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

reply to post by SuperiorEd


From the very same source you linked

How common are these diseases?

Every year, approximately 30 cases of poisoning by marine toxins are reported in the United States.

I'm pretty sure more people die because they have a natural deadly accident in church than that...or more people fall of horses and injure themselves...yet the bible doesn't forbid riding horses.

I think it's hilarious that you dodge every single response that refutes your claims...and then just continue to post complete hogwash.

How ignorant can one be? Open your eyes to reality rather than living in fantasy land, reality's awesome!!

You are thinking in terms of yourself here. This was written for the Hebrew people in Antiquity. The statistic would have likely been much different in that day. Get back with me in 10 years and let me know how that reality you are living works out for you. All of us will reap what we sow no matter our beliefs. You will sow according to your beliefs and so will I. The difference lies in the fruit we reap at harvest time.

Originally posted by MrXYZ
reply to post by SuperiorEd

 

From the very same source you linked

How common are these diseases?

Every year, approximately 30 cases of poisoning by marine toxins are reported in the United States.

I'm pretty sure more people die because they have a natural deadly accident in church than that...or more people fall of horses and injure themselves...yet the bible doesn't forbid riding horses.

I think it's hilarious that you dodge every single response that refutes your claims...and then just continue to post complete hogwash.

How ignorant can one be? Open your eyes to reality rather than living in fantasy land, reality's awesome!!

reply to post by SuperiorEd

The statistic would have likely been much different in that day.

And another claim you don't even bother backing up with objective evidence...simply because it fits your fantasy narrative

reply to post by SuperiorEd


Not many people in ancient times had access to fish and meats unless they were rich and upper class citizens. So was the bible written for rich upper class folk only?

Just saying.

By the way, the title is very misleading. No one's saying it was a "chance accident", we DON'T KNOW how life started. That's why there's several hypothesis. But there's no objective evidence supporting a creator hypothesis...let alone a theory.

A lack of knowledge doesn't make the "god hypothesis" the only possible alternative...especially in the absence of evidence

Remember. Most of the doubts a person has about the Bible are wrapped in bias against a God who requires faith, hope and love. These are not easily achieved in a person's life. I am only pointing out the obvious here so don't take me wrong with all my rebutting of points. The Bible stand on firm ground. Not only is following God good for your future after death, it improves every step you take on a daily basis.

Here's your answer to what you say below. Shellfish was a large part of Gentile (Roman) diet.


LINK

Originally posted by sirnex
reply to post by SuperiorEd

 

Not many people in ancient times had access to fish and meats unless they were rich and upper class citizens. So was the bible written for rich upper class folk only?

Just saying.

As the ATS website gladly points out on a daily basis, reality is not very close to what we image by merely looking at the science. Most of what we know of reality points to a vastly complex mechanism of mathematics and engineering. There is only one conclusion that can be drawn. We are living in a designed reality and we are all wearing bio-mechanical suits to sense the world around us. If you only look under the rocks near you, you will miss the connections these rocks have to all the rocks across the universe. Remember, you only believe there is a universe out there from what you are told. For all you really know, this is the Truman Show you are living in. The clues you can see are SCREAMING at you that there is a God who loves you.

Originally posted by MrXYZ
By the way, the title is very misleading. No one's saying it was a "chance accident", we DON'T KNOW how life started. That's why there's several hypothesis. But there's no objective evidence supporting a creator hypothesis...let alone a theory.

A lack of knowledge doesn't make the "god hypothesis" the only possible alternative...especially in the absence of evidence

edit on 6-4-2011 by MrXYZ because: (no reason given)

reply to post by SuperiorEd


You make a lot of claims but don't post any objective evidence. As for bias against god, that's not the reason people doubt the bible. They doubt it because so much of it has been debunked, like the claim that humans came into existence in their current form without evolving, or global floods, or talking snakes, or of course the existence of a creator for which we have ZERO evidence. I'm not saying there's no creator, I'm saying we have no evidence that would suggest there is one.

reply to post by SuperiorEd

Remember. Most of the doubts a person has about the Bible are wrapped in bias against a God who requires faith, hope and love.

I have no bias against the Judaic-Christian Deity, nor against the hundreds upon hundreds of other deities worshiped throughout humanities history. I just see no evidence in support for any of these creators. Everything you've mentioned has been mentioned for all other deities.

The Bible stand on firm ground. Not only is following God good for your future after death, it improves every step you take on a daily basis.

The bible actually stand on very shaky ground. The very history of how the bible came to be is highly suspect to begin with. There are so many other Judaic-Christian books that weren't included into the bible. Then we have archeological history showing us that the biblical mythology is a retelling of Sumerian mythology. Then we have very scant evidence for Jesus being the Messiah. Then we have people worshiping a man named Jesus from 2000 years ago when the letter J is only 500 years old. The list is endless.

Here's your answer to what you say below. Shellfish was a large part of Gentile (Roman) diet.

Again, that was mainly for those who could afford it, which is a small percentage compared to the whole of the population.

Faith can have no evidence or it wouldn't be faith. This is the paradox of the material world, which is a constant state of flux and transition. Nothing can be observed twice, so it's all faith. If it were fact, then no faith. Notice that nothing in this world is sure. Just when a theory is "proven", it is replace by a new and improved theory. It works the same in science. Faith is the evidence of hope.

Hebrews 11

1 Now faith is confidence in what we hope for and assurance about what we do not see. 2 This is what the ancients were commended for.
3 By faith we understand that the universe was formed at God’s command, so that what is seen was not made out of what was visible.

Originally posted by MrXYZ
reply to post by SuperiorEd

 

You make a lot of claims but don't post any objective evidence. As for bias against god, that's not the reason people doubt the bible. They doubt it because so much of it has been debunked, like the claim that humans came into existence in their current form without evolving, or global floods, or talking snakes, or of course the existence of a creator for which we have ZERO evidence. I'm not saying there's no creator, I'm saying we have no evidence that would suggest there is one.

reply to post by SuperiorEd

Originally posted by SuperiorEd
Nothing can be observed twice, so it's all faith.

You've made this claim before and I asked you a very direct question in reply. You ignored it, so I'll ask it again - are you asserting that no test is reproducible and therefore no two tests will ever get the same results?

reply to post by SuperiorEd

Faith can have no evidence or it wouldn't be faith.

Well it's about time you've finally admitted that this thread has no proof of your deity of choice!

This is the paradox of the material world, which is a constant state of flux and transition.

Entropy is not a paradox.

Nothing can be observed twice, so it's all faith.

Utter garbage. You've never been inside a factory that mass produces products have you? Or maybe those thing's don't really exist and God just provides for all? Are you telling us that you've never ever ever in your entire life owned the same two of something? You've never done the same thing twice, like poop and pee? Twins must be a paradox to you as well.

If it were fact, then no faith.

Faith is a blind belief, only through discovery can you open your eyes and see for the first time.

Notice that nothing in this world is sure. Just when a theory is "proven", it is replace by a new and improved theory. It works the same in science.

That's a good thing! Science is about continual discovery and one of being humble in knowing that whatever answers you may think you have today could change tomorrow in light of new discoveries and evidence that give us a better understanding of our universe and things within it. This is far from a bad thing. If there was no drive to understand, we would all still be living in the stone age. You wouldn't be sitting inside a house with electricity, a fridge or a computer to use in which to bash the science which gave you those tools to bash it.

Faith is the evidence of hope.

Faith is evidence of complacency and laziness. Your comfortable with thinking you have all the answers and you lack the personal drive to educate yourself and discover the many wonders that await you.

reply to post by SuperiorEd

Nothing can be observed twice, so it's all faith.

Actually, that's completely wrong

You might wanna look up how a second is defined, and how atomic clocks work if you don't believe me...in ancient times people also had "faith" that plagues are a "sign of god"...complete and utter garbage

But at least we can finally put this thread to rest as you've admitted that you have ZERO proof and it's all based on blind faith

Yes, entropy is a paradox. Learn what a protein (Enzyme) does to preserve the equilibrium of chemical reactions to produce chemiosmosis and you will see that this is the only process that can reverse entropy to create life. Information is the key to this function. Instructions need to come from a programmer. Especially instructions that defy entropy and are 100% efficient. Sorry, that's a paradox for evolution.

Originally posted by sirnex
reply to post by SuperiorEd

 

Faith can have no evidence or it wouldn't be faith.

Well it's about time you've finally admitted that this thread has no proof of your deity of choice!

This is the paradox of the material world, which is a constant state of flux and transition.

Entropy is not a paradox.

Nothing can be observed twice, so it's all faith.

Utter garbage. You've never been inside a factory that mass produces products have you? Or maybe those thing's don't really exist and God just provides for all? Are you telling us that you've never ever ever in your entire life owned the same two of something? You've never done the same thing twice, like poop and pee? Twins must be a paradox to you as well.

If it were fact, then no faith.

Faith is a blind belief, only through discovery can you open your eyes and see for the first time.

Notice that nothing in this world is sure. Just when a theory is "proven", it is replace by a new and improved theory. It works the same in science.

That's a good thing! Science is about continual discovery and one of being humble in knowing that whatever answers you may think you have today could change tomorrow in light of new discoveries and evidence that give us a better understanding of our universe and things within it. This is far from a bad thing. If there was no drive to understand, we would all still be living in the stone age. You wouldn't be sitting inside a house with electricity, a fridge or a computer to use in which to bash the science which gave you those tools to bash it.

Faith is the evidence of hope.

Faith is evidence of complacency and laziness. Your comfortable with thinking you have all the answers and you lack the personal drive to educate yourself and discover the many wonders that await you.

Yes. And, there are no guarantees that reality will behave the same way tomorrow. Probability says it will and probability is all science can count on. I have a shirt on right now. This shirt has never taken on the same shape twice. It has never been the same temperature twice. It is degrading at every second and will eventually return to the elements as it transitions. This shirt has never been seen twice because it is different than it was before I started writing this reply. You are a different person every seven years because nearly all your cells will be dead and replaced by different cells. The only thing that can be measured (as defined by degrees of entropy) is the information contained within matter and life forms.

If a dead seed sits on the ground, it will not grow. The information in the seed is the key to life. If it has degraded beyond a certain point, it is dead. If the information is still in good shape, the seed will animate to growth. Life is information. Only information can be measured. When science can read the information fluently enough to recreate it in every perspective and within all aspects of degree, then it will not be able to observe nature accurately. Until then, all attempts to measure the results of the information is just an observation of an outcome and not the measurement of the reason for the outcome.

Man will not match God.

So, yes, even information is not the same twice unless it is a perfect copy. Nothing, NO THING is every the same twice, only the information within can accomplish that. We have not yet measured the information from all perspectives. We are blind in that respect.

Originally posted by MrXYZ
reply to post by SuperiorEd

 

Nothing can be observed twice, so it's all faith.

Actually, that's completely wrong

You might wanna look up how a second is defined, and how atomic clocks work if you don't believe me...in ancient times people also had "faith" that plagues are a "sign of god"...complete and utter garbage

But at least we can finally put this thread to rest as you've admitted that you have ZERO proof and it's all based on blind faith

edit on 7-4-2011 by MrXYZ because: (no reason given)

Originally posted by SuperiorEd
Yes, entropy is a paradox. Learn what a protein (Enzyme) does to preserve the equilibrium of chemical reactions to produce chemiosmosis and you will see that this is the only process that can reverse entropy to create life. Information is the key to this function. Instructions need to come from a programmer. Especially instructions that defy entropy and are 100% efficient. Sorry, that's a paradox for evolution.

Examples have been provided to you of nonliving systems that display reduced entropy. I've pointed this out to you before and you lied and said they hadn't. Why the lies? And what are you claiming as 100% efficient?

Originally posted by iterationzero

Originally posted by SuperiorEd
Yes, entropy is a paradox. Learn what a protein (Enzyme) does to preserve the equilibrium of chemical reactions to produce chemiosmosis and you will see that this is the only process that can reverse entropy to create life. Information is the key to this function. Instructions need to come from a programmer. Especially instructions that defy entropy and are 100% efficient. Sorry, that's a paradox for evolution.

Examples have been provided to you of nonliving systems that display reduced entropy. I've pointed this out to you before and you lied and said they hadn't. Why the lies? And what are you claiming as 100% efficient?

More is produced by the information in an acorn seed than is contained within. This is a million times efficiency. Life reproduces and uses energy to do this. Yes. This is the way open and closed systems work. Cycles of nature are users of energy. A car takes a person from there to there and uses x amount of fuel to accomplish the work done. It is inefficient. The car goes in a landfill and is not biodegradable. Even less efficient. The car cannot produce another of its kind. Less again.

A living organism reverses all that inefficiency. Also, it copies itself over and over again in a cycle that renews the energy used. Not only that, it provides usefulness to other life in the form of food, habitat, raw materials and tools. The uses are endless actually. Nothing can or is wasted. What is not used is absorbed by another. 100% efficiency.

I notice that you were about to say that nature is in a chain of energy usage and that energy is lost along the way in many forms. Good point. Nature is still 100% efficient because it is by degree. Nothing else is as efficient so nature wins the prize and is the degree of efficiency that we measure by as the benchmark. Technically, you may be right in a few minutes when you reply with energy loss, but that does not tell the story of what this efficiency says about the purpose in nature itself. Also, do not discount the value of the information produced. This is the real fruit of the efforts that nature goes through to produce life by instruction. Who instructs again? Do you have an answer? Open wide and dig deep. You will wake to the truth. The fact that you can is your proof of God.

Originally posted by iterationzero

Originally posted by SuperiorEd
Yes, entropy is a paradox. Learn what a protein (Enzyme) does to preserve the equilibrium of chemical reactions to produce chemiosmosis and you will see that this is the only process that can reverse entropy to create life. Information is the key to this function. Instructions need to come from a programmer. Especially instructions that defy entropy and are 100% efficient. Sorry, that's a paradox for evolution.

Examples have been provided to you of nonliving systems that display reduced entropy. I've pointed this out to you before and you lied and said they hadn't. Why the lies? And what are you claiming as 100% efficient?

Give me those examples again and I'll make sure I am thorough for you.


As you are thinking up those examples, image a universe where energy can neither be created or destroyed; a universe where energy is conserved; a universe where only one thing can actually be produced. In this universe we imagine, only information can be produced from a seed of the same. Now that I've planted this seed, it will grow and you will see that entropy is no match for God. God is 100% efficient in the closed system he created. He is the seed of information that is the fruit that grows by the efforts of the tree of life. The tree of knowledge is what is planted in that garden. Only the flaming sword of bias can blind you from its image.

No product has ever exited the assembly line the same as the last. They are all different. Different temperatures, working condition, longevity, and so on. Each is as unique as a snow flake. The only thing that can be said is that the information that binds each piece of matter together may produce a similar form. The information is the key to understanding anything and we do not have ultimate knowledge of how physics is programmed to assemble form. Only a vague notion. We can only describe the results of the information.

Originally posted by sirnex
reply to post by SuperiorEd

 

Nothing can be observed twice, so it's all faith.

Utter garbage. You've never been inside a factory that mass produces products have you? Or maybe those thing's don't really exist and God just provides for all? Are you telling us that you've never ever ever in your entire life owned the same two of something? You've never done the same thing twice, like poop and pee? Twins must be a paradox to you as well.

edit on 7-4-2011 by SuperiorEd because: (no reason given)

edit on 7-4-2011 by SuperiorEd because: (no reason given)

Originally posted by SuperiorEd
More is produced by the information in an acorn seed than is contained within. This is a million times efficiency. Life reproduces and uses energy to do this. Yes. This is the way open and closed systems work. Cycles of nature are users of energy. A car takes a person from there to there and uses x amount of fuel to accomplish the work done. It is inefficient. The car goes in a landfill and is not biodegradable. Even less efficient. The car cannot produce another of its kind. Less again.

I should have realized that your arguments boil down to Dembski's specified complexity when you linked the "No Free Lunch" entry on Wikipedia. The information produces nothing without energy and matter as inputs. The things you're trying to apply the rules of closed system to are not closed systems. Is your argument seriously that because an acorn contains "information" and can produce something thousands of times its mass, it must be operating at 100% efficiency? We can measure the energy and mass input for the chemical reactions that the acorn uses to grow into a tree. We can measure the efficiency of those chemical reactions, and they're not even close to 100%. And your second argument is that somehow self-replication implies efficiency beyond 100%. Again, the oak tree requires mass and energy input to build those acorns. And, even if you wanted to try and invoke the "law of conservation of energy", which is a well-debunked concept of Dembski's specified complexity, there is no new information being created, only information being copied. You're trying to apply the concepts of closed systems to things that aren't closed systems.

A living organism reverses all that inefficiency. Also, it copies itself over and over again in a cycle that renews the energy used. Not only that, it provides usefulness to other life in the form of food, habitat, raw materials and tools. The uses are endless actually. Nothing can or is wasted. What is not used is absorbed by another. 100% efficiency.

See above. Your calculations of efficiency aren't taking into account the resources required by the living organism to produce copies of itself. And nothing is wasted? Easily refuted - heat loss as a result of metabolic biochemical reactions. Or are you going to move the goalposts when it comes to defining the "closed" system of the living organism to include its surrounding environment?

I notice that you were about to say that nature is in a chain of energy usage and that energy is lost along the way in many forms. Good point. Nature is still 100% efficient because it is by degree. Nothing else is as efficient so nature wins the prize and is the degree of efficiency that we measure by as the benchmark. Technically, you may be right in a few minutes when you reply with energy loss, but that does not tell the story of what this efficiency says about the purpose in nature itself. Also, do not discount the value of the information produced. This is the real fruit of the efforts that nature goes through to produce life by instruction. Who instructs again? Do you have an answer? Open wide and dig deep. You will wake to the truth. The fact that you can is your proof of God.

I think "Nature is still 100% efficient because it is by degree" is the most meaningless string of words I've read on this thread so far. Trying to claim that because nature is more efficient than man-made processes, which isn't even true in every instance, it's 100% efficient (or more) is like saying that if two people ran a marathon, the person who won finished the race instantaneously because they were faster than the other person. Ludicrous.