Firemorphic
Activist Membrane
Try again. You can always admit you have no clue what you're talking about and start over again.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
The creator did it.
- Thread starter A REAL CHRISTIAN
- Start date
Try again. You can always admit you have no clue what you're talking about and start over again.
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
so sad. You don't know how to use try again properly either.
Firemorphic
Activist Membrane
When you're ready to stop trolling and have a discussion, I'll be ready.
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
That post of mine might have been trolling. But you are far more guilty of that than I am. I explained your error to you. You could only insult and run away. That is trolling.
Firemorphic
Activist Membrane
From your very first reply, all you've done is troll. You can't deny this and I know you're having fun. Good for you but you've got to grow up. Try again.
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
Wrong, your posts from the start were rather foolish. They were corrected. You got mad. A rather immature reaction. That is not trolling. You need to work on your terminology. Please note, no one else was bored enough to respond to you, at least not for any length of time. Perhaps you might want to think about that.
Firemorphic
Activist Membrane
Are you for real?
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
Are you? You are trolling now.
if you do not understand a correction the time to debate them is when they are made. It appears that you do not understand how to debate very well online either.
Firemorphic
Activist Membrane
No, you got mad. I just kept showing you how irrelevant your replies are and have nothing to do with my statement nor did you refute anything. You are a troll. Good luck on the way out.
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
How would your strawman arguments make me mad? Name calling is against the rules here. It is also another sign that one cannot debate.
exchemist
Veteran Member
Haaahaaa!I appreciate your humor!
Okay, that aside. My original question was where did the information come from? Yes, supernatural creation cannot be defended, nor does it need to be scientifically because science only studies the natural world. By default, however, science is studying supernatural creation after the fact. Scientifically literate people should not object to this truth. After all, it is science that revealed what was already there. If you have a one celled Amoeba or "ameba", it has the genetic code of a one celled ameba. Through science, we know you cannot “stack” information for that one celled ameba to become anything more than a one celled ameba. In order for that cell to accomplish more than it is programmed to do, more information must be added. Living things whether insect, fish, birds, monkeys or any host of animals including human beings, all have a genetic code within their DNA to produce only that species. There is variation of course. Humans are a great example. There are people around the globe with different skin color, eye shapes, body sizes, hair, and here’s a big one, LANGUAGE, but they are still humans. These genetic codes do not cross over to produce another species. The immense genetic information for living organisms to accomplish reproduction is staggering! So, if you are going to say that Darwinian evolution is the answer to all life on the planet, you have a mind-boggling mission to show how the trillions of bits of information in cells can divide, materialize and organize to achieve reproduction. Darwinian evolution is absolutely irrational because a mindless, purposeless, aimless process of chance like evolution is naturally impossible, scientifically or otherwise. What we see in nature is the marvelous mind and power of God. When he created all these forms of life he said “Be fruitful and multiple.” This statement by God denotes their ability to reproduce. It is clearly obvious that all life, plants and trees only produce that specific life form. Creation as a part of God's general revelation, affirms certain facts about God. Nature testifies to God's existence and science bows it’s knees to the scriptures. Paul the Apostle wrote to the church at Rome.
“What may be known of God is manifest in them (them-speaking of mankind) for God has shown it to them. For since the creation of the world his invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse” (Romans 1:19,20). This scripture verse describes what I have been saying above.
Even as a scientific literate person, does the ordered fine-tuned universe, this planet and all life on this planet with all of their ecosystems not make reasonable sense to you that its not a haphazard malfunction junction by chance process? I mean, really, what other alternative is there to Gods creative work that is more logical, rational and reasonable to contemplate?
I don't get the bit about the "perilous situation", unless it is code for: "You'll go to Hell if you believe in evolution". Is that what you mean? Well perhaps I will - and perhaps I'll meet you there, some day.
As for the information question, I've given a solid thermodynamic answer to that.
I notice you indulge the usual creationist misrepresentation of stating that evolution is just "chance". It isn't: the clue is......... NATURAL SELECTION.
Look, I go to church every Sunday, just as I am sure you do. But, as someone with a degree in physical science, I simply do not accept that science is totally wrong about these things when the evidence is overwhelming. Nor do I find it aesthetically acceptable to imagine that God needs to keep tinkering with his own creation, as if it were a badly made car, in order to bring about what we see around us.
*** Mod Post ***
OK, guys, calm down and play nice or this thread will get locked down. If you can't play nice, put people on 'ignore'. I want to remind you of rules 1 and 3:
1. Personal Comments About Members and Staff
Personal attacks and name-calling, whether direct or in the third person, are strictly prohibited on the forums. Critique each other's ideas all you want, but under no circumstances personally attack each other or the staff. Quoting a member's post in a separate/new thread without their permission to challenge or belittle them, or harassing staff members for performing moderation duties, will also be considered a personal attack.
3. Trolling and Bullying
Where Rule 1 covers personal attacks, Rule 3 governs other behaviors and content that can generally be described as being a jerk. Unacceptable behaviors and content include:
1) Content (whether words or images) that most people would find needlessly offensive, especially when such content is posted just to get a rise out of somebody and/or is not part of a reasoned argument.
2) Defamation, slander, or misrepresentation of a member's beliefs/arguments, or that of a particular group, culture, or religion. This includes altering the words of another member to change their meaning when using the quote feature.
3) Antagonism, bullying, or harassment - including but not limited to personal attacks, slander, and misrepresentation - of a member across multiple content areas of the forums. Repeatedly targeting or harassing members of particular groups will also be considered bullying.
OK, guys, calm down and play nice or this thread will get locked down. If you can't play nice, put people on 'ignore'. I want to remind you of rules 1 and 3:
1. Personal Comments About Members and Staff
Personal attacks and name-calling, whether direct or in the third person, are strictly prohibited on the forums. Critique each other's ideas all you want, but under no circumstances personally attack each other or the staff. Quoting a member's post in a separate/new thread without their permission to challenge or belittle them, or harassing staff members for performing moderation duties, will also be considered a personal attack.
3. Trolling and Bullying
Where Rule 1 covers personal attacks, Rule 3 governs other behaviors and content that can generally be described as being a jerk. Unacceptable behaviors and content include:
1) Content (whether words or images) that most people would find needlessly offensive, especially when such content is posted just to get a rise out of somebody and/or is not part of a reasoned argument.
2) Defamation, slander, or misrepresentation of a member's beliefs/arguments, or that of a particular group, culture, or religion. This includes altering the words of another member to change their meaning when using the quote feature.
3) Antagonism, bullying, or harassment - including but not limited to personal attacks, slander, and misrepresentation - of a member across multiple content areas of the forums. Repeatedly targeting or harassing members of particular groups will also be considered bullying.
Audie
Veteran Member
I don't get the bit about the "perilous situation", unless it is code for: "You'll go to Hell if you believe in evolution". Is that what you mean? Well perhaps I will - and perhaps I'll meet you there, some day.
As for the information question, I've given a solid thermodynamic answer to that.
I notice you indulge the usual creationist misrepresentation of stating that evolution is just "chance". It isn't: the clue is......... NATURAL SELECTION.
Look, I go to church every Sunday, just as I am sure you do. But, as someone with a degree in physical science, I simply do not accept that science is totally wrong about these things when the evidence is overwhelming. Nor do I find it aesthetically acceptable to imagine that God needs to keep tinkering with his own creation, as if it were a badly made car, in order to bring about what we see around us.
I wonder, if creationists thought "trial and error" instead of "chance"
if that would help them.
exchemist
Veteran Member
As it happens, another piece of the jigsaw here: The helix, of DNA fame, may have arisen with startling ease
It has been found that the direction of spiralling of RNA and DNA firstly is autocatalysed, i.e. one region spiralling in one direction causes neighbouring spirals to form in the same direction, and secondly, very tiny amounts of an introduced chiral (handed) material can cause the spirals to form in one particular direction, too. This happens surprisingly easily, it seems.
Hardly a month goes by without light being shed on one or other of these niggly issues.
It has been found that the direction of spiralling of RNA and DNA firstly is autocatalysed, i.e. one region spiralling in one direction causes neighbouring spirals to form in the same direction, and secondly, very tiny amounts of an introduced chiral (handed) material can cause the spirals to form in one particular direction, too. This happens surprisingly easily, it seems.
Hardly a month goes by without light being shed on one or other of these niggly issues.
First of all, life *is* a complex collection of chemical reactions. So it isn't so strange to think it was begun by chemical processes. In fact, that is precisely what seems most likely given what we know about life.
And, in fact, we have made significant progress on the question of abiogenesis over the years. No, we do not know what, exactly, happened, but many of the obstacles that were initially worried about have easy answers.
Haaahaaa!
Okay, that aside. My original question was where did the information come from? Yes, supernatural creation cannot be defended, nor does it need to be scientifically because science only studies the natural world. By default, however, science is studying supernatural creation after the fact. Scientifically literate people should not object to this truth. After all, it is science that revealed what was already there. If you have a one celled Amoeba or "ameba", it has the genetic code of a one celled ameba. Through science, we know you cannot “stack” information for that one celled ameba to become anything more than a one celled ameba. In order for that cell to accomplish more than it is programmed to do, more information must be added. Living things whether insect, fish, birds, monkeys or any host of animals including human beings, all have a genetic code within their DNA to produce only that species. There is variation of course. Humans are a great example. There are people around the globe with different skin color, eye shapes, body sizes, hair, and here’s a big one, LANGUAGE, but they are still humans. These genetic codes do not cross over to produce another species. The immense genetic information for living organisms to accomplish reproduction is staggering! So, if you are going to say that Darwinian evolution is the answer to all life on the planet, you have a mind-boggling mission to show how the trillions of bits of information in cells can divide, materialize and organize to achieve reproduction. Darwinian evolution is absolutely irrational because a mindless, purposeless, aimless process of chance like evolution is naturally impossible, scientifically or otherwise. What we see in nature is the marvelous mind and power of God. When he created all these forms of life he said “Be fruitful and multiple.” This statement by God denotes their ability to reproduce. It is clearly obvious that all life, plants and trees only produce that specific life form. Creation as a part of God's general revelation, affirms certain facts about God. Nature testifies to God's existence and science bows it’s knees to the scriptures. Paul the Apostle wrote to the church at Rome.
“What may be known of God is manifest in them (them-speaking of mankind) for God has shown it to them. For since the creation of the world his invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse” (Romans 1:19,20). This scripture verse describes what I have been saying above.
Even as a scientific literate person, does the ordered fine-tuned universe, this planet and all life on this planet with all of their ecosystems not make reasonable sense to you that its not a haphazard malfunction junction by chance process? I mean, really, what other alternative is there to Gods creative work that is more logical, rational and reasonable to contemplate?
In general, information is produced in every causal reaction. More specifically, information in living things is produced when genes duplicate, mutate, and are subject to natural selection.
We know of many cases where exactly this has happened, from the globin proteins in our blood, to the serine proteases that catalyze many reactions, to the G-proteins that help messaging inside of cells.
Perhaps if you spent some time learning about biochemistry and genetics you would learn what actually happens in the real world as opposed to some mystical fantasy.
SkepticThinker
Veteran Member
Do you have anything to offer that isn't just proselytization? Like say, evidence?No, I'm not drunk, and there is everything to respond to. I'm assuming you choose not to do so for whatever reason and that is your choice. But now that you know the truth, you have no excuse to say I didn't know. I would hope that you are open enough to follow the truth no matter where it leads.
By the way, in Romans 1:19-21 God says this:
…19"For what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. 20 For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood from His workmanship, so that men are without excuse. 21 For although they knew God, they neither glorified Him as God nor gave thanks to Him, but they became futile in their thinking and darkened in their foolish hearts....
I implore you to rethink your stance in private. Forget about this forum, and anyone who is watching. In private, ask God to reveal the truth to you . Everyone here can do the same thing. If you are really interested in knowing the truth. If not, just let your life play out and accept what you have chosen and the consequences that go along with it. But understand this, eternity never ends! Your life here on earth is the only chance you get. Be very careful what you chose!
sealchan
Well-Known Member
We can accept that ordered systems arise in nature just as we accept that stars and galaxies and superclusters of galaxies have arise and are ordered and we can even believe that there is no supernatural influence behind it all. But we can't create such systems ourselves and for that experiential reason it is something of a mystery to us how that order arises out of lack of intention.
Certainly one day we can reproduce this sort of phenomenon...even if just in a computer program.
One example which is not quite impressive enough but on a continuum is the old Conway's Game of Life.
Conway's Game of Life - Wikipedia
One might even catch the sense of the mystery of order from disorder from this program...
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
When discussing abiogenesis I have found that at best they only know of the Miller-Urey experiment and most of those mistakenly believe that it was refuted.
exchemist
Veteran Member
I think that is quite wrong actually. There are many, many things that we model very accurately in science that we cannot recreate ourselves, including the very stars and galaxies that you mention. Where is the mystery in those?
Any physical scientist is thoroughly used to the idea that order arises spontaneously out of random statistical processes at the molecular level, due simply to the way the so-called "laws of nature" constrain the system. It is what is known as "emergence". Statistical thermodynamics is a case in point, but so too, at a simple level, is the formation of structures such as crystal lattices. We do not just "accept" that these ordered systems arise: our theories of science explain and accurately predict how they do so in the way they do.
So no, there is no intrinsic mystery in order arising out of "lack of intention". I think this idea is a myth.
The mystery, if there is one, is why there are laws of nature in the first place.