The origins of information vs. The origin of species

a reply to: TzarChasm

this feels like a bait thread.

Well, most know me better I would hope.

a reply to: randyvs

Why would God give a revelation of the origin of everything to a people who did not have the words or understanding to convey it to us? Why wouldn't he just reveal it to us now when we are fully capable of understanding it?

Not to mention the creation account being factually inaccurate. Light is created before the sun. Plants are created before the sun. God parades the animals in front of Adam and seems disappointed when he does not find an adequate "HELPER". We also know that other myths of the Near East, such as Babylonian myth, filtered through to help create the Genesis account.

It is not about bias Randy, we know these are myths. They still have religious value and literary value, they just aren't scientific.

I'll probably stick around here on ATS for a while, at least until the nostalgia of the good ol' days wears off.

Its a brave thing to suggest to us randyvs: that such everyday thing's to "John and Josie in the street," still hook line and sinker there believe of things in the bible, or worse what they get told in there schools, collages, and universities. I for one understand what you are trying to suggest from the other side of the coin. But from the reality of what is unfolding, as is how many people have stopped going to church over the idea of creationist this past 100 years, and are of believe of U.F.O.s or Aliens, or "S.e.a.l.s!" As I call them possibly existing, as indeed they are suggested in Bible format!

Yes there are truths buried within the realms of many bible's, but they do not come out and say the truth but wrap themselves up in confusion as do so many things for the common man and woman and child.

As in days gone bye and existent, only those privy of secret societies, clubs etc where privileged. thanks to the inter web we can make informed desishions as to what is really going on.

And make no mistake, it will very shortly "for those not yet awake," bite them on the arse big time.

If anything what you have put up is what truthseekers have to deal with as a true sense of reality of sheep. Simply because they cannot reason with the possibility of other truths other than what they have been indoctrinated with since we where not supposed to know.

But thank you graciously for the confrontation of what we are all ultimately up against, understanding the bigger picture! And the truth is ultimately out there!

More to the point, what is your personal perspective on what you posted!

Kind Regards Brett

a reply to: randyvs

Who wouldn't choose the word of God over the evidence
a man could or couldn't find. I see no contest.

But before we all twist reality and dismiss evidence that doesnt fit with the bible, two things need to be proven. God needs to be proven to exist and the bible needs to be proven to be the word of that god.

Until that happens, we cant label bats as birds just because "the bible says so".

a reply to: TRUTHWARRIOR77

An awesome post and right on the money.

My personal perspective is that God is to be trusted despite the lack
of evidence for, or any amount of evidence against. Because the evidence
either way is only from what a human understands. Who knows what happens
to the evidence from Gods point of view. Certainly not myself nor can anyone
convince me they know. I have my own evidence that far out weighs anything
anyone has ever said to me. I love my Father in Heaven.

a reply to: randyvs

But I was talking about understanding different views. As the vid
touches on most of all in the beginning. Why would I need to
question that? That's where my hope lay in a different discussion.
I thought I was clear but, apparently not. So I apologize I guess?

As I mentioned in my earlier reply in this thread, you may have missed it, I would argue that the proponents of evolution here on ATS understand the "different view" of AIG and their ilk amazingly well. We really do. We understand science in general, we understand the facts behind evolution, and we understand that the claims made by AIG regarding evolution bear little to no resemblance to reality. We understand that, in spite of their claims to the contrary, AIG isn't even doing bad science... what they're doing is the opposite of science -- they are clearly working backwards from their conclusion, that Biblical scripture is literally correct, and attempting to force the evidence to fit their already-drawn conclusion. In the words of the gentleman from the video you posted, "creation was supernatural, therefore cannot be understood scientifically."

a reply to: iterationzero

And there is at least a bit of that different conversation
I was hoping for Z. Not a total loss after all.

originally posted by: randyvs
This is about different views.

If by different views you mean correct and false view, I would agree...

You have one scientist who proves that he should know bit or two about age and size of universe among other facts, yet is able to look at world 'through' belief tinted glasses, and just as I said in other topic where you posted this nonsense - you can validate all religions and mythologies as long as you paint your glasses with required belief.

originally posted by: randyvs
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Like I said, such a shame. He clearly knows how to do good science, yet STILL chooses to disregard it when it conflicts with his confirmation biases.

Well thanks for that much shot. Even tho that's not where I wanted to go
with this.

Hey, I'll give props where it is due. If you do good science, then I'm happy. It's when you disregard the scientific method that I have a problem.

originally posted by: randyvs
This is about different views.

Ok sure.

It just so happens that one view is rooted in science and objective verification, while the other contradicts entire fields of science and is based on a complete guess being asserted as fact without any objective evidence whatsoever. This video clearly shows this, as it is another AIG propaganda piece.

Who wouldn't choose the word of God over the evidence
a man could or couldn't find. I see no contest.

One would have to assume ancient myths written by man are true in order to maintain that view. That is a LOT of faith to place in ancient humans that were barely literate. If god was objectively proven and there was no question of his existence and that the bible is his word, then yes, there is no contest. That's just not the case, however, as god has ignored us completely since the bible was written.

Now why do you think that is? Why not at least reach out to the earth and let us know he's still there and which holy book has it right? All powerful, but can't do that basic thing when folks are killing each other on a daily basis based on which version of him they believe in? Sorry I'm just not buying it. Too much science and logic has to be thrown out the door. "God" as depicted in the bible either does not exist, or left a long time ago.

a reply to: Barcs

Between working and thinking over your post so goes the long
delay and I apologize.

One would have to assume ancient myths written by man are true in order to maintain that view. That is a LOT of faith to place in ancient humans that were barely literate.

Ancient myths and barely literate? If you are truly interested in truth
and science. You can not ignore the Bible.



Reason a top of reason exist for scientists to embrace it not discard it.
Anything else seems like prejudiced attitude. And nothing can be further
from the open minded acceptance of knowledge science is supposed to
have on tap.

a reply to: randyvs

You keep banging on about "truth" yet you ignore the mountain of scientific evidence that debunks your fantastical beliefs and swallow whole ridiculous youtube videos simply because they confirm your beliefs.

You are an intellectually dishonest hypocrite.

a reply to: GetHyped

You are an intellectually dishonest hypocrite.

Indeed a harsh indictment, did you watch the vid?
You really should.

originally posted by: randyvs
Ancient myths and barely literate? If you are truly interested in truth
and science. You can not ignore the Bible.

Actually, when something has zero objective evidence to verify it, yes I can ignore it or at least understand that it may not be absolute truth as you believe. Why do you ignore the Truth and science of the Quaran? What about the truth and science of the Egyptian book of the dead? Oh I get it, your book is right while all the others are wrong, despite having no proof whatsoever. Forget scrutiny, just blindly believe this. How open minded of you.

Reason a top of reason exist for scientists to embrace it not discard it.
Anything else seems like prejudiced attitude. And nothing can be further
from the open minded acceptance of knowledge science is supposed to
have on tap.

What reasons are these? Maybe you don't understand what science is? Science is tangible, not based on guess. Sorry I'm not watching a 45 minute youtube video, please list the reasons for me as to why scientists should "embrace" the bible. I'll take a wild guess here that they actually have nothing whatsoever to do with science as usual with creationist videos. Wild guess is a joke in case you didn't notice, because creationists never post facts or info that can be backed up, only facetious youtube videos. Anybody can say anything in a youtube video. Stop using them as sources.

It's funny. Either you accept the bible as absolute literal truth or you are automatically prejudiced and close minded!!! That same attitude is what led to the dark ages. OMG it must be persecution because you don't blindly believe an unverified myth as absolute truth like me! When was the last time you demonstrated your "open mindedness"? You can't even comprehend anything outside of your narrow scope of reality defined by the bible instead of actual science and things that can be verified. That shows the exact opposite of open mindedness.

a reply to: Barcs

Why do you ignore the Truth and science of the Quaran? What about the truth and science of the Egyptian book of the dead? Oh I get it, your book is right while all the others are wrong, despite having no proof whatsoever. Forget scrutiny, just blindly believe this. How open minded of you.

Why do you assume so much?

It's funny. Either you accept the bible as absolute literal truth or you are automatically prejudiced and close minded!!! That same attitude is what led to the dark ages. OMG it must be persecution because you don't blindly believe an unverified myth as absolute truth like me! When was the last time you demonstrated your "open mindedness"? You can't even comprehend anything outside of your narrow scope of reality defined by the bible instead of actual science and things that can be verified. That shows the exact opposite of open mindedness.

Quite a spin.

You didn't even watch the vid did you?

originally posted by: randyvs

This is about different views.

This is not really a different view we all know this view well. Here is truly a different view for your enjoyment..

Last Thursdayism

Last Thursdayism (sometimes Last Tuesdayism or Last Wednesdayism) refers to the idea that the universe may have been created last Thursday, but with the physical appearance of being billions of years old. Under this notion, people's memories, history books, fossils, light already on the way from distant stars, and so forth would all have been formed at the time of creation (last Thursday) in a state that causes them to appear to be older. It forms both a philosophical point about how our observations may not match with "reality" and a reductio ad absurdum of some young-Earth creationist ideas; if the world was created 6000 years ago with the appearance of being made billions of years ago, what stops us simply claiming it was made last Thursday in the same manner?

a reply to: Xtrozero

Would you watch the vid for cripes sakes?

a reply to: randyvs

Lot's of subtle bias in the video.. here is an example.



Should read:

Creation: Belief in intelligent design
Evolution: Belief in non-intelligent design

He talks a lot of about DNA, but in the sense of only 6000 years of DNA evolution, such as with the variants of dogs. He doesn't go into that all life on earth share the same DNA. Chimps are very close to us (within 6 million years) so they are like 99% our DNA, a grape vine still has over 40% of common DNA with us, and so either we are related in some way or God used 40% common DNA to make both of us, and then I guess we are still related.

He talks about short term evolution in dogs, but does not address what will that dog look like in 4 million years, is it still a dog like today?

Evolution is an extremely slow but continued process, it is hard to debate it when he only gives you 6000 years or less window to prove your point.

I also disagree with his view that everything was created perfect in the beginning and only went the direction of less perfect, loosing information after that.

Here is another main issue too... Evolution does not address how life started, only that life evolves, he does suggest that life evolves too with his dog examples, but even when you look at birds the sheer variants out there would take a lot longer to happen than your 6000 years, can't have it both ways, but then the easy fix is God made many more bird variants than dogs in the beginning...hehe

a reply to: Xtrozero

Oh my God brother not the one in the OP!

This video !




I'm so sorry if we got our wires crossed.

originally posted by: randyvs
Oh my God brother not the one in the OP!

I'm confused... This is not the video you started this topic on, the one you asks use to watch and comment on...lol


I need to ask one question: Why does there need to be a God? We humans can not understand a no beginning or end concept, and if there are infinite universes that blink in and out of existence, and ours is one of them why does there need a God to do it all. The old chicken or egg saying always comes into play, even when God is the creator..who created God? If there are infinite universes then there are most likely infinite physics involved in these universes, some might blink in and out of existence in a nano second, ours might last 50 billion years, but in the end we can not understand what is outside of our universe since we are a part of our universe and none other. As example, how does all the matter of our universe come from nothing to start the big bang? It is something we will never be able to explain since what happens outside of our reality, or universe, it is untouchable since we can only be of our reality.

Another problem is in our past we had 100s of Gods to explain everything we could not understand, today we have one to explain all that we do not understand, what makes modern God any different than Odin or Zeus?

Another question: Why are humans any different than anything else in the universe, or any other life form in the universe? We are related to all life on this planet, any other life form is most likely related to all the life on their planet too, All elements are also related to the first element of Hydrogen. Life is also a concept of humans, so I'm sure in the physics of the universe we are chemical compounds that react in a certain way. If I was to pin point something that defines our universe I would say stars, not humans... They were around long before we were and will be round long after us, AND they created all nature elements including us, so I guess stars our our God since they created Carbon....

Lastly, if there is a God, what makes us so special from the unimaginable amount of life out there. I would suggest we are special because we think we are special, nothing more.

We say in the beginning because we can not comprehend a no beginning...

Something we humans do extremely well is correlations, our memory works on correlations, so for the speaker to suggest 6 days is really 6 million million seconds he is rounding everything to fit what he wants to correlate and we can most likely correlate anything to anything, but as the old saying goes correlation does not mean causation, and that is a very important point.