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.
Originally posted by TheJackelantern
And he didn't bother to address my posts on information science and why is belief is irrelevant since a conscious state can't exist without cause. This forum should have ban rules for such level of intentional and repetitive dishonesty.. (this being my own opinion of course).. He's basically spamming the fora with logical fallacies at this point, and that includes quote mining people out of context since he didn't even bother to read any academic material to begin with to understand how baseless his arguments from ignorance are. It's just spammed intentional ignorance at this point, and I think he feeds of the negative reactions as some sort of fulfilling amusement. Hence, can we consider him internet trolling at this point?
I don't even think he grasps that he's the one making an unsupported claim, and when making such assertions and claims, he needs to prove them vs cast magic assertion that it's a magical fact for a pseudo of winning a debate. He's provided nothing of value, or worthy of academic consideration.edit on 26-7-2012 by TheJackelantern because: (no reason given)edit on 26-7-2012 by TheJackelantern because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by Barcs
reply to post by edmc^2
After repeating the same fallacies page after page after page, ridicule is pretty much the only option left. You won't listen to rational arguments and scientific facts, you won't offer counterpoints that are related to the posts you respond to, and you won't provide factual evidence to back up your claims. You respond to questions with unrelated questions and fallacies. Essentially, that is plugging your ears and going "LALALALALA!". XYZ wasn't posting that to prove you wrong. If he did, it would be a fallacy. He posted it, because it's true and you still won't admit that you don't know the answer to origin of DNA. Personally, I just don't understand how you can be so critical of science experiments, dismissing them because of insignificant details, but you throw all reasoning out the window when it comes to believing in god. Philosophy and word games don't trump science.edit on 26-7-2012 by Barcs because: (no reason given)
Personally, I just don't understand how you can be so critical of science experiments, dismissing them because of insignificant details, but you throw all reasoning out the window when it comes to believing in god. Philosophy and word games don't trump science.
Heck I even use science to question my belief - the existence of an Intelligent Being who created LIFE.
If science can prove that Intelligent Life forms can't arise from non-living materials without Intelligence then IT MUST BE TRUE! Correct?
But the fact is science have already proven time and time again the opposite of the claim.
SO what can we conclude from it?
Life or to be precise Intelligent Life MUST be a product of an Intelligent Creator.
Of course to you this is nonsense because you've already concluded that there's no other alternative but to believe without an ounce of evidence - even by the scientific methods you claim uphold - that intelligent life is a product of blind chance.
But like I said - if it makes you happy then more power to you...
you mean the "I Don't Know - We Don't Know" responses?
you mean your ridiculous pathetic responses?
These are the what you call "excellent intelligent responses"? If so, then you got nothing substantial to offer.
Why you can't even answer a simple question: who are the Intelligent people correspond to in the abiogenesis world?
No wonder your only response is a childish ridicule.
Like I said - study up more before you engage in a adult conversation, maybe by then you can present your side intelligently.
Originally posted by totallackey
reply to post by TheJackelantern
I know enough about the subject to tell you that spontaneous generation of life is a DEAD issue...I also know you can set your experiment up and have it...get back to us with the result in a couple of billion years or so...
Originally posted by totallackey
reply to post by Barcs
Science has performed experiment after experiment concerning abiogenesis. Not one of them has resulted in LIFE from NOTHING! And they never will. Because it is impossible.
By the way, you show me a single post where I have come down on one side or another...You sure group people pretty fast and make assumptions...
Denial (also called abnegation) is a defense mechanism postulated by Sigmund Freud, in which a person is faced with a fact that is too uncomfortable to accept and rejects it instead, insisting that it is not true despite what may be overwhelming evidence.[1] The subject may use:
simple denial: deny the reality of the unpleasant fact altogether
By the way, you show me a single post where I have come down on one side or another
Originally posted by totallackey
reply to post by Barcs
Science has performed experiment after experiment concerning abiogenesis. Not one of them has resulted in LIFE from NOTHING! And they never will. Because it is impossible.
By the way, you show me a single post where I have come down on one side or another...You sure group people pretty fast and make assumptions...
Originally posted by TheJackelantern
The idiot in that video doesn't comprehend that information involves data, and data is bits of information.. That video is such an utter fail, and proves it self wrong and your argument wrong within the first minute..
Dr. Don Johnson has earned Ph.D.s in both Computer & Information Sciences from the University of Minnesota and in Chemistry from Michigan State University. He was a senior research scientist for 10 years in pharmaceutical and medical/scientific instrument fields, served as president and technical expert in an independent computer consulting firm for many years, and taught 20 years in universities in Wisconsin, Minnesota, California, and Europe. Don is currently a speaker, consultant and author. His latest book Programming of Life examines the information of life and was the basis for the video Programming of Life.
Prescriptive Information is much more than intuitive semantic information. PI requires anticipation, "choice with intent," and the diligent pursuit of Aristotle's "final function" at successive bona fide decision nodes. PI either instructs or directly produces formal function at its destination through the use of controls, not mere constraints. Once again, PI either tells us what choices to make, or it is a recordation of wise choices already made. David Abel
Information science should not be confused with information theory, the study of a particular mathematical concept of information
Information is the central theme of several new sciences, which emerged in the 1940s, including Shannon's (1949) Information Theory and Wiener's (1948) Cybernetics. Wiener (1948, p. 155) stated also: "information is information not matter or energy". This aphorism suggests that information should be considered along with matter and energy as the third constituent part of the Universe; information is carried by matter or by energy.
We can outline a hierarchy to distinguish between data, information, knowledge, and wisdom. Data are sensations, facts, figures, etc, that are independent and atomic in nature. Information can be described alternately as organized data, the patterns that exist in data, or the underlying meaning of interrelated pieces of data. Knowledge is the ability to comprehend and use information. Wisdom is the ability to make the best use of knowledge.
Prescriptive Information is much more than intuitive semantic information. PI requires anticipation, "choice with intent," and the diligent pursuit of Aristotle's "final function" at successive bona fide decision nodes. PI either instructs or directly produces formal function at its destination through the use of controls, not mere constraints. Once again, PI either tells us what choices to make, or it is a recordation of wise choices already made. David Abel
You have confused information theory, with information science, No empirical science has ever shown formal symbolic(non physical) functional code to emerge from natural forces, electromagnetic or any other. If I'm wrong please supply the citation.
You have confused information theory, with information science, No empirical science has ever shown formal symbolic(non physical) functional code to emerge from natural forces, electromagnetic or any other. If I'm wrong please supply the citation.
Information is the central theme of several new sciences, which emerged in the 1940s, including Shannon's (1949) Information Theory and Wiener's (1948) Cybernetics. Wiener (1948, p. 155) stated also: "information is information not matter or energy". This aphorism suggests that information should be considered along with matter and energy as the third constituent part of the Universe; information is carried by matter or by energy.
We can outline a hierarchy to distinguish between data, information, knowledge, and wisdom. Data are sensations, facts, figures, etc, that are independent and atomic in nature. Information can be described alternately as organized data, the patterns that exist in data, or the underlying meaning of interrelated pieces of data. Knowledge is the ability to comprehend and use information. Wisdom is the ability to make the best use of knowledge.
en.wikipedia.org...
1) "Information is any type of sensory input and output or source to inquiry."
2) "Information as a concept has many meanings, from everyday usage to technical settings. The concept of information is closely related to notions of constraint, communication, control, data, form, instruction, knowledge, meaning, mental stimulus, pattern, energy, perception, matter, and representation."
3) "Information is any type of pattern that influences the formation or transformation of other patterns. In this sense, there is no need for a conscious mind to perceive, much less appreciate the pattern.
** Systems theory at times seems to refer to information in this sense, assuming information does not necessarily involve any conscious mind, and patterns circulating (due to feedback) in the system can be called information. In other words, it can be said that information in this sense is something potentially perceived as representation, though not created or presented for that purpose. For example, Gregory Bateson defines "information" as a "difference that makes a difference".
**** In 2003, J. D. Bekenstein claimed there is a growing trend in physics to define the physical world as being made of information itself (and thus information is defined in this way) (see Digital physics). Information has a well defined meaning in physics. Examples of this include the phenomenon of quantum entanglement where particles can interact without reference to their separation or the speed of light. Information itself cannot travel faster than light even if the information is transmitted indirectly. This could lead to the fact that all attempts at physically observing a particle with an "entangled" relationship to another are slowed down, even though the particles are not connected in any other way other than by the information they carry.
** Maxwell's demon thought experiment. In this experiment, a direct relationship between information and another physical property, entropy, is demonstrated. A consequence is that it is impossible to destroy information without increasing the entropy of a system; in practical terms this often means generating heat. The direct outcome is that information is interchangeable with energy. Thus, in the study of logic gates, the theoretical lower bound of thermal energy released by an AND gate is higher than for the NOT gate (because information is destroyed in an AND gate and simply converted in a NOT gate). Physical information is of particular importance in the theory of quantum computers.