Design flaw?

Feb 11, 2011 | Posted by: roboblogger | Full story: WORLD Magazine

On Christmas Eve, 1968, as a Super Bowl-sized viewing audience watched on television, the crew of moon-orbiting Apollo 8 took turns reading from the creation story in the first chapter of Genesis.

Comments (Page 3)

Showing posts 41 - 58 of58
|
next page >
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Impeach Obuma

Sun City, AZ

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#41
Feb 14, 2011
 
Only intelligent beings can evolve and survive. Elements have no intelligence on their own.

As to how life began on earth, the pre-Darwin theory of 'abiogenesis' has been debunked, because no life has been observed to come from any combination of elements.

The theories of "Panspermia" and "Directed Panspermia" are possible when we realize that there may be several civilizations in this galaxy that are millions of years older than our own backwards civilizations. Then the origin of life on earth can be theorized as one or more advanced civilizations colonizing earth with various life forms or using earth as a prison planet. It would account for the stupidity and violence and superstitions we see around this world, wouldn't it?
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#42
Feb 14, 2011
 
Impeach Obuma wrote:
Only intelligent beings can evolve and survive.
Yeah, those plants that literally cover a fairly large portion of the Earth, even underwater and at the occasional desert spot, just suck at it big time.
Impeach Obuma wrote:
Elements have no intelligence on their own.
So which element are you?
Impeach Obuma wrote:
As to how life began on earth, the pre-Darwin theory of 'abiogenesis' has been debunked, because no life has been observed to come from any combination of elements.
My combination of elements is working fine, thank you. Harvard called though, and told me to let you know that you were just maybe slightly just a ickle tiny bit WRONG AS HECK since they are currently engaged in abio research as we speak.
Impeach Obuma wrote:
The theories of "Panspermia" and "Directed Panspermia" are possible when we realize that there may be several civilizations in this galaxy that are millions of years older than our own backwards civilizations.
I am aware of the hypotheses, but not of any actual scientific theories in this regard (especially the "directed" one). Perhaps you could expound? Better yet, if you've been speaking to a poster here called 'Infinite Force', better to let those uh, "theories" die off.
Impeach Obuma wrote:
Then the origin of life on earth can be theorized as one or more advanced civilizations colonizing earth with various life forms or using earth as a prison planet. It would account for the stupidity and violence and superstitions we see around this world, wouldn't it?
Gotcha. So Adam and Eve were just a couple of crims then? The Bonnie and Clyde of the spaceways?

So anyway, if that's you again Cathy, do you like, just not like kittens or do you really REALLY hate kittens?

Since: Nov 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#43
Feb 14, 2011
 
steen wrote:
You have shown nothing to change that view. In fact, your demonstrated ignorance of Evolution, coupled with your claims here, that just further confirms to me that you are also a liar. I.e. a typical creationist.
Religious beliefs are very personal and they run deep. And all conclusions depend on presuppositions, unless, of course, you're a Darwinist or some sort of quasi-scientist. If my claims are too unbelievable to you, take a course in modern physics.

“I am evolving as fast as I can”

Since: Jan 08

Brooklyn, in Dayton OH now

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#44
Feb 14, 2011
 
Impeach Obuma wrote:
Only intelligent beings can evolve and survive.
No, all you are doing is revealing your own ignorance on the subject at hand. Are bacteria 'intelligent'?
Elements have no intelligence on their own.
As to how life began on earth, the pre-Darwin theory of 'abiogenesis' has been debunked, because no life has been observed to come from any combination of elements.
No. First of all there is no 'Theory of Abiogenesis'. What there is, is an area of study called Abiogenesis and there are about 8 or 9 hypotheses that are being examined, including one form of Panspermia or another. Please get educated on the subject.
The theories of "Panspermia" and "Directed Panspermia" are possible when we realize that there may be several civilizations in this galaxy that are millions of years older than our own backwards civilizations. Then the origin of life on earth can be theorized as one or more advanced civilizations colonizing earth with various life forms or using earth as a prison planet. It would account for the stupidity and violence and superstitions we see around this world, wouldn't it?
Actually you are voicing one of the not very likely Panspermia hypotheses. What has been supported is the existence of complex hydrocarbon molecules in distant space and the hypothesis is that life on Earth may have formed when some of these complex molecules arrived on a comet or meteorite. But, please rememebr it's a hypothesis when it comes to talking about Abiogenesis. Plus, even if it is true, it merely shifts the focus on how did like begin from Earth to someplace else. Fascinating area of study, but certainly not one that has been debunked by any means. To keep it simple, you might look up Abiogenesis in Wikipedia. It has a nice summary and also links for further information.

“I am evolving as fast as I can”

Since: Jan 08

Brooklyn, in Dayton OH now

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#45
Feb 14, 2011
 
Shubee wrote:
<quoted text> Religious beliefs are very personal and they run deep. And all conclusions depend on presuppositions, unless, of course, you're a Darwinist or some sort of quasi-scientist. If my claims are too unbelievable to you, take a course in modern physics.
No, that's your job. Now you are starting to sound a tiny bit like Dembski, at least you whine a little like him. He stated that if other mathematicians didn't understand his 'work' it was because they weren't smart enough to understand it. Yet even he cannot explain his work to the point of making sense to anyone other than himself -- the answer isn't their intelligence, but his ability.

You're just jealous because the DI gave him a job while he tried to pull together his ideas for taking Darwin down. Yet they gave you the cold shoulder. He can try and make a case for his, at least within his community of already believers. No one wants your crap laying around, too afriad they might step in it and ruin the carpeting.

I know you are a little slow, so let me point out that I am not being particularly polite, you haven't done anything that makes me think you deserve any politeness anymore. Just a garden variety Creationist, and a rude one at that.

Since: Nov 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#46
Feb 14, 2011
 
TedHOhio wrote:
Tell me shoob, what do physicists think of your 'theory'?
Why did the physicist Richard P. Feynman say, "I love only nature, and I hate mathematicians"?

Since: Nov 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#47
Feb 14, 2011
 
TedHOhio wrote:
You're just jealous because the DI gave him a job while he tried to pull together his ideas for taking Darwin down. Yet they gave you the cold shoulder.
I'm a big fan of Dr. David Berlinski. Isn't he connected to the DI? I have never contacted the DI because I am strongly opposed to their emphasis. I haven't received any communication from them in protest to my theory.

“I am evolving as fast as I can”

Since: Jan 08

Brooklyn, in Dayton OH now

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#48
Feb 14, 2011
 
Shubee wrote:
<quoted text> Why did the physicist Richard P. Feynman say, "I love only nature, and I hate mathematicians"?
Well he wasn't talking about you, now was he.

Since: Nov 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#49
Feb 14, 2011
 
You missed the point. Even the best physicists can pout like obstinate children when their mistakes are lovingly corrected by unquestionably greater authorities.
Chimney

UAE

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#50
Feb 15, 2011
 
Shubee wrote:
<quoted text> Either you're not being honest or you're just plain ignorant. I do not assume the God postulate. I assume that the fantastically improbable is possible. No mathematician in his right mind should have a problem with that.
So, Shubee, lets take a simple example.

There is a bowl of bananas in your kitchen. There are none on your desk.

Taking a necessary break from your mathematical studies, you trot off to the bathroom. When you get back to your desk there is a banana there.

We all know it is theoretically possible that the banana quantum shifted all by itself to your desk from the kitchen.

And we all know you would be UTTERLY BANANAS to assume that is the BEST explanation for how it got there.

“Leave That Thing Alone!”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#52
Feb 15, 2011
 
Marlin wrote:
<quoted text>
Ridiculous. People will find you and your group's discriminating against people with other beliefs saying you don't find those beliefs to your liking.
Evolution - simple.
Life starts - very small.
Genes change through mutations and this occurs readily especially over time.
The better or best fit mutations survive - thrive.
Changes elude those organism that have experienced changes.
You arrive on earth with no memory of the past.
You start to hear stories from emotionally weak personalities that something up there created you.
You end up chatting on an evolution-debate site trying to reason the impossible, with people that understand evolution and biology far better than myself, only because it seems God wants you to do exactly that.
God is only your troubled heart, because you have have questions, more than you have answers.
Sure. If that's what you got out of my post, you really should re-read it.
wonder about deaths as

Toronto, Canada

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#53
Feb 15, 2011
 

“Leave That Thing Alone!”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#54
Feb 15, 2011
 
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
I think you have mistaken Terry for a creationist. He is however correct that evolution does not address the origin of life. The origin of life is addressed by abiogenesis. Evolution deals specifically with the diversification of life on Earth. That's all.
Thanks, Dude.

“I am evolving as fast as I can”

Since: Jan 08

Brooklyn, in Dayton OH now

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#55
Feb 15, 2011
 
Chimney wrote:
<quoted text>
So, Shubee, lets take a simple example.
There is a bowl of bananas in your kitchen. There are none on your desk.
Taking a necessary break from your mathematical studies, you trot off to the bathroom. When you get back to your desk there is a banana there.
We all know it is theoretically possible that the banana quantum shifted all by itself to your desk from the kitchen.
And we all know you would be UTTERLY BANANAS to assume that is the BEST explanation for how it got there.
Try to teach shoob Occam's Razor? Opps, did I let the cat out of the bag? Sorry! Now he'll reject it even though a theist is the one given credit for it.

“Leave That Thing Alone!”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#56
Feb 15, 2011
 
Marlin wrote:
<quoted text>
The entire universe evolved. There has continuously been evolution from the beginning and nothing else since time evolved. Matter developed from the beginning seconds after the big bang. Stars formed than stars collapsed giving off the substance for life. Micro organisms formed from special matter evolving from the aged glowing Universe. Micro organism arrive on earth providing life with a chance to live and reproduce on earth. Anything any different has Judaic tendencies towards creationism. How would one know absolutely that the person you call terry is not a creationist?
Iím not a creationist and I have nothing but contempt for anyone that willfully rejects reality in favor of unsupported religious belief. Now you know
Chimney

UAE

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#57
Feb 15, 2011
 
TedHOhio wrote:
<quoted text>
Try to teach shoob Occam's Razor? Opps, did I let the cat out of the bag? Sorry! Now he'll reject it even though a theist is the one given credit for it.
And not just Occam!

His theory does not even work on thermodynamic grounds.

Given two options:

1. State of moderate order represented by the pre-biotic earth, in the presence of an energy flux that can drive higher levels of localised order while continuing to increase disorder across the system as a whole (ie..the solar/earth system).

OR

2. State of extremely high order, for example Earth's biota in the carboniferous, occurring randomly, followed by a succession of "apparently evolved" creatures appearing spontaneously in an order that happens to be consistent with evolution...that is thermodynamically incalculably less probable than (1) above.

Given two possible options, the one with the dramatically higher probability is by far the better explanation.

But evolution ALSO has far superior predictive and explanatory power than Shubee's quantum poofing. In fact Shubee cannot even offer a single testable prediction. Shubee could never have predicted tiktaalik or amniocetus with his "theory".

Hey, he is in love with the fraud Berlinski. Says it all.
Chimney

UAE

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#58
Feb 15, 2011
 
Shubee wrote:
<quoted text> Why did the physicist Richard P. Feynman say, "I love only nature, and I hate mathematicians"?
This should knot up your knickers Shubee:

I would like to make a confession which may seem immoral: I do not believe in Hilbert space anymore.
(John von Neumann)

Feymann was referring to maths increasing disconnection from the real world of observation and experiment, stated more directly by Tesla:

"Today's scientists have substituted mathematics for experiments, and they wander off through equation after equation, and eventually build a structure which has no relation to reality."

More recently:

"I am acutely aware of the fact that the marriage between mathematics and physics, which was so enormously fruitful in past centuries, has recently ended in divorce."
(Freeman John Dyson)

Not surprising, given the breakdown in the dream of perfect analytical prediction and its replacement with the dirty tool of statistics, esp in the latter C20th....a period you want to pretend never happened.

Maths is a great tools for science, until mathematicians like you get uppity and think you know better than what empirical observation is telling us.

“What, me worry?”

Since: Mar 09

I'm a racist caricature!

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#59
Feb 15, 2011
 
Shubee wrote:
<quoted text> But I am a very original, intelligent, scientific creationist.
You are not original.

Your intelligence is apparent, but your knowledge is woefully inadequate.

The words "scientific" and "creationist" are mutually exclusive. Evidence of my previous point.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 41 - 58 of58
|
next page >
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

•••
•••
•••
•••
Enter and win $5000
•••
•••