Clear evidence of Intelligent Design

a reply to: cooperton

Self assembly happens all day long. No supernatural intervention required.

originally posted by: cooperton

originally posted by: Phantom423

Self assembly happens all day long.

Not with DNA/RNA monomer polymerization. You specifically said that these DNA sequences come together through self-assembly, but that's the opposite of the truth. They need to be catalyzed by specific enzymes in biological organisms. They do not self-assemble. "This has been proven over and over - of course, you don't care about the science. That would ruin your agenda."

originally posted by: TzarChasm
It's always the same people endeavoring to deliver the same message, every single time this topic comes up. It suggests to me that all parties are equally insecure, or equally sustained in their respective philosophies. No one here has more blessing or burden than anyone else, so whatever it is we have accomplished with our fragile and finite resources, no rewards have been dispensed to one objector or the other. A curious absence of validation for such an enduring conflict. Almost as if there's no prize to be won regardless. And yet, we persist.

If atheists are right then it doesn't matter, if theists are right then it does matter. The paradox of nihilism is that, according to its own precepts, there's no point in even expressing your opinion

Good post.

Phantom's arguments has been shot down so many times, but he keeps making them like a broken record.

Tzar doesn't realize he's on Above Top Secret Forums. He's basically saying he doesn't want people to post threads he doesn't agree with yet he keeps commenting on these threads he's complaining about with inane commments that have nothing to do with the thread. That sounds insecure.

originally posted by: neoholographic

Phantom's arguments has been shot down so many times, but he keeps making them like a broken record.

I think phantom might be a bot, but even bots learn. I wouldn't be so incessant if she wasn't so scathingly arrogant in her wrongful claims. Since DNA and RNA monomers don't self-assemble into chains in water, this is pretty much a nail in the coffin for abiogenesis. Belief in abiogenesis is essentially disbelief in proven biochemical laws. The epitome of science denial.

originally posted by: Phantom423
a reply to: cooperton

Self assembly happens all day long. No supernatural intervention required.

Not for RNA and DNA strains. It's the opposite. This is why RNA strands break down so quickly, it's because the spontaneous reaction is degradation, not synthesis. Look at what is required to catalyze the formation of DNA strands:

the process of DNA synthesis

Again, if this process were to happen spontaneously without enzymatic control there would be random growths of RNA and DNA in nature, which wouldn't allow biological life to persists. Imagine opening up someone's coffin after 100 years and there's just a massive clump of DNA sitting there. That's the equivalent to your claim.

Your inability to admit you're wrong is exemplary of why science struggles to progress.

a reply to: cooperton

Self assembly happens all day long. No supernatural intervention required.

originally posted by: cooperton

originally posted by: Phantom423

Self assembly happens all day long.

Not with DNA/RNA monomer polymerization. You specifically said that these DNA sequences come together through self-assembly, but that's the opposite of the truth. They need to be catalyzed by specific enzymes in biological organisms. They do not self-assemble. "This has been proven over and over - of course, you don't care about the science. That would ruin your agenda."

originally posted by: TzarChasm
It's always the same people endeavoring to deliver the same message, every single time this topic comes up. It suggests to me that all parties are equally insecure, or equally sustained in their respective philosophies. No one here has more blessing or burden than anyone else, so whatever it is we have accomplished with our fragile and finite resources, no rewards have been dispensed to one objector or the other. A curious absence of validation for such an enduring conflict. Almost as if there's no prize to be won regardless. And yet, we persist.

If atheists are right then it doesn't matter, if theists are right then it does matter. The paradox of nihilism is that, according to its own precepts, there's no point in even expressing your opinion

Some peculiar neurochemical gratification is my reward for the occasional mental exercise. What's your reward?

originally posted by: TzarChasm

Some peculiar neurochemical gratification is my reward for the occasional mental exercise. What's your reward?

Sharing hope that there is enduring purpose in our life and after it by demonstrating the inevitability of an intelligent designer. I feel good neurofeedback too in the process.

Also fun to see the opposing debater turn into a literal broken record

a reply to: cooperton


Self assembly happens all day long. No supernatural intervention required.

a reply to: cooperton

When you're on your deathbed and, after having spent thousands of hours trying, you discover you've converted 0 souls to your cult. How will you feel then?

a reply to: TerraLiga

What makes you think he will die in his deathbed?

originally posted by: Phantom423
a reply to: cooperton

Self assembly happens all day long. No supernatural intervention required.

professor fred hoyle. cosmologist. no random forces . sir doyle

There is a coherent plan in the universe, though I don't know what it's a plan for.

Fred Hoyle

this is interesting. go to the 50 min mark.
multiverse .

a reply to: sarahvital

Hoyle is entitled to his opinion. The mathematics don't agree with him. The universe is self organized. If it wasn't it wouldn't be here and we wouldn't be here. Self assembly is integral to the organization of the universe. Every theory of origin of the universe DOES NOT require a supernatural intervention - doesn't matter whether it's the Big Bang theory, inflation or whatever.

The idea that a supernatural wand is required is founded on ignorance. It's an attempt to change the discussion to something that can't be analyzed or proved. Physics and science in general say NOTHING about a god or supernatural beings - not the existence or lack thereof. That's because there's nothing to analyze or take into the lab. It's simply speculation with no evidence. That's not science. It's bull sheeeeet. And Coop and Neo are full of it.

There are lots of theories about a multi universe. Hugh Everett was the first to publish about the idea. But it will always remain a theory because there's no way to access a multi verse and, therefore, to prove that it exists. The video suggest that a lot of scientists buy into it. Well, they don't buy into it. They examine the mathematics and try to draw conclusions. Sean Carroll is a multi verse enthusiast. But he'll be the first to admit that proof is impossible. To date, no definitive conclusion has been put forth primarily because there's no way to prove it in the lab. Theories are only as good as their proof. If you can take your theory to the LHC and get some positive results, you may have something. But I seriously doubt that will ever happen with the multi verse theory. So in my opinion, it's a waste of time and energy. Makes a good story though.

There's a difference between science which can be verified and bs that has no basis in reality. Cooperton and Neowhatever are fixed on a false agenda. But neither has any foundation in science and simply use cut and paste frenzies to make their points. Science DOES NOT work that way. If you have nothing to take into the lab and no mathematics to back it up, then you have nothing.

originally posted by: Phantom423

Cooperton and Neowhatever are fixed on a false agenda. But neither has any foundation in science

Lol will you ever admit that RNA and DNA monomers don’t self-polymerize? It’s ironic because DNA replication is one of the foundations of biology and you refuse to accept one of its most basic tenets simply because it disproves your baseless belief system. A false agenda has to deny science, which is exactly what you’re doing. You try to avoid admitting you’re wrong which is the most anti-science mindset you could have.

originally posted by: TerraLiga
a reply to: cooperton

When you're on your deathbed and, after having spent thousands of hours trying, you discover you've converted 0 souls to your cult. How will you feel then?

I’m simply sharing my research and my own philosophical deduction. I know there are plenty of people out there who are ready to hear the good news that they’re not a mutant accident. Sure there are vehement intelligence-deniers such as yourself that may never believe in intelligence… but any unbiased mind will inevitably realize the vast intelligible nature of our universe.

When I first joined ATS these sorts of intelligent design threads would get no attention, but now look at them.

When you’re on your deathbed facing your self-supposed eternity of non-existence, just know that the God of the universe is still eagerly waiting for all souls to know the truth and it’s never too late to renounce your intelligence-denial.

a reply to: Direne

So what's your take???

You seem to have or think you have some definitive answers you're holding back from the class

What is it you know that everyone else doesn't?

What's your answer to the thread?

originally posted by: Phantom423
a reply to: sarahvital

Hoyle is entitled to his opinion. The mathematics don't agree with him. The universe is self organized. If it wasn't it wouldn't be here and we wouldn't be here. Self assembly is integral to the organization of the universe. Every theory of origin of the universe DOES NOT require a supernatural intervention - doesn't matter whether it's the Big Bang theory, inflation or whatever.

The idea that a supernatural wand is required is founded on ignorance. It's an attempt to change the discussion to something that can't be analyzed or proved. Physics and science in general say NOTHING about a god or supernatural beings - not the existence or lack thereof. That's because there's nothing to analyze or take into the lab. It's simply speculation with no evidence. That's not science. It's bull sheeeeet. And Coop and Neo are full of it.

There are lots of theories about a multi universe. Hugh Everett was the first to publish about the idea. But it will always remain a theory because there's no way to access a multi verse and, therefore, to prove that it exists. The video suggest that a lot of scientists buy into it. Well, they don't buy into it. They examine the mathematics and try to draw conclusions. Sean Carroll is a multi verse enthusiast. But he'll be the first to admit that proof is impossible. To date, no definitive conclusion has been put forth primarily because there's no way to prove it in the lab. Theories are only as good as their proof. If you can take your theory to the LHC and get some positive results, you may have something. But I seriously doubt that will ever happen with the multi verse theory. So in my opinion, it's a waste of time and energy. Makes a good story though.

There's a difference between science which can be verified and bs that has no basis in reality. Cooperton and Neowhatever are fixed on a false agenda. But neither has any foundation in science and simply use cut and paste frenzies to make their points. Science DOES NOT work that way. If you have nothing to take into the lab and no mathematics to back it up, then you have nothing.

yeah.
another opinion.

not that there's anything wrong with that, but you are wrong.

originally posted by: Phantom423
a reply to: cooperton


Self assembly happens all day long. No supernatural intervention required.

so where is the new stuff walking around?

originally posted by: Phantom423
a reply to: sarahvital

You're alive, you idiot. That's where it is. Every cell in your body is replaced every 7 years. And it doesn't require magic wand to do it. Happens all by itself.

sure.

i'm 70,
so why aren't i in a 10 yr old body?

take your dads carburetor apart, seals springs, gaskets, screws, everything
and throw them all in moms dryer.

will it re assemble before you get your ass kicked?

a reply to: The GUT

Are there any true Atheists even left? Hard-science materialists? Do raise your hand if so. I'm hearing a post or two that sound like it but surely that can't be?

Can you define what you mean by "true atheists" and "hard-science materialists"? Do you mean here at ATS or in the world in general?