A complex case against intelligent design

[Polymath257]

I got the following from the number one result on a Google search for "quantum mechanics and objectivity"

"Quantum mechanics has raised in an acute form three problems which go to the heart of man's relationship with nature through experimental science: (r) the public objectivity of science, that is, its value as a universal science for all investigators; (2) the empirical objectivity of scientific objects, that is, man's ability to construct a precise or causal spatio-temporal model of microscopic systems; and finally (3), the formal objectivity of science, that is, its value as an expression of what nature is independently of its being an object of human knowledge. These are three aspects of what is generally called the "crisis of objectivity" or the "crisis of realism" in modern physics."​

You'd be hard pressed to find any reputable scientist who would dispute that.

I think this is clearly wrong for several reasons.

r) quantum mechanics is, in fact, make publicly objective predictions that have been verified through repeated observation.

2) Funny, quantum mechanics is just that: a spatio-temporal model of microscopic systems.

3) Again, quantum mechanics is a wonderful example of the objectivity of science.

I'm guessing you (and whoever wrote this article from Google) know very little about actual quantum mechanics. Can you write down the Schrodinger equation and explain its meaning or how to solve it?

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

that's how I keep schooling you on it.

I thought you said that you were done with me. I was hoping for a free pass to continue critiquing you without the arrogant, impudent, illogical, and repetitive feedback, which is nothing but bluster and unsupported beliefs.

As I told you, very few are interested in what you believe by faith or assert without evidence. They care about what you know and can demonstrate. So far, that's nothing. You've brought nothing of value to the table yet.

Is there any wonder I'm done with you?

Yeah you said that before. But I'm not done with you. I intend to continue pointing out your errors.

As I indicated, I don't need your replies, and at this point, could write them for you. You've said almost nothing of substance, and repeated it dozens of times, apparently convincing nobody along the way.

OK, for no good reason other than it pleases you or meets some otherwise unfulfilled need, you have chosen to believe in a tri-omni god, which compels you to believe that this must be the best of all possible worlds despite evidence to the contrary. So what? How is telling that to others educating them?

 

[ecco]

At least you should be aware of the difference between the scriptures and nature. Knowledge is always a good thing.

I think most people are aware of "the difference between the scriptures and nature".

Nature is real. Scriptures, yours and those of thousands of other religions, are stories made up by man because they did not understand nature.

As you said, "Knowledge is always a good thing".

 

[ecco]

Well, if you read the book you'd see it says it was not actually written by people.

2 Pet 1:21,

for prophecy was not ever uttered by [the] will of man, but holy men of God spake under the power of [the] Holy Spirit.
Some folks believe that, others don't. Either way that is what to book says.

The Koran says similar things. The writings of Bahá'u'lláh say similar things. Do you ignore these out of hand?


Oh, wait. I know. Your books are real because they say so. Other's books also say so, but you don't believe it.

 

[rrobs]

So god put Adam in control of everything how anthropocentrism. God did not put Eve In control I guess because she was just a woman. That's right Eve caused the falling out with god in the garden. Was Adam before dinosaurs or did the dinosaurs have first chance and tending the garden? Interesting though god set the world in motion but still show up as a burning bush to present to a man and not a woman. And there was that flood god created killing everything except for the few chosen by another man with an arc. God does not seem to favor women that much. God also came back as a man in the form of Jesus but not a woman. There is a trend here

Gen 1:28,

And God blessed them (Adam and Eve), and God said unto them (Adam and Eve), Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.​

Dinosaurs: Google "gap theory bible"
Flood:

Gen 6:5,

And GOD saw that the wickedness of man [was] great in the earth, and [that] every imagination of the thoughts of his heart [was] only evil (dysfunctional) continually.
​

Man became completely dysfunctional, always. Nothing whatsoever functioned as originally designed. The whole thing was doomed. What would you have done?

Burning bush: I guess a woman just wasn't there at the time. I wouldn't read too much into it.

God did not come down as Jesus. Jesus was not God. Jesus was not around until he was born some 4,000 years later. Tradition and the scriptures are at definite odds on that point.

Yes nature is both gentle and fierce as in how a mother loving its offspring and fierce to defend or as gentle as a spring shower or as destructive as a Nature is creative and destructive a hurricane. Nature is everything both positive and negative. Its creative force gave rise to humans and all of the wonderous life we share this planet with. No intelligent designer needed nature is the ultimate creative force

I asked you once before what your source for truth. You didn't answer, but I assume you take nature as your point of reference. If so, I suppose what you say is true.

So Adam did not to a good job and next is Jesus who was already here, according to scripture, but did not warn humans not to destroy the world. I wonder why he did not warn us then or just does not come back set us straight. But no worries we have another myth that there will be another Earth with no disease, no death, no children, no lions, and tigers and bears oh my.

As I said above, Jesus wasn't around to warn Adam and Eve. God did though. I gave the reason God didn't come down and "make things straight." Having given dominion to man, it was out of His hands. Free will is involved. You said you understand the logos, but your reply shows you really don't know much about it. Man got us into the mess. A man had to get out of the mess. The logos is God's plan to do just that without taking over anybody's free will. As I said, Jesus was not a god or a god-man. He was a man, a unique man to be sure, but a man nonetheless. He was just like us. The only difference was that, unlike the first man, Jesus obeyed to the letter. That is the quickest and dirtiest version of the logos I can give you. Details would take some time, so I'll just leave it at that.

There is certainly no shortage of folks who believe the new earth is a myth. However, the scriptures don't agree with that assessment. What do you think happens to you after you die?

 

[ecco]

The majority (grand majority) of illness is caused due to abusive or wrong behavior (or maintenance) of one's body.

Again...Tell that to the millions who died of the Black Plague or Malaria.

An external cause doesn't have to do to the perfection of your body.

What?

RE: Causes of Cancer:

I Assure you they know.

.

Do you know what causes cancer? ...
The truth is humans don't really know the cause of cancer,

You are being very inconsistent.

I guess you believe humans awareness for their body is amazing

Why would you guess that? In any case, your guess is wrong.

 

[ecco]

I got the following from the number one result on a Google search for "quantum mechanics and objectivity"

"Quantum mechanics has raised in an acute form three problems which go to the heart of man's relationship with nature through experimental science: (r) the public objectivity of science, that is, its value as a universal science for all investigators; (2) the empirical objectivity of scientific objects, that is, man's ability to construct a precise or causal spatio-temporal model of microscopic systems; and finally (3), the formal objectivity of science, that is, its value as an expression of what nature is independently of its being an object of human knowledge. These are three aspects of what is generally called the "crisis of objectivity" or the "crisis of realism" in modern physics."
​

​

You'd be hard pressed to find any reputable scientist who would dispute that.

Would you be hard pressed to state who said that?

 

[ecco]

'zactly. We can't understand the yin except for how it differs from the yang.

Ooh. Deep philosophical insights. Are you trying to prop up the only person who somewhat agrees with you?

 

[rrobs]

Well there you have it - google search better yet google scholar search. Did you read the articles listed? The concerns of biotechnology, political science, social science, encephalopathy. It was science that proved the earth was round not flat. Yes we do not no everything but science is willing to question itself for better answers. What makes science so powerful is that it is willing to accept change in view of improved understanding of the natural world.
The God of the scriptures never changes? And something written down long ago by humans is absolute because it does not change? The god in the bible versions I have read does not seem quite the same in every part of the bible. God of wrath and god of loving end things in between.

I have no desire whatsoever to argue whether or not God changes. It is not my aim to convince you that you are somehow wrong and I'm right. I just quoted the book. The verse clearly said God does not change. If, as you suggest, that contradicts other parts of the scriptures then I'd suggest you forget the whole thing. In your mind the Bible is full of myths. Why waste your time on it? I certainly wouldn't.

I've enjoyed our chat, but I think we may have wrung it out by now. I don't want to unilaterally say, "I'm done" but if you want to end at this point I'll be happy to do just that. We can always meet again down the road on some other interesting subject for discussion.

 

[rrobs]

Would you be hard pressed to state who said that?

Not at all.

 

[ecco]

I would say from a scriptural perspective you are absolutely correct. They say that once God created the universe He put Adam in charge of it. I know religious tradition says God is in charge, but that is not at all what Genesis says.

If God put man (Adam) in charge, it didn't last long. God soon realized his mistake and stepped in and killed (almost) everybody and everything.

PPP

 

[ecco]

I might remind you that at one time science proved the world to be flat.

Wrong - on multiple levels.

1. The beliefs of ignorant humans is not the same as science.
2. Science is not in the business of "Proving".

Here you are quoting Quantum Mechanics and you do even have a basic concept of what science is. How silly.

 

[rrobs]

Do you have any real concept about what you just wrote? Do you have anything other than a comic book understanding of QM?

Yes.

A series of inconsistent stories claim to be Truth and the word of God and you "buy into it".

Everybody buys into something.

The Truth is that your Bible states that slavery is acceptable.
The Truth is that your Bible states that killing the young male survivors of a vanquished army is acceptable.
The Truth is that your Bible states that eating lobster is forbidden.

None of those things were in God's original plan. They are all a result of Adam's disobedience.

Why would you buy into anything like that?

I don't. I buy into something totally different. Read my posts.

 

[rrobs]

Wrong - on multiple levels.

1. The beliefs of ignorant humans is not the same as science.
2. Science is not in the business of "Proving".

Here you are quoting Quantum Mechanics and you do even have a basic concept of what science is. How silly.

Isn't it ignorant humans who make science? Who else makes it?

Technically you are right about proof. I was going with the profane views. The correct thing to have said would be, "people thought the world is flat." They also thought the atom was the smallest particle in nature. Now they think it's quarks and leptons. Who knows what they'll think down the road. I trust that is more to your liking.

I have to give you credit for ascertaining the extent of my knowledge of science with minimal evidence. I'm not sure how you did it.

So what exactly did I say about QM that is not generally accepted in the scientific world?

 

[rrobs]

All that means is there are a lot of people talking about something. It has little or no bearing on the reality of the issue(s). Lots of people talk about Kittens on Youtube. This does not mean kittens are in charge of Youtube.

Argument from popularity isn't a valid argument. That would be entirely false, if you do claim that. The bible certainly describes a flat plate or disc of earth, never-ever describing a spherical world. Even in the NT, where Satan takes Jesus to view all the kingdoms of the Earth-- not possible on a sphere. Quite possible on a flat disc.

So, really, the only folk who claimed a flat earth? Were bible types and similar. Even the ancient Greeks knew it was not flat-- and indeed, several calculated the Earth's diameter pretty darn close.

Yes-- by using science. Never by listening to the bible's claims-- which describe a flat earth.

I defy you to find any working scientist, of the modern era, who claims otherwise. It's THEISTS who claim they know everything because it says so in this "holey" book...

I was with you until you got to the "holey" part. I suddenly realized I'm debating with a child. I'll pass.

 

[rrobs]

I think this is clearly wrong for several reasons.

r) quantum mechanics is, in fact, make publicly objective predictions that have been verified through repeated observation.

2) Funny, quantum mechanics is just that: a spatio-temporal model of microscopic systems.

3) Again, quantum mechanics is a wonderful example of the objectivity of science.

I'm guessing you (and whoever wrote this article from Google) know very little about actual quantum mechanics. Can you write down the Schrodinger equation and explain its meaning or how to solve it?

They key word I got from your reply is "guessing."

 

[rrobs]

I think most people are aware of "the difference between the scriptures and nature".

Nature is real. Scriptures, yours and those of thousands of other religions, are stories made up by man because they did not understand nature.

As you said, "Knowledge is always a good thing".

Quoted me out of context.

 

[rrobs]

The Koran says similar things. The writings of Bahá'u'lláh say similar things. Do you ignore these out of hand?


Oh, wait. I know. Your books are real because they say so. Other's books also say so, but you don't believe it.

Putting words in my mouth.

 

[rrobs]

Would you be hard pressed to state who said that?

No.

 

[rrobs]

If God put man (Adam) in charge, it didn't last long. God soon realized his mistake and stepped in and killed (almost) everybody and everything.

PPP

The book doesn't say that.