Is there any better argument against intelligent design that the human mouth/teeth?

page: 19
21
<< 16  17  18    20  21  22 >>

log in

join

posted on Feb, 25 2013 @ 11:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by SplitInfinity

Originally posted by pyramid head
reply to post by PrivateSi
 


You do realize evolution is a belief right?
Per the great Dr. Horowitz at Yale, the chances of life occurring spontaneously is about 1/10362( after 1/1050 the likelihood of occurrence is never).

Despite endless funding and research no one has been able to create primordial conditions.

Sounds like a belief to me. Sounds a little fanatical considering how unlikely evolution is the reason for the creation of life on earth, that one would completely dismiss Intelligent design. Sounds shall I say... closed minded and un-scientific.





Those numbers od probability pertain to material and conditions present.

When Materials and Conditions are present as they were on Earth over a Billion Years ago...the Probability of the Creation of LIFE goes up to 100%

You have to be careful with percentages and probabilities as their numerical values are always specific to the Conditions and Materials present at the time. This is even true for the possible outcome of events.

As example...A person is driving to work...if the enviromental conditions are 70 degree's F. and Sunny with a dry road while driving a New Car in perfect condition and light traffic of all experienced drivers on that road...there is a HIGH Probability that person will have a safe uneventful drive to work.

Same scenario...change one condition...rain....Probability for an event occuring that will cause the drivers vehicle to crash goes up greatly...add a second condition...phone call from Mom...Probability goes up even higher...add a material...cut up tree branches fallen off the back of a truck in the road...that Probability for a crash keeps going up....EVENTUALLY....given enough time...and given enough of the specific conditions and materials that are conductive to that driver crashing the car...Probability will reach 100%.

This is the same principle for the Quantum Evolutionary development of LIFE. Given the proper Conditions and Materials and given enough time...LIFE will manifest. This concept is a basic tenet of Logic.

Split Infinity


Understand probability very well. The study Dr Horowitz did involved focused on the complexity of proteins(i.e several proteins finding each other at the same time) not conditions for the basis of the conclusion. Most evolutionary science focuses(or should) on this field(proteins). Conditions are not the difficulty involved in explaining the origins of life, the development and function of cells are.

My logic was pretty sound, the study said 1/10362 were the chances, 1/1015 would take 15 billion years. I believe on a generous estimate the earth is around 5 billion years old. There is no "given enough time", mathematically its a not possible or more...rather unlikely..




posted on Feb, 25 2013 @ 11:24 PM
link   
reply to post by pyramid head
 



Evolution does not exist without "spontaneous generation".

Evolution does not involve the origin of life, only the manner in which life changes.


Its funny how you are not searching for "the origins of life" when your reasoning is mathematically impossible, but then you want to simply dismiss other explanations(like ID) like your some scientific authority on the origins of life. Your are not even putting together coherent thoughts.

Evolution is about the diversity of life, not the origin of life.

BTW, the name is Morowitz, not Horowitz.

Morowitz is mentioned int he wikipedia

Morowitz's book Energy Flow in Biology laid out his central thesis that "the energy that flows through a system acts to organize that system,"[11] an insight later quoted on the inside front cover of The Last Whole Earth Catalog. He has long been a vigorous proponent of the view that life on earth emerged deterministically from the laws of chemistry and physics,[12] and so believes it highly probable that life exists widely in the universe.[4][13]

In 1983, he testified at "McLean v. Arkansas" (nicknamed "Scopes II") that creationism has no scientific basis and so should not be taught as science in public schools.[14]

en.wikipedia.org...

Morowitz states in his calculations that pure random does not make sense. That is not the same as claiming that something designed life. Rather he claims that the laws of chemistry and physics tend towards the creation of life.



posted on Feb, 25 2013 @ 11:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by Grimpachi
It is no wonder there have been wars fought over whose god is the true god. I just wish he would take the time and tell everyone so we could avoid the useless bloodshed. Surely an omnipotent being could do something so trivial unless there isn’t one.

Its part of the condition that we humans live under from having chosen the law over grace. We are subject to the rule of this world, with all that entails... Again... Pain, death, disease, war, strife, greed, etc...

God has given us an out for this, but no man is forced to accept it. As such we still have to deal with mans petty bickering and greed until God finally puts an end to it. There is a timing to when this should happen, and it should not be too far off. Everything in Gods plan seems to revolve around 7's.


Originally posted by Grimpachi
Sorry I don’t mean to ramble but the moment I think about the entire concept of gods the entire premise just seems overwhelmingly dumb to me. I was just reading scientific American today and they have dated flaked stone tools back to over 2.6 million years ago yet there are still those that would have us believe the earth is less than 10,000 years old because an old book says so.

Even as a Christian I don't believe that the Earth is 10,000 years old, and I can point to biblical verses that tend to agree with this idea. I believe that the Earth has been created and destroyed multiple times, which also seems to agree with the fossil records, as well as the beliefs of many ancient religions. This is the final repetition and started around the time you mention.

It may additionally interest you that some pseudepigraphal writings expound on the idea that not only was there stuff here before “Adam and Eve”, but also that the world in some way belonged to and still belongs to Satan. That one of the reasons that he has such an issue with us humans is because we are on his “earth”.



posted on Feb, 25 2013 @ 11:30 PM
link   
reply to post by pyramid head
 


I have actually read abit about his theories before as well as his calculations but not this one specifically.

I find his logic and basis for such calculations shaky at best.

It is a fact that given enough time...as long as materials and conditions exist...probability increases to 100% for a specific reaction.

I find that when reading his theories that it would seem that he does not account for the reality that it took about the same amount of time for our Universe to exist as it does...so he is claiming that it would take 15 Billion Years for LIFE to develop....doesn't seem logical.

Split Infinity



posted on Feb, 25 2013 @ 11:39 PM
link   
reply to post by pyramid head
 


Straw man followed up by ad hominem yeah you are showing that education off. You should ask for a refund. I gave you the correct term I do not care if you use it or not we both know you are grasping at straws.


Here is a mathematical question for you.

If god created everything in the universe where does that leave god? Tell me how that is mathematically possible.

I doubt you will answer you didn’t even answer my other question of the origin of your mythological creator.

Somehow creationists have a problem with spontaneous life but they have no problem with spontaneous gods. Freaking hypocrites you are.

BTW here is the link for Abiogenesis


Abiogenesis

It is pretty sad that you will not even admit you didn’t know the difference. I think that is a trait of creationists they seem to ignore the definitions of things I have seen the same tactic used in many threads like this and it fails each time.

Hey if you want to believe in a spaghetti monster go for it but do not have the audacity to claim that is a rational explanation. It is farfetched oga boga nonsense. I think your type does it from fear of the unknown. Tell me do you believe in Thor God of Thunder as well? How about Zeus or how about Ra or would that be crazy? If you do believe in them at least you are consistent.

Try this one out I will agree god exists only if you agree that I am god it holds just as much truth as your position. Probably more.
edit on 25-2-2013 by Grimpachi because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 25 2013 @ 11:55 PM
link   
reply to post by defcon5
 


When you got to Satan that was pretty much it for me. Satan is a fabrication by the church furthermore if there is such a thing as god you will have to admit you may be following the wrong one. Abrahamic religion is far from being the original religion as far as I am concerned it is a mix and match hodge podge of older religions and there is evidence that supports that. I am not going to waste my time believing in something thought up by a bunch of sheep herders to keep their people in line. If you are going to claim a god why don’t you at least go back to the earlier ones.

You say we humans chose the law over grace sorry I am not biting. I never chose any such thing and neither did my ancestors. By your own account you don’t believe the earth age is what the bible claims it to be. You are just picking and choosing what suits you if you are going to do that why do it at all.

Religion falls flat in to many aspects you might as well believe we are riding on a giant turtles back.

The only religion I even consider is Buddhism but it is the philosophe more than anything. I also believe that the character in the bible that describes Jesus is an interpretation of Buddha and his teachings.



posted on Feb, 26 2013 @ 12:05 AM
link   
reply to post by Grimpachi
 


Although I am in agreement with most of what you say...I would like to point out that if you follow the Scientific Method of determining what is and what is not....you have to agree with the fact that there is not a 100% Probability proving that a GOD does not exist.

Now this does not mean one does and it is most likely it doesn't. But to look at things in the way the known proof allows them to be...you must accept this reality. This reality of course has nothing to do with ones belief.

I agree that Creationists tend to use statements of "proof" that are not proof at all but ideas generated by their Religious Texts. But to make the mistake of stating something is a reality that goes aginst the probability...no matter how crazy it may sound...is just doing what they do.

Split Infinity



posted on Feb, 26 2013 @ 12:26 AM
link   
What is even the point of this post? To pick an argument with a "creationist"? If they do not believe in the theory of evolution they will not change their mind just because you post a thread about wisdom teeth. Wisdom teeth were needed to replace worn out molars from poor diets and dental hygiene, by the way. It makes sense in either view.



posted on Feb, 26 2013 @ 12:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by SplitInfinity
reply to post by Grimpachi
 


Although I am in agreement with most of what you say...I would like to point out that if you follow the Scientific Method of determining what is and what is not....you have to agree with the fact that there is not a 100% Probability proving that a GOD does not exist.

Now this does not mean one does and it is most likely it doesn't. But to look at things in the way the known proof allows them to be...you must accept this reality. This reality of course has nothing to do with ones belief.

I agree that Creationists tend to use statements of "proof" that are not proof at all but ideas generated by their Religious Texts. But to make the mistake of stating something is a reality that goes aginst the probability...no matter how crazy it may sound...is just doing what they do.

Split Infinity



I am in full agreement with that statement, I think one should keep an open mind regardless of belief.

@ Grim Who says the flying spaghetti monster isn't real? If I pray hard enough he may even bless me with meatballs and hot sausages.....

Also how cool would floating around on a Giant Sea Turtle's back be....... *imagines the experience*



posted on Feb, 26 2013 @ 12:30 AM
link   
reply to post by Grimpachi
 


If this is all so ridiculous to you, how to you explain the pull between good and evil?



posted on Feb, 26 2013 @ 12:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by GoldenOne23
What is even the point of this post? To pick an argument with a "creationist"? If they do not believe in the theory of evolution they will not change their mind just because you post a thread about wisdom teeth. Wisdom teeth were needed to replace worn out molars from poor diets and dental hygiene, by the way. It makes sense in either view.


TBH I really don't know what it is except to debate the point of something that both ways is as of yet unproven.

Existance of "God" vs. nonexistance of "God" I mean......to argue against evolution is kinda silly considering the evidence that it is a real phenomena.



posted on Feb, 26 2013 @ 12:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by Grimpachi
reply to post by pyramid head
 


Straw man followed up by ad hominem yeah you are showing that education off. You should ask for a refund. I gave you the correct term I do not care if you use it or not we both know you are grasping at straws.


Here is a mathematical question for you.

If god created everything in the universe where does that leave god? Tell me how that is mathematically possible.

I doubt you will answer you didn’t even answer my other question of the origin of your mythological creator.

Somehow creationists have a problem with spontaneous life but they have no problem with spontaneous gods. Freaking hypocrites you are.

BTW here is the link for Abiogenesis


Abiogenesis

It is pretty sad that you will not even admit you didn’t know the difference. I think that is a trait of creationists they seem to ignore the definitions of things I have seen the same tactic used in many threads like this and it fails each time.

Hey if you want to believe in a spaghetti monster go for it but do not have the audacity to claim that is a rational explanation. It is farfetched oga boga nonsense. I think your type does it from fear of the unknown. Tell me do you believe in Thor God of Thunder as well? How about Zeus or how about Ra or would that be crazy? If you do believe in them at least you are consistent.

Try this one out I will agree god exists only if you agree that I am god it holds just as much truth as your position. Probably more.
edit on 25-2-2013 by Grimpachi because: (no reason given)


Stop rambling, so its clear you have not taken a biology class, cool, no big deal, simply say you dont understand how the two are related. That's okay well leave that alone. A belief does not have to be mathematically sound, its a belief.

What you are failing to see is that evolution mathematically is an improbable solution to the origin of life. My belief is irrelevant, when evolution is an unlikely solution the next logical step is deliberate life, or intelligent design. Could spontaneous generation be an explanation, sure. But to sit there and say that a mathematically impossible figure is somehow more scientific than a being(omnipotent or ET) is nonsense.

Your stance is simply bred out of narcissism and lack of education. Any true man of science could not rule out intelligent design.



posted on Feb, 26 2013 @ 12:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by GoldenOne23
reply to post by Grimpachi
 


If this is all so ridiculous to you, how to you explain the pull between good and evil?


I don't think one needs to believe in a specific god to recognize that good and evil are opposites like yin and yang.



posted on Feb, 26 2013 @ 12:34 AM
link   
reply to post by GoldenOne23
 


Here is the thing...it's no longer a Theory.

I can understand holding my beliefs until all the evidence is in...but in Evolutions case...it's in.

Split Infinity



posted on Feb, 26 2013 @ 12:36 AM
link   
reply to post by Darkphoenix77
 


This is what I have been trying to say...one must keep an open mind and realize until something is proven one way or the other...or disproven...we just don't yet know.

Split Infinity



posted on Feb, 26 2013 @ 12:36 AM
link   
Everyone is entitled to thier own sets of beliefs, to be fair like I said in my original post some (3 page back I think?), I hope to one day have the consciousness to find out. The universe is full of mysteries that are unexplained.

Edit: I don't really have a "religion" persay, I find fault with all the mainstream ideologies. The closest I can come to placing a label on myself would be Agnostic, although I believe that there is room for all religions and there are truths to be found in all of them.
edit on 26-2-2013 by Darkphoenix77 because: EDIT



posted on Feb, 26 2013 @ 12:38 AM
link   
reply to post by GoldenOne23
 


Excuse me but...what the hell does that mean and what science are you basing such a statement upon?

Split Infinity



posted on Feb, 26 2013 @ 12:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by SplitInfinity
reply to post by Grimpachi
 


Although I am in agreement with most of what you say...I would like to point out that if you follow the Scientific Method of determining what is and what is not....you have to agree with the fact that there is not a 100% Probability proving that a GOD does not exist.




Possibilities abound in this universe far beyond my comprehension however you are mistaken if you think I am trying to prove god does not exist. There is no way for me to prove a negative in such regards. However I can point out that no one has proven one does exist. Since others are making the claim of existence and want me to believe in their god or spaghetti monster they should be the ones to provide the supporting evidence.



posted on Feb, 26 2013 @ 12:43 AM
link   
reply to post by Grimpachi
 


I am not doing that at all. I personally doubt highly that a GOD exists. I am just saying that until the probability drops to ZERO% in that a GOD exists...we can't say for certain one does not.

Split Infinity



posted on Feb, 26 2013 @ 12:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by Grimpachi

Originally posted by SplitInfinity
reply to post by Grimpachi
 


Although I am in agreement with most of what you say...I would like to point out that if you follow the Scientific Method of determining what is and what is not....you have to agree with the fact that there is not a 100% Probability proving that a GOD does not exist.




Possibilities abound in this universe far beyond my comprehension however you are mistaken if you think I am trying to prove god does not exist. There is no way for me to prove a negative in such regards. However I can point out that no one has proven one does exist. Since others are making the claim of existence and want me to believe in their god or spaghetti monster they should be the ones to provide the supporting evidence.


I'd even go a step further and say that things exist beyond anyone's ability to define or comprehend. When you have your own unexplainable experience it tends to lend a whole new perspective on things....





new topics
top topics
 
21
<< 16  17  18    20  21  22 >>

log in

join