- This topic is empty.
- Posts
Quote (Nick Hassan @ Jan. 10 2008,12:34) Hi stu,
No one has come back since the Lord to give us more detail.
So there could be a retraction in the future? We are sorry but the promised reality is actually fantasy. No refunds are available at this time.Stuart
Quote (Nick Hassan @ Jan. 10 2008,12:41) Hi Stu,
Nup.
Your future
Your own choice
Then I choose reality and the truth of compassion and love and other qualities of humanity, and reject the religious fantasy that by definition we cannot know is true, but involves telling people they are fools and making care for others a secondary priority to getting out of this life and into an imaginary paradise.Stuart
Quote (Nick Hassan @ Jan. 10 2008,12:47) Hi tow,
The reality you see is enough?
Then you'll be off then?
This is a bible area.
This is a reality area. The reality is that people with irrational motives want to organise the lives of others. That is worth opposing.Stuart
Hi Stu,
You come here where we share the gospel and discuss the sacred writings
and then get annoyed when you hear the message of hope.
There are places where ears are tickled.Quote (Nick Hassan @ Jan. 10 2008,13:01) Hi Stu,
You come here where we share the gospel and discuss the sacred writings
and then get annoyed when you hear the message of hope.
There are places where ears are tickled.
But the message of hope as written in your book is demonstrably a lie. Is delusion on excuse?Stuart
Quote (Nick Hassan @ Jan. 10 2008,13:09) Hi Stu,
Really?
You can tell us these things?
You must be a man of amazing insight.
In principle at least, I can see no more than you can!Stuart
Quote (Stu @ Jan. 10 2008,12:50) This is a reality area. The reality is that people with irrational motives want to organise the lives of others. That is worth opposing.
Actually the reality is that you cannot make a banana and nobody/non-intelligence can. That means that you are less than nobody/non-intelligence, because non-intelligence can do many more things than you can ever dream of.The reality is that you, an intelligent ape cannot even come close to what non-intelligence has made.
On the other hand, if there there is a God, then you could quite easily say that you cannot compete with God and rightly so. But as it stands with your argument, you cannot compete with non-intelligence and that paints you in a poor light Stu.
In that case I would reassess your belief that you are some kind of enlightened ape. Perhaps the word enlightened needs to be removed.
Hi t8
Quote Actually the reality is that you cannot make a banana and nobody/non-intelligence can. That means that you are less than nobody/non-intelligence, because non-intelligence can do many more things than you can ever dream of. The reality is that you, an intelligent ape cannot even come close to what non-intelligence has made.
I would have agreed with you earlier, but I now withdraw my assent to the idea that a banana cannot be made. I think it will be possible within the next couple of years.Quote On the other hand, if there there is a God, then you could quite easily say that you cannot compete with God and rightly so. But as it stands with your argument, you cannot compete with non-intelligence and that paints you in a poor light Stu. In that case I would reassess your belief that you are some kind of enlightened ape. Perhaps the word enlightened needs to be removed.
Europe definitely went thought an anti-christian enlightenment which was of revolutionary importance to our well-being, and we are definitely apes. You too are an enlightened ape, t8.Have you got some new material?
Stuart
Quote (Stu @ Feb. 14 2008,17:29) I would have agreed with you earlier, but I now withdraw my assent to the idea that a banana cannot be made. I think it will be possible within the next couple of years.
Maybe by using the code that God already created and creating a synthetic version, or by genetic engineering it may be possible. But that is like the guy next to you who in an exam is looking at your answers and writing them down.But what about starting with an empty test tube. And creating a banana.
Nothing/non-intelligence did it by processes that came from processes that came from nothing/nobody. So surely an intelligent ape has a much greater chance of doing it, than a non-intelligent thingy.
Of course I believe in God so I don't need to create a banana to prove my point.
Good luck, your going to need it.
Get back to me when you have created a green banana and then report back when it turns yellow and again when it rots.
Thanks.
Quote (Stu @ Feb. 14 2008,17:29) Hi t8 Quote Actually the reality is that you cannot make a banana and nobody/non-intelligence can. That means that you are less than nobody/non-intelligence, because non-intelligence can do many more things than you can ever dream of. The reality is that you, an intelligent ape cannot even come close to what non-intelligence has made.
I would have agreed with you earlier, but I now withdraw my assent to the idea that a banana cannot be made. I think it will be possible within the next couple of years.Quote On the other hand, if there there is a God, then you could quite easily say that you cannot compete with God and rightly so. But as it stands with your argument, you cannot compete with non-intelligence and that paints you in a poor light Stu. In that case I would reassess your belief that you are some kind of enlightened ape. Perhaps the word enlightened needs to be removed.
Europe definitely went thought an anti-christian enlightenment which was of revolutionary importance to our well-being, and we are definitely apes. You too are an enlightened ape, t8.Have you got some new material?
Stuart
How much DNA does one have to have to make them the same?Humans have 40% DNA in common with daffodils, so I am a flower?
Yes humans and apes have most DNA in common, but it is not hard to see that many animals and plants share common DNA.You know what, MS Word and MS Excel have much common code and common libraries of binaries. But that only proves that the programmers reuse code in their creations. No point in reinventing the wheel each time if you don't have to.
The point is that saying that we came from apes is like saying that MS Word came from MS Excel. But it didn't. They are 2 products that share some base code.
Think of DNA like HTML. You can create all manner of web pages from HTML. Pages have common code but that is no proof that one page came from another. In the HTML case there is most likely a template in a website that pages are made from. So they resemble each other in code, but didn't come from one another, but from one prototype.
To say that one code base came from another is purely the result of scientific imagination and not scientific fact. There are other conclusions that can be drawn from such evidence. A good scientist would never rule them out due to bias, or promote one option because he didn't like the other options.
Hi t8
Stu: I would have agreed with you earlier, but I now withdraw my assent to the idea that a banana cannot be made. I think it will be possible within the next couple of years.
Quote Maybe by using the code that God already created and creating a synthetic version, or by genetic engineering it may be possible. But that is like the guy next to you who in an exam is looking at your answers and writing them down.
You cannot know that in your mythology, your god has not copied the code from someone else. It could well be true that life as we know it is the only system that is chemically possible. There are some good chemical reasons to believe this. You therefore cannot honestly claim copyright on behalf of your supernatural being on the only possible way of producing life, if that is what it is. If it is a banana you want, how else could it be done?Quote Of course I believe in God so I don't need to create a banana to prove my point. Good luck, your going to need it.
I don’t need to make fruit for you in order not to believe in your god. You’re the one making the extraordinary claim without any extraordinary evidence. You can’t even tell me how your god made bananas.Stuart
Hi t8
Stu: Have you got some new material?
Quote How much DNA does one have to have to make them the same? Humans have 40% DNA in common with daffodils, so I am a flower? Yes humans and apes have most DNA in common, but it is not hard to see that many animals and plants share common DNA. You know what, MS Word and MS Excel have much common code and common libraries of binaries. But that only proves that the programmers reuse code in their creations. No point in reinventing the wheel each time if you don't have to. The point is that saying that we came from apes is like saying that MS Word came from MS Excel. But it didn't. They are 2 products that share some base code.
Chimpanzees and humans are apes that came from a common ancestor, and as you say we share lots of ‘base code’.Quote Think of DNA like HTML. You can create all manner of web pages from HTML. Pages have common code but that is no proof that one page came from another. In the HTML case there is most likely a template in a website that pages are made from. So they resemble each other in code, but didn't come from one another, but from one prototype.
Your analogy is not a theory. There is an important difference between HTML and DNA. HTML is only a set of instructions to tell the system what to display or point to. DNA contains all the information for making an entirely new system. That is why natural selection can cause radical changes in the frequency of genes over time. HTML cannot instruct for the production of a new, possibly mutated PC.The other problem is that it does not disprove common HTML ancestry. You are providing a testimony that there is a prototype template involved. I believe you that there is an HTML designer, and there is evidence of one, but there is no absolute proof of it. There is no evidence of a DNA designer, and many tell-tale signs in the DNA itself that it is not the design of the Judeo-christian mythological creator, judging by the things claimed for him in holy books. The problem here is that there is no theory of how a creator designed DNA, so we can only go on the claims of those who claim to describe this creator.
Quote To say that one code base came from another is purely the result of scientific imagination and not scientific fact. There are other conclusions that can be drawn from such evidence. A good scientist would never rule them out due to bias, or promote one option because he didn't like the other options.
It is obviously true that one set of chromosomes comes directly from the recombination of those of two parents. It is also true that the process has repeated for a very long time. The fossil record tells us that humans have only been present on earth in their current form for about 185,000 years, and that other hominids have gone extinct. There has unquestionably been a very slow, gradual change in the species of living things that shows an increase in complexity over the last 600 million years, with the existence in the first billions of years of little more than very simple bacteria-like organisms. The fossils and our DNA independently give exactly the same sequence of divergence of species and the molecular clock can be correlated to the dated fossils. There are now many series of fossils that show in quite good resolution the changes that happened in particular species.What other conclusion can be drawn from such evidence to the extent that it forms a coherent theory that is falsifiable and makes predictions that can be demonstrated true?
Stuart
Quote (Stu @ Feb. 15 2008,21:11) You cannot know that in your mythology, your god has not copied the code from someone else. It could well be true that life as we know it is the only system that is chemically possible. There are some good chemical reasons to believe this. You therefore cannot honestly claim copyright on behalf of your supernatural being on the only possible way of producing life, if that is what it is. If it is a banana you want, how else could it be done?
Um excuse me, but someone came up with the code first. That person is God.All others copy. NASA and the military copy God's designs. Geneticists, the Wright brothers, just about anyone who has created anything copies from God's designs.
Once that is understood, it is something else entirely different to say who is God? But that is base 2 and you haven't even landed on base 1 yet.
Quote (Stu @ Feb. 15 2008,21:52) Your analogy is not a theory. There is an important difference between HTML and DNA. HTML is only a set of instructions to tell the system what to display or point to. DNA contains all the information for making an entirely new system. That is why natural selection can cause radical changes in the frequency of genes over time. HTML cannot instruct for the production of a new, possibly mutated PC.
OK, then replace HTML with a language that has variables.You know there are digital viruses out there that mutate to escape detection and annihilation. Each was written by a creator and yet they can change.
Now think about millions of years of digital evolution. Simple cells or viruses become bigger organisms through mutation. Yet even then the instructions were all written by a creator.
It's called logic Stu. Magic is just logic designed to look impossible.
Fancy that.
Stu,
Quote I would have agreed with you earlier, but I now withdraw my assent to the idea that a banana cannot be made. I think it will be possible within the next couple of years. Stu will that be before or after those flying cars we were supposed to have last century? lol
Quote (seekingtruth @ Feb. 16 2008,18:43) Stu, Quote I would have agreed with you earlier, but I now withdraw my assent to the idea that a banana cannot be made. I think it will be possible within the next couple of years. Stu will that be before or after those flying cars we were supposed to have last century? lol
Yes. All those science programmes on TV in the '70s and '80s. I expected to be commuting to work on a Moon station by now!Stuart
Hi t8
Stu: You cannot know that in your mythology, your god has not copied the code from someone else..
Quote Um excuse me, but someone came up with the code first. That person is God.
You are telling us that it was. I disagree.Is god a person?
Quote All others copy. NASA and the military copy God's designs. Geneticists, the Wright brothers, just about anyone who has created anything copies from God's designs.
God must be wondering who is embezzling all his royalties.Quote Once that is understood, it is something else entirely different to say who is God? But that is base 2 and you haven't even landed on base 1 yet.
Funny you should say that, I was just thinking the same about you.Stu: Your analogy is not a theory. There is an important difference between HTML and DNA. HTML is only a set of instructions to tell the system what to display or point to. DNA contains all the information for making an entirely new system. That is why natural selection can cause radical changes in the frequency of genes over time. HTML cannot instruct for the production of a new, possibly mutated PC.
Quote OK, then replace HTML with a language that has variables.
Do you mean a multi-variable code for a robot that can self-replicate?Quote You know there are digital viruses out there that mutate to escape detection and annihilation. Each was written by a creator and yet they can change.
Yes you’ve told me about them before. Yes, they were indeed written by coders.Quote Now think about millions of years of digital evolution. Simple cells or viruses become bigger organisms through mutation. Yet even then the instructions were all written by a creator.
No they weren’t. I make that statement with the same kind of justification that you have used above.You are making analogies that are not applicable to the living world, without any evidence for their worth. You claim to be using logic, but it is a false circular argument.
Stuart
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
