Freethought & Rationalism Archive

MyKell · 03-01-2003, 07:33 PM

Magus,
I wasn't referring to making observations yourself. I was asking you to give some "personal insight" on the crap you were citing. The least you can do when you make claims is understand what the hell you are talking about.

christ-on-a-stick · 03-01-2003, 07:37 PM

Magus asserts

Quote:

And spiritual things aren't required to come from anything. They don't follow the laws of physics and math. If God exists, he has always existed - for eternity, where as matter can't since its in the physical realm.

Hmmm... how about this:

Matter (and energy as well) isn't required to come from anything. It follows the laws of physics and math, but it has always existed - for eternity.

Why can't matter have "always existed"? If you want to call the one thing that "has always existed" God, then fine, you've convinced me...

The physical realm (The Universe) is God.

I just don't see any reason to call it "God". The Universe is a nice name for it

Starboy · 03-01-2003, 07:38 PM

MyKell, the thing I don't get is why the IDers can't figure out that even if they did succeed in showing that TOE is wrong it would not make ID right. That if they want to convince people that ID has merit they had best approach it scientifically and come up with their own evidence that supports their theory. Of course the problem is that ID is not a scientific theory, so they can't do it. It is only a matter of time before people figure this out. What these nutcases don't realize is that the more they struggle the tighter the noose gets. If they would just leave it all as a matter of faith then that would leave them with the credibility of not trying to justify the unjustifiable.

Starboy

WWSD · 03-01-2003, 08:55 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Magus55
http://www.evolutionisfalse.org/Probability.html

Lol you guys are absolutely unbelievable. You even try to dispute Math by doctors and nobel prize winners just because you are so bent on the idea of God existing.

MyKell, sorry unless you are smarter than some of the worlds best mathmaticians your words are meaningless. I guess we can't conclude how many stars or atoms are in the universe based on your dumb claim that they have to use assumptions? No matter whehter they had to use assumptions or not - LIFE COULD NOT FORM ON ITS OWN FROM NON LIVING ATOMS!

If you don't agree with it fine, apparently you will deny anything to prove God doesn't exist. You are as stubborn as possible, so if you have any more dumb arguments claiming all the scientists, mathmaticians, and geniouses who did studies on the mathematical probabilities of life forming without God, don't bother replying because i can conlude you are suffering from know-it-all syndrome and i don't where to hear your comments. Thanks - luv2all!

Wasn't all of the above discussed in detail here?

I do believe it was, and I do believe it was addressed very well by those who responded to it.

This appeal to authority business followed by the "you're not a mathemetician, so how do you know, stupid?" stuff is absolutely appaling.

ou yourself are not a mathemetician, and you yourself do not have the credentials to know how right or wrong these analyses are. Therefore, using your logic, you are in no position to defend them, or even to claim they are valid at all.

And this appeal to authority that you continually swing around, this "how can you question geniuses" garbage.

Cut it out!

How can YOU question the numerous scientists who have done great amounts of research which contradicts your bible?

Are you a biologist, archeologist, paleantologist, or geologist?

If you answer no to any of these, you cannot, using YOUR OWN logic, question the results and the data presented here that was learned from these scientists.

WWSD · 03-01-2003, 09:20 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by spurly
Well, there is proof from design. In order for something to be as complex as a universe, heck in order for something as complex as a single cell to exist, there had to be a designer. Things don't just happen to appear.

If there was a designer, then that designer has to be "god". Then the question becomes - which of the "gods" is the designer. Then you have to get into a study of theology.

The one who most fits the bill is Yahweh.

Kevin

You have gone from one unsupported assertion here directly into another unsupported assertion, and then finally, you have finished with yet another unsupported assertion.

First, you must demonstrate convincingly how everything was designed. And let's not rehash the statistics argument from Magus55 here please.

You're going to have to show me evidence for design in the systems that compromise the universe. Its a tall bill IMO.

Second, you are going to have to define "god" and then demonstrate that the universe could have only been designed by this god and not by some sort of alien from an alternate universe. Another tall bill IMO.

And thirdly, when you are done demonstrating effectively the first two conditions, you are going to have to show me that YHWH created this whole mess.

But let's not get ahead of ourselves. Perhaps you should take your design argument to E/C and see how well it fares before we start talking theology here.

Queen of Swords · 03-01-2003, 09:52 PM

Originally posted by spurly
In the beginning there was no such thing as disease. Bacteria and viruses were originally designed by God for good and they were good.

Being a microbiologist, I have to ask : what exactly was the good that bacteria such as Neisseria meningitidis or Yersinia pestis did? What good did God have in mind when he originally designed the viruses which cause influenza?

However, with sin and the fall of man, the whole creation fell. Some things that were good, became bad - viruses mutated and instead of being helpful started to be hurtful.

Why did some viruses, such as Ebola, mutate to the point of causing death while others, such as the rhinoviruses which cause the common cold, mutate to a lesser degree?

Did bacteriophages mutate to the point of killing bacteria or did god originally design them to kill bacteria?

Was there a system of checks and balances in place before the fall to prevent any bacterium or virus from mutating? How, precisely, did god compensate for the fact that copying errors are made by enzymes such as reverse transcriptase?

If any of this is in the bible, I'd be interested in hearing the relative verses.

Did God create the viruses to cause the pain and wreak the havoc that they do. Probably not. But in a fallen world, that's what happened.

How do things "happen" without god intending them to do so? If viruses can "happen" to cause pain, why couldn't abiogenesis also "happen" without much input from a god?

Queen of Swords · 03-01-2003, 09:57 PM

Originally posted by Magus55
And spiritual things aren't required to come from anything. They don't follow the laws of physics and math.

(For the hundredth time) Please provide evidence for this assertion.

Starboy · 03-01-2003, 09:58 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by QueenofSwords
Originally posted by Magus55
And spiritual things aren't required to come from anything. They don't follow the laws of physics and math.

(For the hundredth time) Please provide evidence for this assertion.

QOS, the evidence is simple, without such thinking religion is not possible.

WWSD · 03-01-2003, 09:59 PM

Originally posted by QueenofSwords

Being a microbiologist, I have to ask : what exactly was the good that bacteria such as Neisseria meningitidis or Yersinia pestis did? What good did God have in mind when he originally designed the viruses which cause influenza?

Maybe Yersinia was originally intended to "cleanse" the lymph nodes.

This whole ordeal has me snickering at the thought of a new FOX show "When bacteria and viruses GO BAD!!"

Did bacteriophages mutate to the point of killing bacteria or did god originally design them to kill bacteria?

God designed phages to carry cDNA expression libraries. Duh.

Sorry, sorry, my geek is showing I know...

Queen of Swords · 03-01-2003, 10:01 PM

Originally posted by Magus55
LIFE COULD NOT FORM ON ITS OWN FROM NON LIVING ATOMS!

Ah, the argumentum ad capslock, last refuge of the greatly outclassed.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

03-01-2003, 07:33 PM	#31
MyKell Regular Member Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Amman, Jordan Posts: 258	Magus, I wasn't referring to making observations yourself. I was asking you to give some "personal insight" on the crap you were citing. The least you can do when you make claims is understand what the hell you are talking about.

03-01-2003, 07:38 PM	#33
Starboy Banned Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Tallahassee, FL Reality Adventurer Posts: 5,276	MyKell, the thing I don't get is why the IDers can't figure out that even if they did succeed in showing that TOE is wrong it would not make ID right. That if they want to convince people that ID has merit they had best approach it scientifically and come up with their own evidence that supports their theory. Of course the problem is that ID is not a scientific theory, so they can't do it. It is only a matter of time before people figure this out. What these nutcases don't realize is that the more they struggle the tighter the noose gets. If they would just leave it all as a matter of faith then that would leave them with the credibility of not trying to justify the unjustifiable. Starboy

03-01-2003, 09:52 PM	#36
Queen of Swords Contributor Join Date: Nov 2000 Location: Canada. Finally. Posts: 10,155	Originally posted by spurly In the beginning there was no such thing as disease. Bacteria and viruses were originally designed by God for good and they were good. Being a microbiologist, I have to ask : what exactly was the good that bacteria such as Neisseria meningitidis or Yersinia pestis did? What good did God have in mind when he originally designed the viruses which cause influenza? However, with sin and the fall of man, the whole creation fell. Some things that were good, became bad - viruses mutated and instead of being helpful started to be hurtful. Why did some viruses, such as Ebola, mutate to the point of causing death while others, such as the rhinoviruses which cause the common cold, mutate to a lesser degree? Did bacteriophages mutate to the point of killing bacteria or did god originally design them to kill bacteria? Was there a system of checks and balances in place before the fall to prevent any bacterium or virus from mutating? How, precisely, did god compensate for the fact that copying errors are made by enzymes such as reverse transcriptase? If any of this is in the bible, I'd be interested in hearing the relative verses. Did God create the viruses to cause the pain and wreak the havoc that they do. Probably not. But in a fallen world, that's what happened. How do things "happen" without god intending them to do so? If viruses can "happen" to cause pain, why couldn't abiogenesis also "happen" without much input from a god?

03-01-2003, 09:57 PM	#37
Queen of Swords Contributor Join Date: Nov 2000 Location: Canada. Finally. Posts: 10,155	Originally posted by Magus55 And spiritual things aren't required to come from anything. They don't follow the laws of physics and math. (For the hundredth time) Please provide evidence for this assertion.

03-01-2003, 09:59 PM	#39
WWSD Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: Albucrazy, New Mexico Posts: 1,425	Originally posted by QueenofSwords Being a microbiologist, I have to ask : what exactly was the good that bacteria such as Neisseria meningitidis or Yersinia pestis did? What good did God have in mind when he originally designed the viruses which cause influenza? Maybe Yersinia was originally intended to "cleanse" the lymph nodes. This whole ordeal has me snickering at the thought of a new FOX show "When bacteria and viruses GO BAD!!" Did bacteriophages mutate to the point of killing bacteria or did god originally design them to kill bacteria? God designed phages to carry cDNA expression libraries. Duh. Sorry, sorry, my geek is showing I know...

03-01-2003, 10:01 PM	#40
Queen of Swords Contributor Join Date: Nov 2000 Location: Canada. Finally. Posts: 10,155	Originally posted by Magus55 LIFE COULD NOT FORM ON ITS OWN FROM NON LIVING ATOMS! Ah, the argumentum ad capslock, last refuge of the greatly outclassed.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.