So in essence, you're filling a gap in knowledge with magic...again...god of the gaps at its best


Also, I'm not sure you noticed, but you're not actually discussing. You post hogwash, me and others completely debunk it (like I did in my previous post), and you then go on completely ignoring the content of those replies...and instead continue to post more garbage

edit on 19-4-2011 by MrXYZ because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 19 2011 @ 06:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by SuperiorEd
I have spent countless moments in time activating my bio-mechanical distal phalanges providing the science that backs my claims.

No, you provide your misinterpretations and misunderstandings of science that you imagine back your claims. There's a big difference there. From your misapplication of thermodynamics, to your misunderstanding about mass and energy balances within systems, to your misinterpretation of what scientific articles and papers actually say.


In any other context besides a God context, this would be met with overwhelming adoration, singing the praises of science over all other thought. The difference here is bias. Bias blinds the connection between the reflection of God to what we currently know of Science. It matches, yet bias is the chasm between. I am happy to discuss anything you bring to the table. So far, nothing but bias. This is not a counter proof that negates the other as fallacy.

No, it's not a bias against God or religion or theology or theism or any concept that you'd like to think. It's a bias against bad science. Once you get over your persecution complex and understand the difference, the better off you'll be.



posted on Apr, 19 2011 @ 06:33 PM
link   
reply to post by SuperiorEd
 





I don't think you can debunk the science I use to back my claims about God.


Oh but we have




I have spent countless moments in time activating my bio-mechanical distal phalanges providing the science that backs my claims.


But science doesn't back up your claims...on the contrary




In any other context besides a God context, this would be met with overwhelming adoration, singing the praises of science over all other thought.


Not really...hogwash is hogwash




Where do the governing laws of motion originate?


There was a clever man called Newton who perfectly explained the laws of motion.

As for how our physical laws came to be, we don't know. But again, you can't just substitute a lack of knowledge with magic...no matter how often you try to. Every single one of your posts is a prime example of god of the gaps




How can we explain information with purpose encoded into all life and how can this information match the governing laws from question one (apart from a knowledge of them)?


The purpose of all life is survival...mostly because if life doesn't survive, it's dead and without purpose. Not sure why you imply this is connected to the law of motion though...makes no sense whatsoever




I have said enough with my proof that points directly at a creator. How about a negation to my proof by answering these two questions. Let's discuss with some science.


Once again you fail at providing any proof...you should really look up the definition of "proof". And while your at it, look up "god of the gaps" because it's your only (and seriously flawed) argument


And lastly, you just continue to post garbage, but never actually respond to people debunking your claims. Instead, you just continue to post more garbage. That's not discussing, that's called PREACHING. Do that at church, but it makes you look silly here



posted on Apr, 19 2011 @ 06:39 PM
link   
Answer one question at a time if you can.

First question.

Where do the governing laws of motion originate? For motion to take place, there must be a fixed object to set the other in motion.

Second question.

Assuming you get through this first question with any success, answer this: How can we explain information with purpose encoded into all life and how can this information match the governing laws from question one (apart from a knowledge of them)?

I have said enough with my proof that points directly at a creator. How about a negation to my proof by answering these two questions. Let's discuss with some science.



posted on Apr, 19 2011 @ 07:28 PM
link   
.

First question.

Where do the governing laws of motion originate? For motion to take place, there must be a fixed object to set the other in motion.

As science examines the physical laws that govern the universe, the evidence suggests that we live in a multi-dimensional omniverse where all possible realities exist. By examining the dimensions below, we see the hint at the dimensions above. Flatland is a good example of this conceptualization.

"Multiverse: The part of infinity that directly joins a given universe with all possible configurations of that universe."

Our fourth dimensional reality of time is contained within a probability space of the dimension above, which contains all possible outcomes.

This LINK is your best opportunity to explore what I can only hint at here.

So, what am I getting at? God did it? Not my point, but an obvious answer. It is just too complex to be anything but God? Not my point either, but it is. It is so amazing that it must be God? Not my main point at all.

Augustine, from City of God

"And yet the validity of logical sequences is not a thing devised by men, but is observed and noted by them that they may be able to learn and teach it; for it exists eternally in the reason of things, and has its origin with God. For as the man who narrates the order of events does not himself create that order; and as he who describes the situations of places, or the natures of animals, or roots, or minerals, does not describe arrangements of man; and as he who points out the stars and their movements does not point out anything that he himself or any other man has ordained;—in the same way, he who says, “When the consequent is false, the antecedent must also be false,” says what is most true; but he does not himself make it so, he only points out that it is so."

My point is this:

God said he is Alpha and Omega. This is all probability and potential outcomes in an infinity of possibility. "Quantum physics tells us that the subatomic particles that make up our world are collapsed from waves of probability, simply by the act of observation (Rob Brianton)." That means our consciousness creates the material reality, not the material reality creating the observer.

DID YOU HEAR THAT!!!!!!! This is proof a la mode. Let me say it again, only louder this time.

That means our consciousness creates the material reality, not the material reality creating the observer.

God is NOUS. NOUS is THE ALL. The great I AM.

God has an answer to what science confirms from physics. LIGHT and Wave. That is God (Light-Genesis 1) and Christ (logos-John 1), creating it all from NOUS (Consciousness) in an infinite probability space. Now if you think that the shepherds came up with this, then you have missed God in the image.


edit on 19-4-2011 by SuperiorEd because: (no reason given)

edit on 19-4-2011 by SuperiorEd because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 19 2011 @ 07:51 PM
link   
Second question.

Assuming you get through this first question with any success, answer this: How can we explain information with purpose encoded into all life and how can this information match the governing laws from question one (apart from a knowledge of them)?

-----------------------

I am through the first question with success.

Light is the fundamental particle and wave of all physics. Light is both particle and wave. Wave carries light. Light is enlightenment. This is concrete and abstract, created in consciousness in the form of language, mathematics, symbol, which are functions of NOUS. The Word (LOGOS) is the programming language of the universe. From NOUS, all arises to our perception from the Light of NOUS (Consciousness), carried by the wave.

Done.

Now. Let's hear the counter arguments for evolution and chance.


edit on 19-4-2011 by SuperiorEd because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 19 2011 @ 07:59 PM
link   
I started a new thread to continue this proof. Copy and paste if you are answering below this post.

LINK



posted on Apr, 19 2011 @ 08:08 PM
link   
reply to post by SuperiorEd
 

You have zero understanding of entropy, quantum physics, and thermodynamics, and do not in any way relate to the dirges in scripture.

Your quantum physics analogy is sterile, completely barren of any form of logical relevance to whatever it is you are trying to get it. If I have two sticks, one longer, and one shorter, and give you one without looking, as soon as I look again at the sticks I'm either going to have a short one or a long one. That's the "waves of probability" scientist speak of concerning quantum physics. There is nothing in consciousness that creates matter, especially considering consciousness was the by-product of a bigger brain, which itself is a by-product of a more spatial uterus.

And all of your "claims" are contingent on two things, the grand assumption that a god exists, and "but things are so pretty." I can speculate as well, but the difference is my speculations in the above paragraph are grounded in science, because a uterus, a brain, and consciousness are all things that exist.

Research what happens to the wasps inside a fig. It puts Sodom and Gomorrah to shame.



posted on Apr, 19 2011 @ 08:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by uva3021
There is nothing in consciousness that creates matter, especially considering consciousness was the by-product of a bigger brain, which itself is a by-product of a more spatial uterus.


Scientifically speaking you cannot proves that consciousness is a product of the brain.



posted on Apr, 19 2011 @ 08:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by MrXYZ


Where do the governing laws of motion originate?


There was a clever man called Newton who perfectly explained the laws of motion.

As for how our physical laws came to be, we don't know. But again, you can't just substitute a lack of knowledge with magic...no matter how often you try to. Every single one of your posts is a prime example of god of the gaps



Magic is simply a word to describe a lack of understanding.

Also, I think you are confusing understanding the processes and mechanisms of something and understanding the source.



posted on Apr, 19 2011 @ 08:30 PM
link   
reply to post by SuperiorEd
 


No reason to start a new thread.

Again making a grand assumption about purpose. A frog is seemingly predisposed to snatch insects out of midair. What if I throw a dark pellet in the frogs frame of reference, and its obviously not an insect, but the frog snatches it anyway. Well has its "purpose" changed? Or is snatching things with your tongue simply a consequence of descending from organisms that snatched things with tongue, who were able to reproduce differentially for reasons we might be able to identify in retrospect.

Is a bird's wings used for flight or for displaying feathers? What is its "purpose"? What about the flightless birds with wings. They may have descended from organisms that flew, but now use their wings as a display rack. At what point did its "purpose" change? Or maybe, again, a side consequence of differential reproduction is having offspring similar to you, who possess features that are only there because their parents had them.

What "purpose" does our appendix serve? Or the ability to wiggle your ears? Not all humans can wiggle their ears, but perhaps they descended from organisms that wiggled their ears. At what point does "purpose" A turn into "purpose" B?

What "purpose" does simultaneous blinking accomplish. It takes 50 milliseconds to blink, that's 5% of your life walking around with your eyes closed. Why don't we blink sequentially? Would truly be advantageous to negotiating one's hostile environment. You would always have one eye open. Did god not take this into consideration? Why did god spend so little time on our backs and laryngeal nerves, or is god punishing us for past sins by giving us back problems and an ill-engineered laryngeal nerve. Most people get along fine regardless, so the joke's on god.

If information had "purpose", wouldn't there be some inherent property of sugar and phosphates that can assess the value of a resource? If not, then it truly is all random and phenotypes are by-products of molecular interaction. Since information can only go in one direction, and changes in nucleotides really are random (scientists for 60 years have been trying to prove otherwise, with not a shred of evidence found, and in all honesty, I think the notion of "mutation by necessity" is comical), then there is no "purpose" to a DNA molecule. Its merely a random aggregation of Carbon, Oxygen, Hydrogen, and Nitrogen that took over a billion years to stabilize.


edit on 19-4-2011 by uva3021 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 19 2011 @ 08:30 PM
link   
reply to post by Jezus
 
Noted



posted on Apr, 19 2011 @ 08:32 PM
link   
Please do share you grand assumptions, facts, statements to refute. BIAS is not an answer. I have not shared bias. I have shared my perspective according to science. Please share you answers to the questions. They are in a new thread here. LINK


Originally posted by uva3021
reply to post by SuperiorEd
 

You have zero understanding of entropy, quantum physics, and thermodynamics, and do not in any way relate to the dirges in scripture.

Your quantum physics analogy is sterile, completely barren of any form of logical relevance to whatever it is you are trying to get it. If I have two sticks, one longer, and one shorter, and give you one without looking, as soon as I look again at the sticks I'm either going to have a short one or a long one. That's the "waves of probability" scientist speak of concerning quantum physics. There is nothing in consciousness that creates matter, especially considering consciousness was the by-product of a bigger brain, which itself is a by-product of a more spatial uterus.

And all of your "claims" are contingent on two things, the grand assumption that a god exists, and "but things are so pretty." I can speculate as well, but the difference is my speculations in the above paragraph are grounded in science, because a uterus, a brain, and consciousness are all things that exist.

Research what happens to the wasps inside a fig. It puts Sodom and Gomorrah to shame.

edit on 19-4-2011 by SuperiorEd because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 19 2011 @ 09:25 PM
link   
That is good food for thought. Thank you. It is a preponderance of data for sure.


Originally posted by uva3021
reply to post by SuperiorEd
 


No reason to start a new thread.

Again making a grand assumption about purpose. A frog is seemingly predisposed to snatch insects out of midair. What if I throw a dark pellet in the frogs frame of reference, and its obviously not an insect, but the frog snatches it anyway. Well has its "purpose" changed? Or is snatching things with your tongue simply a consequence of descending from organisms that snatched things with tongue, who were able to reproduce differentially for reasons we might be able to identify in retrospect.

Is a bird's wings used for flight or for displaying feathers? What is its "purpose"? What about the flightless birds with wings. They may have descended from organisms that flew, but now use their wings as a display rack. At what point did its "purpose" change? Or maybe, again, a side consequence of differential reproduction is having offspring similar to you, who possess features that are only there because their parents had them.

What "purpose" does our appendix serve? Or the ability to wiggle your ears? Not all humans can wiggle their ears, but perhaps they descended from organisms that wiggled their ears. At what point does "purpose" A turn into "purpose" B?

What "purpose" does simultaneous blinking accomplish. It takes 50 milliseconds to blink, that's 5% of your life walking around with your eyes closed. Why don't we blink sequentially? Would truly be advantageous to negotiating one's hostile environment. You would always have one eye open. Did god not take this into consideration? Why did god spend so little time on our backs and laryngeal nerves, or is god punishing us for past sins by giving us back problems and an ill-engineered laryngeal nerve. Most people get along fine regardless, so the joke's on god.

If information had "purpose", wouldn't there be some inherent property of sugar and phosphates that can assess the value of a resource? If not, then it truly is all random and phenotypes are by-products of molecular interaction. Since information can only go in one direction, and changes in nucleotides really are random (scientists for 60 years have been trying to prove otherwise, with not a shred of evidence found, and in all honesty, I think the notion of "mutation by necessity" is comical), then there is no "purpose" to a DNA molecule. Its merely a random aggregation of Carbon, Oxygen, Hydrogen, and Nitrogen that took over a billion years to stabilize.


edit on 19-4-2011 by uva3021 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 20 2011 @ 05:16 AM
link   
reply to post by graphuto
 



Originally posted by graphuto
The proof is that for over 2000 years the Bible has stood strong, and has been used as a guideline for life by countless numbers of people.


Again, two logical fallacies:

Argumentum ad populum (so what if countless numbers of people thought something, it can still be wrong!)
Argument from tradition (so what if it's old, it can still be wrong!)



The proof is that every single thing you say in regards to science, etc, can be refuted by the Word of God.


...no, it can't. The Bible cannot refute that Pi = ~3.14, it cannot refute that allele frequency changes over successive generations, it cannot refute that the Earth is an oblate spheroid, it cannot refute that the Earth is in orbit around the Sun, it cannot refute that the Earth is ~4.54 billion years old, it cannot refute that the story of Noah is fiction, it cannot refute the physical impossibility of human giants, etc.



The proof is the very fact that you're arguing so hard about it.


...no. Saying that spending an hour or so a day on the internet pointing out that you're wrong is 'arguing so hard' is kind of ridiculous. And I guess that I can say that evolution must be true because of how damn hard creationists argue against it.



For the fool has said in his heart, there is no God.


Fools like Einstein, Hawking, Sagan, Curie, etc.



Once we have quoted you scripture after scripture there is just nothing else to say really unless you want to believe, and theres even a verse about that.


Scripture cannot be used to prove the claims of scripture. I don't get why some Christians don't get that. By your logic I should quote you lines from the Lord of the Rings to make you believe in Middle Earth.



The groundwork is faith. I know you'll scoff and tell me you don't want it, but I'll pray for you sir.


From Nietzsche:


That faith makes blessed under certain circumstances, that blessedness does not make of a fixed idea a true idea, that faith moves no mountains but puts mountains where there are none: a quick walk through a madhouse enlightens one sufficiently about this.




Do you know where the wind begins to blow and why? No, but you know it's there because you can feel it.


Actually...meteorology sort of knocked that one out ages ago. Changes in atmospheric temperature. We can actually test wind with scientific instruments...or not so scientific instruments.



Also, I CAN throw out the idea of conciousness. You certainly can't prove it, yet here you are, forming thoughts.


...except that I can prove consciousness depending on the definition. It's a complicated cognitive science issue that I've actually studied as part of my studying of the philosophy of artificial intelligence.



posted on Apr, 20 2011 @ 05:17 AM
link   
reply to post by graphuto
 


Yes, the Bible insulates itself from criticism, so what? Like I've said, quoting a book to prove the claims of that book is not an argument, it's illogical.



posted on Apr, 20 2011 @ 05:19 AM
link   
reply to post by graphuto
 


The Qu'ran claims to have been directly dictated by Allah to Mohammed. Word for word it is authored by Allah. It is the only definitive religious book and it is packed full of things to say in any situation. And any book of sufficient length will have sufficient things to say in any situation. I'm sure I can quote War and Peace at you if I get familiar enough with it.



new topics

top topics



 
22
<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in

join