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.
evolution beats creationism 10 to 3 and thats generous
page: 8share:
reply to post by ashanu90
reply to post by ashanu90
Well ashanu90 it's been interesting conversing with you thru this forum and a bit sad that we can't continue the discussion further. But it was educational nonetheless if not fun.
But before I go may I offer you this advice if you are going to read thru the dawkins forum, don't you'll just get a headache and much of the conversation anyway boiled down to - like look at my chest - I can huff and puff. too much technical jargon and unrealistic processes. But it's your choice. At the same time may I also offer you something to read as I appreciate your being of an open mind. The site below might give you something to think about about life itself. Since one of our goal in life is enlightenment then it is also important to know why we are here – that is the purpose of life itself.
I know evolution or for that matter science tried to answer this question – and has came up with different answers but the bible has a simple answer which I think you will find totally different from what the religions of the world believe and teach. In fact majority of religion don't accept it, don't believe it and surprisingly even hated it (thus you might have heard the hatred/prejudice thrown at us). Anyway I don't want to take much of your time so here's the website:
www.watchtower.org...
Are JW's creationist? www.watchtower.org...
Additional topics that you might find interesting: www.watchtower.org...
Again thank you,
edmc^2
reply to post by ashanu90
Well ashanu90 it's been interesting conversing with you thru this forum and a bit sad that we can't continue the discussion further. But it was educational nonetheless if not fun.
But before I go may I offer you this advice if you are going to read thru the dawkins forum, don't you'll just get a headache and much of the conversation anyway boiled down to - like look at my chest - I can huff and puff. too much technical jargon and unrealistic processes. But it's your choice. At the same time may I also offer you something to read as I appreciate your being of an open mind. The site below might give you something to think about about life itself. Since one of our goal in life is enlightenment then it is also important to know why we are here – that is the purpose of life itself.
I know evolution or for that matter science tried to answer this question – and has came up with different answers but the bible has a simple answer which I think you will find totally different from what the religions of the world believe and teach. In fact majority of religion don't accept it, don't believe it and surprisingly even hated it (thus you might have heard the hatred/prejudice thrown at us). Anyway I don't want to take much of your time so here's the website:
www.watchtower.org...
Are JW's creationist? www.watchtower.org...
Additional topics that you might find interesting: www.watchtower.org...
Again thank you,
edmc^2
reply to post by edmc^2
i agree it has been most ineresting conversing with you thank you for the links and your time
i will be sure to look through them sometime
i agree it has been most ineresting conversing with you thank you for the links and your time
i will be sure to look through them sometime
Originally posted by edmc^2
could undirected chemical reactions relying on mere chance create life?
Probably not.
However, we have the benefit of knowing that there is no such thing as "random". This is a creationist canard, a word they jam in where they feel it's inappropriate to use "stupid doodiehead"
edmc, do you recognize the laws of physics? I'm going to assume you do, given the physicist you're draping all over yourself. The universe follows a definable set of patterns and laws, chemicals will always react certain ways in certain conditions, crystals will always arrange in the same way, etc.
So no, life could not arise from "mere chance" - but it could arise from repeatable processes, measurable and predictable interactions, and the like.
The only trouble is, we don't know the specifics. We happened to appear on the earth long after its abiotic era had passed, so we're not even sure exactly what to look for. However, it is more than possible to discover what happened - especially since it's probably still happening.
Woah wait what?
Yup. Unless the process that generated life requires a completely lifeless world (which IS in fact a possibility) then odds are the same processes are going on today. it's just that pre-existing life forms happen to chow down on the proto-life that develops in this way.
You're assuming "random chemical soup" and further assuming it exists in a vacuum. Ain't so.
reply to post by TheWalkingFox
patterns? interesting and sounds somewhat promising, i'll have to look into that after i read some of edmc's links
i'm still not convinced with things of spiritual/religous/superstitious nature but i have to keep an open mind and look at both ends of the spectrum
can you give any links to this thread? thanks for the post
patterns? interesting and sounds somewhat promising, i'll have to look into that after i read some of edmc's links
i'm still not convinced with things of spiritual/religous/superstitious nature but i have to keep an open mind and look at both ends of the spectrum
can you give any links to this thread? thanks for the post
reply to post by nycfrog27
Easy. Here's an experiment you can do at home!
Go to your stove, turn one of the range burners on high. When it's red-hot, hold your hand over it. Don't burn yourself, just hold your hand above it.
Do you feel the warmth? of course you do. This is because your skin, its cells and nerve endings, are detecting the infrared radiation that the burner is giving off. You can repeat this with whatever patch of skin you have doubts about on your body.
A similar experiment is to spend lots of time out in the sun. You tan, right? That's your body sensing ultraviolet radiation and releasing melanin to protect your skin.
Infrared and ultraviolet are both places on the electromagnetic spectrum, and visible light is between them.
The eye started out in a similar way - patches of skin (or cells, rather, since I doubt the first such critters had "skin) that detected electromagnetic wavelengths along what we see as the "visible spectrum." You find these light-detecting "eyespots) in things such as flatworms and even some single-celled protists.
of course, better vision is a good adaptation in a world that is bathed in light, so adaptations that increased the effectiveness of these photosensitive cells were bound to happen. By forming a concave surface, they can focus more, at the cost of dimming the picture. Bivalve mollusks have eyes like this, just simple "light dishes" that let them detect light and motion.
In fact mollusks run the gamut - other bivalves only have light-sensitive spots, nautilus have pinhole eyes, that are basically just sacks lined with photosensitive cells, and squids and octopus have lens eyes, similar to humans.
Speaking of humans, did you know that our retinas are, from an engineering standard, backwards? You would think that the light-sensitive cells in the human eye would face the light, and that the nerves that lead to the brain would be behind them, right? Well, that's not the case. The light-sensitive cells face AWAY from the light, the nerves are splayed over the surface of the retina, and then slip down a hole in the back of the eye, which creates a blind spot. Squid, on the other hand, have a better-designed eye, with the photosensitive cells facing the light, no blind spot, etc.
back to the point, your eye is nothing special. it's just a sack of cells that are specialized towards detecting a particular subspectrum of electromagnetic radiation.
I know you're likely to come back with an argument about how every eye needs to be perfect or it doesn't work, but that's definitely not the case at all - ask anyone with glasses! Some vision is much better than no vision, after all!
Also, there are simply too many varieties of eyes for them to have been anything other than evolved. Did you know spider eyes are very different from insect eyes? Insect eyes are made of keratin, like the rest of their exoskeleton, while spider eyes are made of calcium (I think it's calcium) crystals - as are the eyes of crustaceans. The different form of octopus eyes from human eyes means, despite their similarities, they were each arrived at independently of human eyes. Did you know that birds and many fish are tetrachromatic? That is, they have much better color vision than humans, who are trichromatic - most other mammals are dichromatic, while whales are monochromatic. Mantis shrimp are capable of seeing in duodechromatic color! Weird, huh?
Easy. Here's an experiment you can do at home!
Go to your stove, turn one of the range burners on high. When it's red-hot, hold your hand over it. Don't burn yourself, just hold your hand above it.
Do you feel the warmth? of course you do. This is because your skin, its cells and nerve endings, are detecting the infrared radiation that the burner is giving off. You can repeat this with whatever patch of skin you have doubts about on your body.
A similar experiment is to spend lots of time out in the sun. You tan, right? That's your body sensing ultraviolet radiation and releasing melanin to protect your skin.
Infrared and ultraviolet are both places on the electromagnetic spectrum, and visible light is between them.
The eye started out in a similar way - patches of skin (or cells, rather, since I doubt the first such critters had "skin) that detected electromagnetic wavelengths along what we see as the "visible spectrum." You find these light-detecting "eyespots) in things such as flatworms and even some single-celled protists.
of course, better vision is a good adaptation in a world that is bathed in light, so adaptations that increased the effectiveness of these photosensitive cells were bound to happen. By forming a concave surface, they can focus more, at the cost of dimming the picture. Bivalve mollusks have eyes like this, just simple "light dishes" that let them detect light and motion.
In fact mollusks run the gamut - other bivalves only have light-sensitive spots, nautilus have pinhole eyes, that are basically just sacks lined with photosensitive cells, and squids and octopus have lens eyes, similar to humans.
Speaking of humans, did you know that our retinas are, from an engineering standard, backwards? You would think that the light-sensitive cells in the human eye would face the light, and that the nerves that lead to the brain would be behind them, right? Well, that's not the case. The light-sensitive cells face AWAY from the light, the nerves are splayed over the surface of the retina, and then slip down a hole in the back of the eye, which creates a blind spot. Squid, on the other hand, have a better-designed eye, with the photosensitive cells facing the light, no blind spot, etc.
back to the point, your eye is nothing special. it's just a sack of cells that are specialized towards detecting a particular subspectrum of electromagnetic radiation.
I know you're likely to come back with an argument about how every eye needs to be perfect or it doesn't work, but that's definitely not the case at all - ask anyone with glasses! Some vision is much better than no vision, after all!
Also, there are simply too many varieties of eyes for them to have been anything other than evolved. Did you know spider eyes are very different from insect eyes? Insect eyes are made of keratin, like the rest of their exoskeleton, while spider eyes are made of calcium (I think it's calcium) crystals - as are the eyes of crustaceans. The different form of octopus eyes from human eyes means, despite their similarities, they were each arrived at independently of human eyes. Did you know that birds and many fish are tetrachromatic? That is, they have much better color vision than humans, who are trichromatic - most other mammals are dichromatic, while whales are monochromatic. Mantis shrimp are capable of seeing in duodechromatic color! Weird, huh?
reply to post by TheWalkingFox
wow i knew some of that but wow that's quite intelligent and it makes perfect sense thank you for that post
excellent
wow i knew some of that but wow that's quite intelligent and it makes perfect sense thank you for that post
excellent
reply to post by TheWalkingFox
…nice of you to chime in…I thought the discussion was over…I guess not …so the discussion continues…
First of all let me clarify something so that there’s no confusion, as a Christian JW I’m not what you call a “creationist” for the following reasons:
1) Many creationists believe that the universe and the earth and all life on it were created in six 24-hour days some 10,000 years ago. This, however, is not what the Bible teaches.
2) Creationists have embraced many doctrines that lack support in the Bible. Jehovah’s Witnesses base their religious teachings solely on God’s Word.
3) In some lands the term “creationist” is synonymous with Fundamentalist groups that actively engage in politics. These groups attempt to pressure politicians, judges, and educators into adopting laws and teachings that conform to the creationists’ religious code. Thus, Jehovah’s Witnesses are politically neutral. They respect the right of governments to make and enforce laws. (Romans 13:1-7) However, they take seriously Jesus’ statement that they are “no part of the world.” (John 17:14-16) In their public ministry, they offer people the chance to learn the benefits of living by God’s standards. But they do not violate their Christian neutrality by supporting the efforts of Fundamentalist groups that try to establish civil laws that would force others to adopt Bible standards. Taken from: Are JW's creationist? www.watchtower.org...
Now back to what you said “there is no such thing as "random"… “life could not arise from "mere chance" - Are you admitting then that life came not by accident but by design?
You also said “The universe follows a definable set of patterns and laws”. I totally AGREE! But was this law always existed to govern the ‘patterns” of the universe or did it came by accident since ““there is no such thing as "random"… “ as you put it. How could this happen? Will you please share your knowledge and enlighten me?
In the meantime let me tell you what I learned and came to know from my study/research: that the obvious is the ONLY answer, that it was put in place by someone who knew the laws of the universe. If we use simple good logic I’m sure you will agree with me that
LAW REQUIRES A LAWMAKER.
This is not just based on mere belief or 'faith' but based on scientific observation and study. Being a person of science I’m sure you are aware that the entire universe, from atoms to galaxies, is governed by definite physical laws. There are laws for governing heat, light, sound and gravity, for example. As physicist Stephen W. Hawking said:
“The more we examine the universe, we find it is not arbitrary at all but obeys certain well-defined laws that operate in different areas. It seems very reasonable to suppose that there may be some unifying principles, so that all laws are part of some bigger law.”
Do you think Dr. Hawking is wrong?
Again simple logic:
When we think of laws, we acknowledge that they came from a lawmaking entity. A traffic sign that says “Stop” certainly has behind it some person or group of persons who originated the law. What, then, about the comprehensive laws that govern the material universe? Such brilliantly conceived laws surely bear witness to a supremely intelligent lawmaker. Don’t you agree? I hope so.
[edit on 19-3-2010 by edmc^2]
…nice of you to chime in…I thought the discussion was over…I guess not …so the discussion continues…
First of all let me clarify something so that there’s no confusion, as a Christian JW I’m not what you call a “creationist” for the following reasons:
1) Many creationists believe that the universe and the earth and all life on it were created in six 24-hour days some 10,000 years ago. This, however, is not what the Bible teaches.
2) Creationists have embraced many doctrines that lack support in the Bible. Jehovah’s Witnesses base their religious teachings solely on God’s Word.
3) In some lands the term “creationist” is synonymous with Fundamentalist groups that actively engage in politics. These groups attempt to pressure politicians, judges, and educators into adopting laws and teachings that conform to the creationists’ religious code. Thus, Jehovah’s Witnesses are politically neutral. They respect the right of governments to make and enforce laws. (Romans 13:1-7) However, they take seriously Jesus’ statement that they are “no part of the world.” (John 17:14-16) In their public ministry, they offer people the chance to learn the benefits of living by God’s standards. But they do not violate their Christian neutrality by supporting the efforts of Fundamentalist groups that try to establish civil laws that would force others to adopt Bible standards. Taken from: Are JW's creationist? www.watchtower.org...
Now back to what you said “there is no such thing as "random"… “life could not arise from "mere chance" - Are you admitting then that life came not by accident but by design?
You also said “The universe follows a definable set of patterns and laws”. I totally AGREE! But was this law always existed to govern the ‘patterns” of the universe or did it came by accident since ““there is no such thing as "random"… “ as you put it. How could this happen? Will you please share your knowledge and enlighten me?
In the meantime let me tell you what I learned and came to know from my study/research: that the obvious is the ONLY answer, that it was put in place by someone who knew the laws of the universe. If we use simple good logic I’m sure you will agree with me that
LAW REQUIRES A LAWMAKER.
This is not just based on mere belief or 'faith' but based on scientific observation and study. Being a person of science I’m sure you are aware that the entire universe, from atoms to galaxies, is governed by definite physical laws. There are laws for governing heat, light, sound and gravity, for example. As physicist Stephen W. Hawking said:
“The more we examine the universe, we find it is not arbitrary at all but obeys certain well-defined laws that operate in different areas. It seems very reasonable to suppose that there may be some unifying principles, so that all laws are part of some bigger law.”
Do you think Dr. Hawking is wrong?
Again simple logic:
When we think of laws, we acknowledge that they came from a lawmaking entity. A traffic sign that says “Stop” certainly has behind it some person or group of persons who originated the law. What, then, about the comprehensive laws that govern the material universe? Such brilliantly conceived laws surely bear witness to a supremely intelligent lawmaker. Don’t you agree? I hope so.
[edit on 19-3-2010 by edmc^2]
continuing..
In fact the precision of the laws that govern the universe and its order worried some cosmologist because they are so apparent. Here’s a quote from Science News: “Contemplation of these things disturbs cosmologists because it seems as if such particular and precise conditions could hardly have arisen at random. One way to deal with the question is to say the whole thing was contrived and lay it on Divine Providence.” Of course most proponents of evolution can never and will never accept this (publicly) but no matter how they twist and turn to ignore it, the evidence is overwhelming and keeps insisting - INTELLIGENCE.
How did this Universe came to be? Where did all this matter came from? To quote the famous Carl Sagan, in Cosmos he said
““At the beginning of this universe, there were no galaxies, stars or planets, no life or civilizations.” He refers to the change from that state to the present universe as “the most awesome transformation of matter and energy that we have been privileged to glimpse.”
That is the key to understanding how the universe could have come into existence: It must have involved a transformation of energy and matter. This relationship was verified by Einstein’s famous formula, E=mc^2 (energy equals mass times the speed of light squared). One conclusion that derives from this formula is that matter can be produced from energy, just as tremendous energy can be produced from matter. The atomic bomb proved the latter.
Thus, astrophysicist Josip Kleczek stated: ““Most and possibly all elementary particles may be created by materialization of energy.""
Hence, there is scientific evidence that a source of limitless energy would have the raw material to create the substance of the universe. The Bible writer noted that this source of energy is a living, intelligent personality, saying: “Due to the abundance of dynamic energy, he also being vigorous in power, not one of them [the heavenly bodies] is missing.” Thus, from the Biblical standpoint, this source of boundless energy was behind what Genesis 1:1 describes: “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.”
Something to think about:
A precision watch is a product of an intelligent designer. Is not the far greater precision in the universe the product of a superior, intelligent designer?
In fact the precision of the laws that govern the universe and its order worried some cosmologist because they are so apparent. Here’s a quote from Science News: “Contemplation of these things disturbs cosmologists because it seems as if such particular and precise conditions could hardly have arisen at random. One way to deal with the question is to say the whole thing was contrived and lay it on Divine Providence.” Of course most proponents of evolution can never and will never accept this (publicly) but no matter how they twist and turn to ignore it, the evidence is overwhelming and keeps insisting - INTELLIGENCE.
How did this Universe came to be? Where did all this matter came from? To quote the famous Carl Sagan, in Cosmos he said
““At the beginning of this universe, there were no galaxies, stars or planets, no life or civilizations.” He refers to the change from that state to the present universe as “the most awesome transformation of matter and energy that we have been privileged to glimpse.”
That is the key to understanding how the universe could have come into existence: It must have involved a transformation of energy and matter. This relationship was verified by Einstein’s famous formula, E=mc^2 (energy equals mass times the speed of light squared). One conclusion that derives from this formula is that matter can be produced from energy, just as tremendous energy can be produced from matter. The atomic bomb proved the latter.
Thus, astrophysicist Josip Kleczek stated: ““Most and possibly all elementary particles may be created by materialization of energy.""
Hence, there is scientific evidence that a source of limitless energy would have the raw material to create the substance of the universe. The Bible writer noted that this source of energy is a living, intelligent personality, saying: “Due to the abundance of dynamic energy, he also being vigorous in power, not one of them [the heavenly bodies] is missing.” Thus, from the Biblical standpoint, this source of boundless energy was behind what Genesis 1:1 describes: “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.”
Something to think about:
A precision watch is a product of an intelligent designer. Is not the far greater precision in the universe the product of a superior, intelligent designer?
Originally posted by edmc^2
reply to [url=http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread551296
First of all let me clarify something so that there’s no confusion, as a Christian JW I’m not what you call a “creationist” for the following reasons:
1) Many creationists believe that the universe and the earth and all life on it were created in six 24-hour days some 10,000 years ago. This, however, is not what the Bible teaches.
Those are young-earth creationists. You can be (and apparently you are) a creationist without being one of these guys.
2) Creationists have embraced many doctrines that lack support in the Bible. Jehovah’s Witnesses base their religious teachings solely on God’s Word.
Of course they do. So does every other denomination. So does every other religion. If you're trying to impress me, it's not working.
3) In some lands the term “creationist” is synonymous with Fundamentalist groups that actively engage in politics. These groups attempt to pressure politicians, judges, and educators into adopting laws and teachings that conform to the creationists’ religious code. Thus, Jehovah’s Witnesses are politically neutral. They respect the right of governments to make and enforce laws. (Romans 13:1-7) However, they take seriously Jesus’ statement that they are “no part of the world.” (John 17:14-16) In their public ministry, they offer people the chance to learn the benefits of living by God’s standards. But they do not violate their Christian neutrality by supporting the efforts of Fundamentalist groups that try to establish civil laws that would force others to adopt Bible standards. Taken from: Are JW's creationist? www.watchtower.org...
Do you believe that god created the universe? Then you're a creationist. Your denomination doesn't figure into it.
Now back to what you said “there is no such thing as "random"… “life could not arise from "mere chance" - Are you admitting then that life came not by accident but by design?
No, I'm telling you that it is not an either-or argument. The absence of randomness does not immediately mean the presence of a designer. If I put vinegar and baking soda together, it will always foam. Always. it's predictable. It will never explode, it will never turn to ice, and it will never start singing hte howdy-doody theme song. This does not mean that it is designed, or that the guiding hand of a deity or spirits or angels or devas or demons or the ghost of Carl Sagan is making it happen. It's simply how acids and bases react.
The same logic applies to other chemical and physical reactions; given the same substances and conditions, a reaction will always get the same results.
You also said “The universe follows a definable set of patterns and laws”. I totally AGREE! But was this law always existed to govern the ‘patterns” of the universe or did it came by accident since ““there is no such thing as "random"… “ as you put it. How could this happen? Will you please share your knowledge and enlighten me?
Regrettably, physics and chemistry aren't my strong suits. My knowledge of them is peripheral and mostly restricted to practical applications and their effects in biology.
It would seem that the physical laws of the universe have been in existence across the whole universe since the moment it started.
it seems to me you may as well be asking why a gram weighs a gram, instead of a kilogram.
In the meantime let me tell you what I learned and came to know from my study/research: that the obvious is the ONLY answer, that it was put in place by someone who knew the laws of the universe. If we use simple good logic I’m sure you will agree with me that
LAW REQUIRES A LAWMAKER.
Nice try. Unfortunately the use of the same word does not infer an identical meaning. it's sort of like that other science word that throws creationists, "theory". All a scientific law is, is a universal constant. For instance, 1 + 1 = 2 is a law. No matter where you go in the universe, one and one always equal two.
Are you going to tell me that one plus one doesn't equal three because a diety has declared it so?
This is not just based on mere belief or 'faith' but based on scientific observation and study. Being a person of science I’m sure you are aware that the entire universe, from atoms to galaxies, is governed by definite physical laws. There are laws for governing heat, light, sound and gravity, for example. As physicist Stephen W. Hawking said:
“The more we examine the universe, we find it is not arbitrary at all but obeys certain well-defined laws that operate in different areas. It seems very reasonable to suppose that there may be some unifying principles, so that all laws are part of some bigger law.”
Do you think Dr. Hawking is wrong?
Nope, I don't think he's wrong. I think you're taking his statement and trying to turn it into advocacy for some omnipotent all-knowing supernatural jewish sky-spirit with a thing about foreskins.
Do you disagree that if you proposed your idea to Mr. Hawking, that he would likely laugh at you? I imagine it in my head as "Ha. Ha. Ha. Ha. Ha. Hee. Hee. Ho. Ha."
...Little Hawking humor there.
What he is saying is that there is some conjunctive law between the observable laws of the universe. This is, in short, the "theory of everything." I assure you, "god" is not the answer - ir, on the wild off chance it is, I'd be pretty certain it's not any sort of god you've ever conceived up, much less given worship to.
Again simple logic:
When we think of laws, we acknowledge that they came from a lawmaking entity. A traffic sign that says “Stop” certainly has behind it some person or group of persons who originated the law. What, then, about the comprehensive laws that govern the material universe? Such brilliantly conceived laws surely bear witness to a supremely intelligent lawmaker. Don’t you agree? I hope so.
[edit on 19-3-2010 by edmc^2]
What makes you think they're "brilliant" exactly? it's entirely possible that our universe's laws are like the bargian-bin scraping bootleg laugh track version of the laws that all the other, cooler universes got. we'd never know, but it's wholly possible.
Taking this logic of yours back to biology, I often hear claims of how life MUST be designed because of how "perfect" it is. Sorry, from an engineering standpoint, most life forms are pretty terrible.
Do you defecate? I'm going to assume you do, I hope you don't mind. Do you know how much food gets wasted in our digestive system? we are terrible at getting the most energy out of our meals; herbivores like horses or rabbits are even worse! it takes nearly as much energy for a horse to digest a meal as that meal would provide! This is why working and race horses are fed grains and vitamins and supplements and all this other stuff to give them extra energy for the labor they perform; otherwise they'd starve to death no matter how much they ate.
is that magnificent design? I'd say it's not.
Now let's look at the giraffe's neck. Inside there's a nerve that connects the giraffe's larynx to its brain via the spinal cord. You or I, were we designing a giraffe, would attach this nerve to the rear of the larynx, and plug it into the spinal cord right there in the neck. It's rather intuitive, don't you think? Instead, this nerve attaches to the front of the larynx, travels down the entire length of the neck into the chest, loops under the aorta, then curves back up into the neck, where it joins the spinal cord somewhere just above the shoulders. This same nerve follows the same configuration in every chordate, from fish to humans - giraffes, due to their long necks, just make a better illustrative example.
Another example in mammals are testicles. When you're born, your testicles are high in your abdomen, and descend afterwards. In so doing, they loop over your kidneys. The "tubes" that connect the testicles to the rest of the, ah, apparatus, travel up into your abdomen, around your kidneys, and back down. Same problem with the giraffe's larynx, it's just counter-intuitive.
Taken logically, any creator who would design this stuff is pretty bad at what he does, and can't be called "brilliant" if one of his creations (the one with the loop-de-loop balls and backwards retinas and a tendency towards baldness) can call him out on the design flaws.
[edit on 19-3-2010 by TheWalkingFox]
[edit on 19-3-2010 by TheWalkingFox]
reply to post by ashanu90
Ok ya I'll get right to that.5 minutes tops.
You've already eliminated God , the soul and magic from existence. You think I should be more pleasant. WTF? Anything else you can think of?
Typically all about you.
Walking fox,
she means it to, by the time your finished reading one of her posts you've walked a football field.
Why dosn't the experiment perform by itself?
[edit on 19-3-2010 by randyvs]
i'm still waiting
Ok ya I'll get right to that.5 minutes tops.
You've already eliminated God , the soul and magic from existence. You think I should be more pleasant. WTF? Anything else you can think of?
Typically all about you.
Walking fox,
she means it to, by the time your finished reading one of her posts you've walked a football field.
Easy. Here's an experiment you can do at home!
Why dosn't the experiment perform by itself?
[edit on 19-3-2010 by randyvs]
An omniscient, wholly good being would prevent the occurrence of any intense suffering it could, unless it could not do so without thereby losing some greater good or permitting some evil equally bad or worse.
(Therefore) There does not exist an omnipotent, omniscient, wholly good being.[2] -william L. rowe
Note the underlined. The conclusion william makes is based on his assumption (underlined) and is therefore invalid. -wayaboveitall
Taken logically, any creator who would design this stuff is pretty bad at what he does, and can't be called "brilliant" if one of his creations (the one with the loop-de-loop balls and backwards retinas and a tendency towards baldness) can call him out on the design flaws.
Incredibly arrogant, but intensly funny observation!
[edit on 19-3-2010 by wayaboveitall]
Originally posted by edmc^2
reply to [url=http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread551296
Those are young-earth creationists. You can be (and apparently you are) a creationist without being one of these guys.
Of course they do. So does every other denomination. So does every other religion. If you're trying to impress me, it's not working.
On the contrary, I’m not trying to impress you or anyone else. Just stating what I believe as oppose to other denomination’s belief.
Do you believe that god created the universe? Then you're a creationist. Your denomination doesn't figure into it.
If you put it that way, then I’m one. But at least you now know the difference between the commonly accepted “creationist/fundamentalist” teaching and us.
No, I'm telling you that it is not an either-or argument. The absence of randomness does not immediately mean the presence of a designer. If I put vinegar and baking soda together, it will always foam. Always. it's predictable. It will never explode, it will never turn to ice, and it will never start singing hte howdy-doody theme song. This does not mean that it is designed, or that the guiding hand of a deity or spirits or angels or devas or demons or the ghost of Carl Sagan is making it happen. It's simply how acids and bases react.
The same logic applies to other chemical and physical reactions; given the same substances and conditions, a reaction will always get the same results.
If you don’t mind I’d like analyze this a bit more with Qs. It’s very important because it’s tied to my very first question, so:
The absence of randomness does not immediately mean the presence of a designer.
By “not immediately” are you saying that there’s a possibility of a “designer”?
Is your statement a fact or a theory (of your own making)?
If it’s a fact, are you saying then that the building blocks of life already existed in the universe? And for some unknown process without any intelligent intervention these building blocks of life came together as in a dance and spontaneously formed life as we know it?
If so how did the building blocks of life ‘spontaneously appeared” from nothing and why?
(btw since 1864 nobody so far has disproved Pasteur’s work in regards to spontaneous generation).
Where did this “reaction” happened - did it occurred in outer space before coming down to earth or it occurred right here on earth?
Finally (very important) what are these building blocks of life and how did they combine to form life?
Now here’s my take on your flimsy example, it is a fact that vinegar and baking soda didn’t just come to be. Unless you are claiming they already existed before life. I don’t think so but logic says that a person possessing intelligence discovered or manipulated the substances in them to convert them into their current forms. And of course we can expect the same reaction when mixed because we know what they are. For example we know that this formula C3H8 + 5 O2 3 CO2 + 4 H2O means that the oxidation of propane releases heat and light, and a rapid reaction is an explosion. Now combine C3H5N3O9 into your vinegar/baking soda mixture, what do you think will happen?
Point is - if we break down anything tangible in nature into their subatomic level - we see intelligence and intricate design. That is why we know how to manipulate them and make them useful because we have the capacity of understanding.
Btw, do you recognize this formula: CH3COOH-CHNaO3. Do you think they just came to be? What is the probability of getting the correct covalence bond w/o any intelligent intervention? From this CO2 + 2 NaOH → Na2CO3 + H2O to this Na2CO3 + CO2 + H2O → 2 NaHCO3 ?
cont...
Again the point is, it requires intelligence to understand these things, thus disproving your point that “This does not mean that it is designed.” By having the knowledge of the molecular combination of “acids and bases” thus we know how they will “react” when they are mixed. How much more complex do you think life is in comparison to your substances? Do you know the probability of getting the right molecule combination to form life (at first try, 2nd try..etc)?
Next
Not just “seem” but definitely - because the physical laws were put in place at the start of creation by someone who possesses it. That someone is no other than God.
To quote: Rocket expert Wernher von Braun: “The natural laws of the universe are so precise that we have no difficulty building a spaceship to fly to the moon and can time the flight with the precision of a fraction of a second. These laws must have been set by somebody.” Scientists who want a rocket to orbit the earth, or the moon, must work in harmony with such universal laws if they are to be successful.
I’m not sure if you got my point, anyway I’m just simply stating the simple fact that a ‘Law’ can’t just exist without someone making it and laws require organization and intelligence to put together.
are you referring to circadian math?
I dunno, but I would love to discuss it with him. Imagine asking him what he meant by this:
“It is difficult to discuss the beginning of the universe without mentioning the concept of God. My work on the origin of the universe is on the borderline between science and religion, but I try to stay on the scientific side of the border. It is quite possible that God acts in ways that cannot be described by scientific laws, but in that case, one would just have to go by personal belief." A Brief History of Time
Next you said:
I say that’s your opinion.
Again the point is, it requires intelligence to understand these things, thus disproving your point that “This does not mean that it is designed.” By having the knowledge of the molecular combination of “acids and bases” thus we know how they will “react” when they are mixed. How much more complex do you think life is in comparison to your substances? Do you know the probability of getting the right molecule combination to form life (at first try, 2nd try..etc)?
Next
Regrettably, physics and chemistry aren't my strong suits. My knowledge of them is peripheral and mostly restricted to practical applications and their effects in biology.
It would seem that the physical laws of the universe have been in existence across the whole universe since the moment it started.
Not just “seem” but definitely - because the physical laws were put in place at the start of creation by someone who possesses it. That someone is no other than God.
To quote: Rocket expert Wernher von Braun: “The natural laws of the universe are so precise that we have no difficulty building a spaceship to fly to the moon and can time the flight with the precision of a fraction of a second. These laws must have been set by somebody.” Scientists who want a rocket to orbit the earth, or the moon, must work in harmony with such universal laws if they are to be successful.
Nice try. Unfortunately the use of the same word does not infer an identical meaning. It’s sort of like that other science word that throws creationists, "theory". All a scientific law is a universal constant. For instance, 1 + 1 = 2 is a law. No matter where you go in the universe, one and one always equal two.
I’m not sure if you got my point, anyway I’m just simply stating the simple fact that a ‘Law’ can’t just exist without someone making it and laws require organization and intelligence to put together.
Are you going to tell me that one plus one doesn't equal three because a diety has declared it so?
are you referring to circadian math?
….Do you think Dr. Hawking is wrong?
Nope, I don't think he's wrong. I think you're taking his statement and trying to turn it into advocacy for some omnipotent all-knowing supernatural jewish sky-spirit with a thing about foreskins.
Do you disagree that if you proposed your idea to Mr. Hawking, that he would likely laugh at you? I imagine it in my head as "Ha. Ha. Ha. Ha. Ha. Hee. Hee. Ho. Ha."
...Little Hawking humor there.
I dunno, but I would love to discuss it with him. Imagine asking him what he meant by this:
“It is difficult to discuss the beginning of the universe without mentioning the concept of God. My work on the origin of the universe is on the borderline between science and religion, but I try to stay on the scientific side of the border. It is quite possible that God acts in ways that cannot be described by scientific laws, but in that case, one would just have to go by personal belief." A Brief History of Time
Next you said:
What he is saying is that there is some conjunctive law between the observable laws of the universe. This is, in short, the "theory of everything." I assure you, "god" is not the answer - ir, on the wild off chance it is, I'd be pretty certain it's not any sort of god you've ever conceived up, much less given worship to.
I say that’s your opinion.
Again simple logic:
….? Such brilliantly conceived laws surely bear witness to a supremely intelligent lawmaker. Don’t you agree? I hope so.
[edit on 19-3-2010 by edmc^2]
What makes you think they're "brilliant" exactly? it's entirely possible that our universe's laws are like the bargian-bin scraping bootleg laugh track version of the laws that all the other, cooler universes got. we'd never know, but it's wholly possible.
cont..
I wonder what will people say (quoted below) to you if you were able to tell them that. They would likely laugh at you? I imagine it in my head as "Ha. Ha. Ha. Ha. Ha. Hee. Hee. Ho. Ha."
“Rocket expert Wernher von Braun: “The natural laws of the universe are so precise that we have no difficulty building a spaceship to fly to the moon and can time the flight with the precision of a fraction of a second. These laws must have been set by somebody.” Scientists who want a rocket to orbit the earth, or the moon, must work in harmony with such universal laws if they are to be successful.”
Astrophysicist Alan Lightman noted that scientists “find it mysterious that the universe was created in such a highly ordered condition.” He added that “any successful theory of cosmology should ultimately explain this entropy problem”—why the universe has not become chaotic.
Discover magazine stated: “We perceived the order in surprise, and our cosmologists and physicists continue to find new and astonishing aspects of the order. . . . We used to say it was a miracle, and we still permit ourselves to refer to the whole universe as a marvel.” This orderly structure is acknowledged even in the word commonly used in astronomy to describe the universe—“cosmos.” It is defined in one dictionary as “an orderly harmonious systematic universe.”
Why even the Holy Scriptures has something to say that even a 5 year old child will agree and understand ““Every house is constructed by someone, but he that constructed all things is God.” —Hebrews 3:4.
Yes the universe was founded in brilliance and wisdom. (Proverbs 3:19)
Something to think about:
The discoverer of the “law of gravity,” Sir Isaac Newton, was another who was deeply impressed by the evidence of God’s invisible qualities that are to be seen in His creation. The following account relates how Newton testified to his belief in Almighty God:
Newton once had a skilled mechanic make for him a model of the solar system. Balls representing the planets were geared together so as to move realistically in orbit. One day an atheist friend visited Newton. On seeing the model, he operated it, and exclaimed in admiration, “Who made it?” Newton answered, “Nobody!” The atheist replied, “You must think I am a fool! Of course somebody made it, and he is a genius.” Newton then said to his friend, “This thing is but a puny imitation of a much grander system whose laws you know, and I am not able to convince you that this mere toy is without a designer and maker; yet you profess to believe that the great original from which the design is taken has come into being without either designer or maker!”
Newton’s friend came to acknowledge that the great Designer and Maker of all things is God. Surely we, too, as we look on the marvels of creation about us, in the heavens and on earth, must acknowledge that an all-wise Creator made it all! How thankful we should be that this mighty Creator lovingly placed man here on this earth and that he is deeply interested in us!
Next you said:
I understand why you think that way, why you have a myopic view of nature or for that matter ‘creation’. It is because you perceive things in one dimension. That is, the physical dimension. You can’t see the spiritual side of man or for that matter spiritual dimension the physical universe. I know that you don’t believe, besides our physical needs there’s the spiritual need in each one of us. W/o this spiritual side, a person can’t understand the “why” of things, the purpose of creation, the beauty of being loved, and the beauty of serving the grand Creator. ...
I wonder what will people say (quoted below) to you if you were able to tell them that. They would likely laugh at you? I imagine it in my head as "Ha. Ha. Ha. Ha. Ha. Hee. Hee. Ho. Ha."
“Rocket expert Wernher von Braun: “The natural laws of the universe are so precise that we have no difficulty building a spaceship to fly to the moon and can time the flight with the precision of a fraction of a second. These laws must have been set by somebody.” Scientists who want a rocket to orbit the earth, or the moon, must work in harmony with such universal laws if they are to be successful.”
Astrophysicist Alan Lightman noted that scientists “find it mysterious that the universe was created in such a highly ordered condition.” He added that “any successful theory of cosmology should ultimately explain this entropy problem”—why the universe has not become chaotic.
Discover magazine stated: “We perceived the order in surprise, and our cosmologists and physicists continue to find new and astonishing aspects of the order. . . . We used to say it was a miracle, and we still permit ourselves to refer to the whole universe as a marvel.” This orderly structure is acknowledged even in the word commonly used in astronomy to describe the universe—“cosmos.” It is defined in one dictionary as “an orderly harmonious systematic universe.”
Why even the Holy Scriptures has something to say that even a 5 year old child will agree and understand ““Every house is constructed by someone, but he that constructed all things is God.” —Hebrews 3:4.
Yes the universe was founded in brilliance and wisdom. (Proverbs 3:19)
Something to think about:
The discoverer of the “law of gravity,” Sir Isaac Newton, was another who was deeply impressed by the evidence of God’s invisible qualities that are to be seen in His creation. The following account relates how Newton testified to his belief in Almighty God:
Newton once had a skilled mechanic make for him a model of the solar system. Balls representing the planets were geared together so as to move realistically in orbit. One day an atheist friend visited Newton. On seeing the model, he operated it, and exclaimed in admiration, “Who made it?” Newton answered, “Nobody!” The atheist replied, “You must think I am a fool! Of course somebody made it, and he is a genius.” Newton then said to his friend, “This thing is but a puny imitation of a much grander system whose laws you know, and I am not able to convince you that this mere toy is without a designer and maker; yet you profess to believe that the great original from which the design is taken has come into being without either designer or maker!”
Newton’s friend came to acknowledge that the great Designer and Maker of all things is God. Surely we, too, as we look on the marvels of creation about us, in the heavens and on earth, must acknowledge that an all-wise Creator made it all! How thankful we should be that this mighty Creator lovingly placed man here on this earth and that he is deeply interested in us!
Next you said:
Taking this logic of yours back to biology, I often hear claims of how life MUST be designed because of how "perfect" it is. Sorry, from an engineering standpoint, most life forms are pretty terrible.
I understand why you think that way, why you have a myopic view of nature or for that matter ‘creation’. It is because you perceive things in one dimension. That is, the physical dimension. You can’t see the spiritual side of man or for that matter spiritual dimension the physical universe. I know that you don’t believe, besides our physical needs there’s the spiritual need in each one of us. W/o this spiritual side, a person can’t understand the “why” of things, the purpose of creation, the beauty of being loved, and the beauty of serving the grand Creator. ...
cont...
Thus the physical person sees the physical as mundane, inadequate and unworthy. Why probably, you will also say that the love brought by a puppy is only a chemical reaction.
Now let’s take a look at what you said below, how you ridicule the Creator by implying that “any creator who would design this stuff is pretty bad at what he does” as if you can offer something better. On the contrary it’s the way you see things that makes you what you are – incredibly arrogant as “wayaboveitall” puts it. Since you don’t believe that a divine being created all things, logically then your ridicule comes back to you as you accused and condemn your own belief, your evolution religion as a “pretty bad design”.
As for me, I see creation in wonderful and amazing way. I see the love, power, justice and wisdom. Sure there might be some perceived flaw but that’s because we don’t have the full understanding of it. In time they always get resolved. Whatever imperfections present, in time it will be corrected. In any case let me show you what we can learn in nature/creation if we apply them design and engineering – with an open mind one can appreciate the brilliance and magnificence of creation.
Take this immerging industry - bionics. This copying from living things is so prevalent that it has its own name (this not made up, it’s are real):
Thus one biologist said, “that we’re not the innovators we think we are; we’re merely the repeaters.” Many times, human inventors only repeat what plants and animals have been doing for thousands of years.
Another scientist says that practically all the fundamental areas of human technology “have been opened up and utilized to advantage by living things . . . before the human mind learned to understand and master their functions.” Interestingly, he adds: “In many areas, human technology is still lagging far behind nature.”
Thus the physical person sees the physical as mundane, inadequate and unworthy. Why probably, you will also say that the love brought by a puppy is only a chemical reaction.
Now let’s take a look at what you said below, how you ridicule the Creator by implying that “any creator who would design this stuff is pretty bad at what he does” as if you can offer something better. On the contrary it’s the way you see things that makes you what you are – incredibly arrogant as “wayaboveitall” puts it. Since you don’t believe that a divine being created all things, logically then your ridicule comes back to you as you accused and condemn your own belief, your evolution religion as a “pretty bad design”.
Do you defecate? I'm going to assume you do, I hope you don't mind. Do you know how much food gets wasted in our digestive system? we are terrible at getting the most energy out of our meals; herbivores like horses or rabbits are even worse! it takes nearly as much energy for a horse to digest a meal as that meal would provide! This is why working and race horses are fed grains and vitamins and supplements and all this other stuff to give them extra energy for the labor they perform; otherwise they'd starve to death no matter how much they ate.
is that magnificent design? I'd say it's not.
Now let's look at the giraffe's neck. Inside there's a nerve that connects the giraffe's larynx to its brain via the spinal cord. You or I, were we designing a giraffe, would attach this nerve to the rear of the larynx, and plug it into the spinal cord right there in the neck. It's rather intuitive, don't you think? Instead, this nerve attaches to the front of the larynx, travels down the entire length of the neck into the chest, loops under the aorta, then curves back up into the neck, where it joins the spinal cord somewhere just above the shoulders. This same nerve follows the same configuration in every chordate, from fish to humans - giraffes, due to their long necks, just make a better illustrative example.
Another example in mammals are testicles. When you're born, your testicles are high in your abdomen, and descend afterwards. In so doing, they loop over your kidneys. The "tubes" that connect the testicles to the rest of the, ah, apparatus, travel up into your abdomen, around your kidneys, and back down. Same problem with the giraffe's larynx, it's just counter-intuitive.
Taken logically, any creator who would design this stuff is pretty bad at what he does, and can't be called "brilliant" if one of his creations (the one with the loop-de-loop balls and backwards retinas and a tendency towards baldness) can call him out on the design flaws.
As for me, I see creation in wonderful and amazing way. I see the love, power, justice and wisdom. Sure there might be some perceived flaw but that’s because we don’t have the full understanding of it. In time they always get resolved. Whatever imperfections present, in time it will be corrected. In any case let me show you what we can learn in nature/creation if we apply them design and engineering – with an open mind one can appreciate the brilliance and magnificence of creation.
Take this immerging industry - bionics. This copying from living things is so prevalent that it has its own name (this not made up, it’s are real):
Thus one biologist said, “that we’re not the innovators we think we are; we’re merely the repeaters.” Many times, human inventors only repeat what plants and animals have been doing for thousands of years.
Another scientist says that practically all the fundamental areas of human technology “have been opened up and utilized to advantage by living things . . . before the human mind learned to understand and master their functions.” Interestingly, he adds: “In many areas, human technology is still lagging far behind nature.”
Here are just but a few of bionics
AIR CONDITIONING. Modern technology cools many homes. But long before, termites also cooled theirs, and they still do. Their nest is in the center of a large mound. From it, warm air rises into a network of air ducts near the surface. There stale air diffuses out the porous sides, and fresh cool air seeps in and descends into an air chamber at the bottom of the mound. From there it circulates into the nest. Some mounds have openings at the bottom where fresh air comes in, and in hot weather, water brought up from underground evaporates, thus cooling the air. How do millions of blind workers coordinate their efforts to build such ingeniously designed structures? Biologist Lewis Thomas answers: “The plain fact that they exhibit something like a collective intelligence is a mystery.”
AIRPLANES. The design of airplane wings has benefited over the years from the study of the wings of birds. The curvature of the bird’s wing gives the lift needed to overcome the downward pull of gravity. But when the wing is tilted up too much, there is the danger of stalling. To avoid a stall, the bird has on the leading edges of its wings rows, or flaps, of feathers that pop up as wing tilt increases. These flaps maintain lift by keeping the main airstream from separating from the wing surface.
Still another feature for controlling turbulence and preventing “stalling out” is the alula, a small bunch of feathers that the bird can raise up like a thumb.
At the tips of the wings of both birds and airplanes, eddies form and they produce drag. Birds minimize this in two ways. Some, like swifts and albatross, have long, slender wings with small tips, and this design eliminates most of the eddies. Others, like big hawks and vultures, have broad wings that would make big eddies, but this is avoided when the birds spread out, like fingers, the pinions at the ends of their wings. This changes these blunt ends into several narrow tips that reduce eddies and drag.
Airplane designers have adopted many of these features. The curvature of wings gives lift. Various flaps and projections serve to control airflow or to act as braking devices. Some small planes lessen wing-tip drag by the mounting of flat plates at right angles to the wing surface. Airplane wings, however, still fall short of the engineering marvels found in the wings of birds.
ANTIFREEZE. Humans use glycol in car radiators as antifreeze. But certain microscopic plants use chemically similar glycerol to keep from freezing in Antarctic lakes. It is also found in insects that survive in temperatures of 4 degrees below zero Fahrenheit. There are fish that produce their own antifreeze, enabling them to live in the frigid waters of Antarctica. Some trees survive temperatures of 40 degrees below zero Fahrenheit because they contain “very pure water, without dust or dirt particles upon which ice crystals can form.”4
UNDERWATER BREATHING. People strap tanks of air to their backs and remain under water for up to an hour. Certain water beetles do it more simply and stay under longer. They grab a bubble of air and submerge. The bubble serves as a lung. It takes carbon dioxide from the beetle and diffuses it into the water, and takes oxygen dissolved in the water for the beetle to use.
CLOCKS. Long before people used sundials, clocks in living organisms were keeping accurate time. When the tide is out microscopic plants called diatoms come to the surface of wet beach sand. When the tide comes in the diatoms go down into the sand again. Yet in sand in the laboratory, without any tidal ebb and flow, their clocks still make them come up and go down in time with the tides. Fiddler crabs turn a darker color and come out during low tide, turn pale and retreat to their burrows during high tide. In the laboratory away from the ocean, they still keep time with the changing tide, turning dark and light as the tide ebbs and flows. ..
AIR CONDITIONING. Modern technology cools many homes. But long before, termites also cooled theirs, and they still do. Their nest is in the center of a large mound. From it, warm air rises into a network of air ducts near the surface. There stale air diffuses out the porous sides, and fresh cool air seeps in and descends into an air chamber at the bottom of the mound. From there it circulates into the nest. Some mounds have openings at the bottom where fresh air comes in, and in hot weather, water brought up from underground evaporates, thus cooling the air. How do millions of blind workers coordinate their efforts to build such ingeniously designed structures? Biologist Lewis Thomas answers: “The plain fact that they exhibit something like a collective intelligence is a mystery.”
AIRPLANES. The design of airplane wings has benefited over the years from the study of the wings of birds. The curvature of the bird’s wing gives the lift needed to overcome the downward pull of gravity. But when the wing is tilted up too much, there is the danger of stalling. To avoid a stall, the bird has on the leading edges of its wings rows, or flaps, of feathers that pop up as wing tilt increases. These flaps maintain lift by keeping the main airstream from separating from the wing surface.
Still another feature for controlling turbulence and preventing “stalling out” is the alula, a small bunch of feathers that the bird can raise up like a thumb.
At the tips of the wings of both birds and airplanes, eddies form and they produce drag. Birds minimize this in two ways. Some, like swifts and albatross, have long, slender wings with small tips, and this design eliminates most of the eddies. Others, like big hawks and vultures, have broad wings that would make big eddies, but this is avoided when the birds spread out, like fingers, the pinions at the ends of their wings. This changes these blunt ends into several narrow tips that reduce eddies and drag.
Airplane designers have adopted many of these features. The curvature of wings gives lift. Various flaps and projections serve to control airflow or to act as braking devices. Some small planes lessen wing-tip drag by the mounting of flat plates at right angles to the wing surface. Airplane wings, however, still fall short of the engineering marvels found in the wings of birds.
ANTIFREEZE. Humans use glycol in car radiators as antifreeze. But certain microscopic plants use chemically similar glycerol to keep from freezing in Antarctic lakes. It is also found in insects that survive in temperatures of 4 degrees below zero Fahrenheit. There are fish that produce their own antifreeze, enabling them to live in the frigid waters of Antarctica. Some trees survive temperatures of 40 degrees below zero Fahrenheit because they contain “very pure water, without dust or dirt particles upon which ice crystals can form.”4
UNDERWATER BREATHING. People strap tanks of air to their backs and remain under water for up to an hour. Certain water beetles do it more simply and stay under longer. They grab a bubble of air and submerge. The bubble serves as a lung. It takes carbon dioxide from the beetle and diffuses it into the water, and takes oxygen dissolved in the water for the beetle to use.
CLOCKS. Long before people used sundials, clocks in living organisms were keeping accurate time. When the tide is out microscopic plants called diatoms come to the surface of wet beach sand. When the tide comes in the diatoms go down into the sand again. Yet in sand in the laboratory, without any tidal ebb and flow, their clocks still make them come up and go down in time with the tides. Fiddler crabs turn a darker color and come out during low tide, turn pale and retreat to their burrows during high tide. In the laboratory away from the ocean, they still keep time with the changing tide, turning dark and light as the tide ebbs and flows. ..
Birds can navigate by sun and stars, which change position as time passes. They must have internal clocks to compensate for these changes. (Jeremiah
8:7) From microscopic plants to people, millions of internal clocks are ticking away.
COMPASSES. About the 13th century C.E. men began to use a magnetic needle floating in a bowl of water—a crude compass. But it was nothing new. Bacteria contain strings of magnetite particles just the right size to make a compass. These guide them to their preferred environments. Magnetite has been found in many other organisms —birds, bees, butterflies, dolphins, mollusks and others. Experiments indicate that homing pigeons can return home by sensing the earth’s magnetic field. It is now generally accepted that one of the ways migrating birds find their way is by the magnetic compasses in their heads.
DESALINATION. Men build huge factories to remove salt from seawater. Mangrove trees have roots that suck up seawater, but filter it through membranes that remove the salt. One species of mangrove, Avicennia, using glands on the underside of its leaves, gets rid of the excess salt. Sea birds, such as gulls, pelicans, cormorants, albatross and petrels, drink seawater and by means of glands in their heads remove the excess salt that gets into their blood. Also penguins, sea turtles and sea iguanas drink salt water, removing the excess salt.
ELECTRICITY. Some 500 varieties of electric fish have batteries. The African catfish can produce 350 volts. The giant electric ray of the North Atlantic puts out 50-ampere pulses of 60 volts. Shocks from the South American electric eel have been measured as high as 886 volts. “Eleven different families of fishes are known to include species with electrical organs,” a chemist says.
FARMING. For ages men have tilled the soil and tended livestock. But long before that, leaf-cutting ants were gardeners. For food they grew fungi in a compost they had made from leaves and their droppings. Some ants keep aphids as livestock, milk sugary honeydew from them and even build barns to shelter them. Harvester ants store seeds in underground granaries. (Proverbs 6:6-8) A beetle prunes mimosa trees. Pikas and marmots cut, cure and store hay.
INCUBATORS. Man makes incubators to hatch eggs, but in this he is a latecomer. Sea turtles and some birds lay their eggs in the warm sand for incubation. Other birds will lay their eggs in the warm ashes of volcanoes for hatching. Sometimes alligators will cover their eggs with decaying vegetable matter to produce heat. But in this the male mallee bird is the expert. He digs a big hole, fills it with vegetable matter and covers it with sand. The fermenting vegetation heats the mound, the female mallee bird lays an egg in it weekly for up to six months, and all that time the male checks the temperature by sticking his beak into the mound. By adding or removing sand, even in weather from below freezing to very hot, he keeps his incubator at 92 degrees Fahrenheit.
JET PROPULSION. Today when you fly in a plane you are probably being jet-propelled. Many animals are also jet-propelled and have been for millenniums. Both the octopus and the squid excel in this. They suck water into a special chamber and then, with powerful muscles, expel it, shooting themselves forward. Also using jet propulsion: the chambered nautilus, scallops, jellyfish, dragonfly larvae and even some oceanic plankton.
LIGHTING. Thomas Edison is credited with inventing the light bulb. But it is not too efficient, as it loses energy in the form of heat. Fireflies do better as they flash their lights on and off. They produce cold light that loses no energy. Many sponges, fungi, bacteria and worms glow brightly. One, called the railroad worm, is like a miniature train moving along with its red “headlight” and 11 white or pale green pairs of “windows.” Many fish have lights: flashlight fish, anglerfish, lantern fish, viperfish and constellation fish, to name a few.
COMPASSES. About the 13th century C.E. men began to use a magnetic needle floating in a bowl of water—a crude compass. But it was nothing new. Bacteria contain strings of magnetite particles just the right size to make a compass. These guide them to their preferred environments. Magnetite has been found in many other organisms —birds, bees, butterflies, dolphins, mollusks and others. Experiments indicate that homing pigeons can return home by sensing the earth’s magnetic field. It is now generally accepted that one of the ways migrating birds find their way is by the magnetic compasses in their heads.
DESALINATION. Men build huge factories to remove salt from seawater. Mangrove trees have roots that suck up seawater, but filter it through membranes that remove the salt. One species of mangrove, Avicennia, using glands on the underside of its leaves, gets rid of the excess salt. Sea birds, such as gulls, pelicans, cormorants, albatross and petrels, drink seawater and by means of glands in their heads remove the excess salt that gets into their blood. Also penguins, sea turtles and sea iguanas drink salt water, removing the excess salt.
ELECTRICITY. Some 500 varieties of electric fish have batteries. The African catfish can produce 350 volts. The giant electric ray of the North Atlantic puts out 50-ampere pulses of 60 volts. Shocks from the South American electric eel have been measured as high as 886 volts. “Eleven different families of fishes are known to include species with electrical organs,” a chemist says.
FARMING. For ages men have tilled the soil and tended livestock. But long before that, leaf-cutting ants were gardeners. For food they grew fungi in a compost they had made from leaves and their droppings. Some ants keep aphids as livestock, milk sugary honeydew from them and even build barns to shelter them. Harvester ants store seeds in underground granaries. (Proverbs 6:6-8) A beetle prunes mimosa trees. Pikas and marmots cut, cure and store hay.
INCUBATORS. Man makes incubators to hatch eggs, but in this he is a latecomer. Sea turtles and some birds lay their eggs in the warm sand for incubation. Other birds will lay their eggs in the warm ashes of volcanoes for hatching. Sometimes alligators will cover their eggs with decaying vegetable matter to produce heat. But in this the male mallee bird is the expert. He digs a big hole, fills it with vegetable matter and covers it with sand. The fermenting vegetation heats the mound, the female mallee bird lays an egg in it weekly for up to six months, and all that time the male checks the temperature by sticking his beak into the mound. By adding or removing sand, even in weather from below freezing to very hot, he keeps his incubator at 92 degrees Fahrenheit.
JET PROPULSION. Today when you fly in a plane you are probably being jet-propelled. Many animals are also jet-propelled and have been for millenniums. Both the octopus and the squid excel in this. They suck water into a special chamber and then, with powerful muscles, expel it, shooting themselves forward. Also using jet propulsion: the chambered nautilus, scallops, jellyfish, dragonfly larvae and even some oceanic plankton.
LIGHTING. Thomas Edison is credited with inventing the light bulb. But it is not too efficient, as it loses energy in the form of heat. Fireflies do better as they flash their lights on and off. They produce cold light that loses no energy. Many sponges, fungi, bacteria and worms glow brightly. One, called the railroad worm, is like a miniature train moving along with its red “headlight” and 11 white or pale green pairs of “windows.” Many fish have lights: flashlight fish, anglerfish, lantern fish, viperfish and constellation fish, to name a few.
PAPER. Egyptians made it thousands of years ago. Even so, they were far behind wasps, yellow jackets and hornets. These winged workers chew up
weathered wood, producing a gray paper to make their nests. Hornets hang their large round nests from a tree. The outer covering is many layers of
tough paper, separated by dead-air spaces. This insulates the nest from heat and cold as effectively as would a brick wall 16 inches thick.
ROTARY ENGINE. Microscopic bacteria preceded man by thousands of years in making a rotary engine. One bacterium has hairlike extensions twisted together to form a stiff spiral, like a corkscrew. It spins this corkscrew around like the propeller of a ship and drives itself forward. It can even reverse its engine! But how it works is not completely understood. One report claims that the bacterium can attain speeds equivalent to 30 miles an hour, and it says that “nature had, in effect, invented the wheel.” A researcher concludes: “One of the most fantastic concepts in biology has come true: Nature has indeed produced a rotary engine, complete with coupling, rotating axle, bearings, and rotating power transmission.”
SONAR. The sonar of bats and dolphins surpasses man’s copy of it. In a darkened room with fine wires strung across it, bats fly about and never touch the wires. Their supersonic sound signals bounce off these objects and return to the bats, who then make use of echolocation to avoid them. Porpoises and whales do the same thing in water. Oilbirds use echolocation as they enter and leave the dark caves they roost in, making sharp clicking sounds to guide them.
SUBMARINES. Many submarines existed before men invented them. Microscopic radiolarians have oil droplets in their protoplasm by which they regulate their weight and thereby move up or down in the ocean. Fish diffuse gas in to or out of their swim bladders, altering their buoyancy. Inside its shell, the chambered nautilus has chambers or flotation tanks. By altering the proportions of water and gas in these tanks, it regulates its depth. The cuttlebone (the calcified internal shell) of the cuttlefish is filled with cavities. To control buoyancy, this octopuslike creature pumps water out of its skeleton and allows gas to fill the emptied cavity. Thus the cavities of the cuttlebone function just like water tanks in a submarine.
THERMOMETERS. From the 17th century onward men have developed thermometers, but they are crude compared to some found in nature. A mosquito’s antennae can sense a change of 1/300 degree Fahrenheit. A rattlesnake has pits on the sides of its head with which it can sense a change of 1/600 degree Fahrenheit. A boa constrictor responds in 35 milliseconds to a heat change of a fraction of a degree. The beaks of the mallee bird and the brush turkey can tell temperature to within one degree Fahrenheit.
There are still millions of undiscovered species that also have potential. It’s just a matter of studying them. So tell me can you “design or engineer’ something that can surpass creation?
And NO these are not products of your evolution religion since you’ve already judge them as flawed creations.
This reminds of a question to a man who thought he knew it all:
And Jehovah proceeded to answer Job out of the windstorm and say:
“Who is this that is obscuring counsel
By words without knowledge?
Gird up your loins, please, like an able-bodied man,
And let me question you, and you inform me.
Where did you happen to be when I founded the earth?
Tell [me], if you do know understanding.
By the way I have not even touch the human eye, let alone the human body, but I’m not sure if this forum will be able to let me post all of the information or if you have the time to digest the information. But if you are up to it, I’ll attempt to condense it sometime.
In case you neglected to answer my qs, then just answer this one: what are these building blocks of life and how did they combine to form life?
ROTARY ENGINE. Microscopic bacteria preceded man by thousands of years in making a rotary engine. One bacterium has hairlike extensions twisted together to form a stiff spiral, like a corkscrew. It spins this corkscrew around like the propeller of a ship and drives itself forward. It can even reverse its engine! But how it works is not completely understood. One report claims that the bacterium can attain speeds equivalent to 30 miles an hour, and it says that “nature had, in effect, invented the wheel.” A researcher concludes: “One of the most fantastic concepts in biology has come true: Nature has indeed produced a rotary engine, complete with coupling, rotating axle, bearings, and rotating power transmission.”
SONAR. The sonar of bats and dolphins surpasses man’s copy of it. In a darkened room with fine wires strung across it, bats fly about and never touch the wires. Their supersonic sound signals bounce off these objects and return to the bats, who then make use of echolocation to avoid them. Porpoises and whales do the same thing in water. Oilbirds use echolocation as they enter and leave the dark caves they roost in, making sharp clicking sounds to guide them.
SUBMARINES. Many submarines existed before men invented them. Microscopic radiolarians have oil droplets in their protoplasm by which they regulate their weight and thereby move up or down in the ocean. Fish diffuse gas in to or out of their swim bladders, altering their buoyancy. Inside its shell, the chambered nautilus has chambers or flotation tanks. By altering the proportions of water and gas in these tanks, it regulates its depth. The cuttlebone (the calcified internal shell) of the cuttlefish is filled with cavities. To control buoyancy, this octopuslike creature pumps water out of its skeleton and allows gas to fill the emptied cavity. Thus the cavities of the cuttlebone function just like water tanks in a submarine.
THERMOMETERS. From the 17th century onward men have developed thermometers, but they are crude compared to some found in nature. A mosquito’s antennae can sense a change of 1/300 degree Fahrenheit. A rattlesnake has pits on the sides of its head with which it can sense a change of 1/600 degree Fahrenheit. A boa constrictor responds in 35 milliseconds to a heat change of a fraction of a degree. The beaks of the mallee bird and the brush turkey can tell temperature to within one degree Fahrenheit.
There are still millions of undiscovered species that also have potential. It’s just a matter of studying them. So tell me can you “design or engineer’ something that can surpass creation?
And NO these are not products of your evolution religion since you’ve already judge them as flawed creations.
This reminds of a question to a man who thought he knew it all:
And Jehovah proceeded to answer Job out of the windstorm and say:
“Who is this that is obscuring counsel
By words without knowledge?
Gird up your loins, please, like an able-bodied man,
And let me question you, and you inform me.
Where did you happen to be when I founded the earth?
Tell [me], if you do know understanding.
By the way I have not even touch the human eye, let alone the human body, but I’m not sure if this forum will be able to let me post all of the information or if you have the time to digest the information. But if you are up to it, I’ll attempt to condense it sometime.
In case you neglected to answer my qs, then just answer this one: what are these building blocks of life and how did they combine to form life?
reply to post by randyvs
randys at the risk of starting another crusade, on another post you said this
is there some doubt you have? sorry to bring that up man but heres a dancing bannana for your troubles
randys at the risk of starting another crusade, on another post you said this
post to defend my beliefs
You shouldn't" have to post" to defend your beliefs. Even if someone posts something offensive. if your belief is solid enough it shouldn't even phase
you or what you believe. That's one thing I've learned from ATS. Nobody
here can cause me to react. People offend to draw you out. Timing is
everything.
is there some doubt you have? sorry to bring that up man but heres a dancing bannana for your troubles
reply to post by ashanu90
Almost couldn't follow what you were getting at with that last effort.
I'm very aware of everything I post for all the world to see.
So no doubts at all. What makes you ask Asshu?
A crusade ?
Well I guess you can get pretty good at flattering yourself when you practice all the time.
oh ya um you can keep the banana, I don't know where that thing has been.
[edit on 20-3-2010 by randyvs]
is there some doubt you have? sorry to bring that up man but heres a dancing bannana for your troubles
Almost couldn't follow what you were getting at with that last effort.
I'm very aware of everything I post for all the world to see.
So no doubts at all. What makes you ask Asshu?
A crusade ?
Well I guess you can get pretty good at flattering yourself when you practice all the time.
oh ya um you can keep the banana, I don't know where that thing has been.
[edit on 20-3-2010 by randyvs]
new topics
-
Israeli strikes on southern Gaza city of Rafah kill 22, mostly children, as US advances aid package
Middle East Issues: 6 hours ago -
Really Unexplained
Paranormal Studies: 11 hours ago -
The Vaccine Injured
Medical Issues & Conspiracies: 11 hours ago
top topics
-
Leading Surgeon from Al-Shifa Hospital Dies in Israeli Custody
Middle East Issues: 14 hours ago, 8 flags -
The Vaccine Injured
Medical Issues & Conspiracies: 11 hours ago, 4 flags -
Really Unexplained
Paranormal Studies: 11 hours ago, 4 flags -
Israeli strikes on southern Gaza city of Rafah kill 22, mostly children, as US advances aid package
Middle East Issues: 6 hours ago, 4 flags
active topics
-
Zionists of ATS assemble
Political Issues • 134 • : SteamyAmerican -
Israeli strikes on southern Gaza city of Rafah kill 22, mostly children, as US advances aid package
Middle East Issues • 90 • : WeMustCare -
France makes abortion a constitutional right in historic vote
Other Current Events • 296 • : DBCowboy -
Hard evidence of a Royal plot on the US....if only i had proof.
ATS Skunk Works • 96 • : stonerwilliam -
Really Unexplained
Paranormal Studies • 23 • : KnowItAllKnowNothin -
UN Estimates Rebuilding Gaza Will Cost Up To 40 Billion Dollars
Middle East Issues • 103 • : DBCowboy -
-@TH3WH17ERABB17- -Q- ---TIME TO SHOW THE WORLD--- -Part- --44--
Dissecting Disinformation • 802 • : nerbot -
The Vaccine Injured
Medical Issues & Conspiracies • 9 • : ARM19688 -
Candidate TRUMP Now Has Crazy Judge JUAN MERCHAN After Him - The Stormy Daniels Hush-Money Case.
Political Conspiracies • 1185 • : Annee -
Lawsuit Seeks to ‘Ban the Jab’ in Florida
Diseases and Pandemics • 37 • : lilzazz