- This topic has 1,340 replies, 50 voices, and was last updated 14 years ago by
.
- Posts
Quote (Stu @ Aug. 02 2008,13:36) Quote (t8 @ Aug. 02 2008,11:13) Quote (kejonn @ July 30 2008,12:08) Quote (Samuel @ July 29 2008,17:41) I don't have to disprove it. GOD will when he comes back.
When did he leave?
He leaves when you give up on him. But he is not far away.
So he is not everywhere then? Has he just popped down to the shops for some paracetamol for the headaches caused by being constantly bothered by the righteous?Stuart
While you are there, why not buy a bunch of bananas. Bananas are one of the most nutritious foods out there.To Stu.
To say there is no God you need absolute proof. Therefore you cannot say such a thing without this proof. I believe in God. I have had proof too. I am satisfied with this and even logic agrees that there is a creator. If you don't believe in God, the onus for yourself to is to uncover every stone in the cosmos and every dimension in the cosmos and you need to look even beyond the cosmos it self to make such a statement. Do it for yourself.
After such a search is undertaken, please report your discovery or lack of discovery to Heaven Net. We can then continue this discussion with at least some substance to back up your claims and then we can move onto other things. But if you continue with this statement with your physical presence restricted to New Zealand, Planet Earth, the Milky Way, the Local Group, then I have to say the obvious that you are from a small part of the universe and you are focusing on a very small part of knowledge that is obtainable from where you are positioned.
I hope you accept the mission. If not, then at least admit that you could be wrong. Thanks for listening.
Quote (Stu @ Aug. 03 2008,14:19) Quote (Not3in1 @ Aug. 03 2008,08:43) I watched the History channel last night. They have a show called, “Evolve” and they were discussing the evolution of the eye. I found it very interesting that while they are able to speculate when the eye came into being (through what they called an “explosion” and fossils from that so-called era), they could not explain why it evolved and exactly how it came to be. Very vague for science, I thought? Is it really only guesswork after all?
Good question, Not3. If it was a TV show from a couple of decades ago they might discuss eye evolution in those terms. There is no excuse today. There are examples of the evolutionary intermediate stages present in still-living species. The eye has always been a creationist favourite, and now it is rapidly going sour on them because as usual there is a very straightforward explanation. There is little guesswork and much evidence even for an adaptation that leaves poor fossils.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_of_the_eye
Stuart
I'm surprised to hear that this show is dated considering it is a new show AND on a network that prides itself in current, up-to-date information.Instead of missing some pieces, I think they were just being honest scientists – some things cannot be known for sure.
Google have an interesting product to compete with Wikipedia.
http://knol.google.comYou can create a page and only you are allowed to edit the page. If someone disagrees with you, then they can create a competing page.
This stops the merciless editing that you see on Wikipedia sometimes.
Hi Kimba08
Quote I know we've covered Design threw evolution of your Body but there's more.
Yes, and design by evolution is not design at all. Evolution is in no way forward thinking.Quote Much more Actually. And this is the last class as at this point evolution ends on most part in being of much importance. Of course evolution is still slowly marching on but the true creation has already been created NOW and this Creation CAN NOT! be explained by Darwin! It is YOU naturally not your Body that can be accounted for by Darwin but the thing that makes us defer from rest of Darwins Prodigy of Evolution ie Fish, Animals and Birds of all kinds. They all have an aniamal brain strickly stimlus response mechanisms only. Can be trained by Punishmnet / reward methods quite effectively but No thought, No creativity, Just response to stimius and that is all
We are all animals of exactly that kind. We are not the only tool-makers and we are not the only apes with culture and language.Quote Darwins theory can manufacture from the missing abiogensis material. No True intelligent life that allows you to consider my words or read this type. A dog can't read but you can. Not saying much for the poor dog having to put up with you? There is not conscience thought or computations just reaction to enviromental conditions beaten into it's animal mind.
Many humans cannot read. Most dogs show affection. We are so used to being humans in an industrial society that we have lost track of just how much we ourselves have our own ‘animal instincts’. The bible bangs on about little else for long stretches. A domesticated animal like a dog is probably not the best animal to choose to exemplify ‘natural’ behaviour.Quote Fact is we too can be trained to some smaller degree but the Rational mind can revolt. An animal will always react in some trained manner. A dog cannot sing an opera (Maybe Howl along with you?) lets say write an opera instead, write poetry or paint the Mona Lisa. But if asked but you and I could attempt it, Perhaps a bad effort but some form of similie could be managed by all humans to some degree.
We do have much bigger brains with greater intellectual capacities than other animals. Religious cults succeed in brainwashing their victims; they are not capable of rationally overcoming their training. I think people here are self-brainwashed. They deny so much evidence (or choose to remain ignorant of it) that you have to conclude that their rationality is suppressed for the good of the survival of the doctrine. There is a very good argument to be made that unthinking obedience to a common ideology or set of rituals binds the group and gives a very strong evolutionary survival advantage.Quote So what is this intelligence that has conscienceness of his awareness with annalictical / artistic capability?
It’s a massively fortuitous survival advantage courtesy of natural selection working on chance mutations in the context of variation in the population. A likely factor was the availability of iodine and fish as essential parts of a diet able to support the building and feeding of bigger brains, made possible because our distant ancestors lived near the East African coast.
Quote YOU! Simply YOU. No more or less. Now here we go again where's the Proof it's Me? You Prove it's not same it's but your turn, Just one scienifical non-refutable, labratory controlled experiment Proving you don't exist and I WILL BE VERY HAPPY and Probably a lot of fundamentalistic religous type you know what I mean because you are aware and analizing the concept. Chow …
I can neither prove I exist nor prove I don’t. ‘I think therefore I am’ is probably the safest ground on which to stand. There is very good empirical evidence for both of us, but no proof. That is the existentialist problem that you have described above.Quote P.S. … you were right about GOD Plan being Calvanistic but only up until man Gains Awareness then Free choice comes in and we have destiny over our lives for Good or Bad.
Of course calvanists take it much further than that. God is waiting to punish you for the wrong option he knew you would take. He stands by and waits for you to fail as he knows you will. I consider the concept of having the free will to follow ‘god’s plan’ just absurd. If we know anything on the subject it is that human motive to act is complicated and even the most considerate justice systems have only very blunt tools with which to answer the questions of culpability. Most choices we make freely are trivial ones. Usually we make choices on the basis of natural consequence and very occasionally on principle. Would you be claiming that it is not possible for an atheist to make ‘good’ choices?Stuart
Quote (Not3in1 @ Aug. 04 2008,15:08) Quote (Stu @ Aug. 03 2008,14:19) Quote (Not3in1 @ Aug. 03 2008,08:43) I watched the History channel last night. They have a show called, “Evolve” and they were discussing the evolution of the eye. I found it very interesting that while they are able to speculate when the eye came into being (through what they called an “explosion” and fossils from that so-called era), they could not explain why it evolved and exactly how it came to be. Very vague for science, I thought? Is it really only guesswork after all?
Good question, Not3. If it was a TV show from a couple of decades ago they might discuss eye evolution in those terms. There is no excuse today. There are examples of the evolutionary intermediate stages present in still-living species. The eye has always been a creationist favourite, and now it is rapidly going sour on them because as usual there is a very straightforward explanation. There is little guesswork and much evidence even for an adaptation that leaves poor fossils.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_of_the_eye
Stuart
I'm surprised to hear that this show is dated considering it is a new show AND on a network that prides itself in current, up-to-date information.Instead of missing some pieces, I think they were just being honest scientists – some things cannot be known for sure.
With parts like eyes that don't form good fossils, it can be hard work piecing together natural history. There is a very robust explanation for how eyes evolved, which actually happened independently several times over. You must appreciate that your post is the equivalent of saying 'I have heard there are some problems with Jesus'. Without details it is more like a smear than a point. That could have been a weakness of the programme.Stuart
Hi t8
Quote You have a choice as to whether you will be part of the new creation and perfection or whether you are entirely of this order and will be destroyed along with everything else that belongs to this order. Your choice, no one else can make that for you.
If I choose not to compete to be part of your fantasy world, it will be easier for you to book your seat on the 144,000-seater bus, destination: this new ‘creation and perfection’.You have not said why your omnipotent being did not manage to create perfection the first time. The fall, satan, the behaviours of people, whatever, are all excuses for divine incompetence. Was ‘he’ in charge or not?
Quote To say there is no God you need absolute proof.
Which is why I wrote that I am strictly an agnostic, as we all must be, but that based on the evidence I conclude that atheism is a reasonable conclusion.Quote Therefore you cannot say such a thing without this proof. I believe in God. I have had proof too.
So turn western philosophy on its head and show us you proof.Quote I am satisfied with this and even logic agrees that there is a creator.
You can be as satisfied with it as you want; alcoholics are satisfied with meths too. Who is logic? Is he your pastor?Quote If you don't believe in God, the onus for yourself to is to uncover every stone in the cosmos and every dimension in the cosmos and you need to look even beyond the cosmos it self to make such a statement. Do it for yourself.
There is no such onus whatsoever. You are making the claim, so you provide the evidence, or the proof you claim to have.Quote After such a search is undertaken, please report your discovery or lack of discovery to Heaven Net. We can then continue this discussion with at least some substance to back up your claims and then we can move onto other things. But if you continue with this statement with your physical presence restricted to New Zealand, Planet Earth, the Milky Way, the Local Group, then I have to say the obvious that you are from a small part of the universe and you are focusing on a very small part of knowledge that is obtainable from where you are positioned. I hope you accept the mission. If not, then at least admit that you could be wrong. Thanks for listening.
I wish you would ‘listen’. I have posted several times that I reserve a small space for the possibility that you are right. Pragmatically atheist but philosophically agnostic.OK. I have investigated and have found the answer…
Here it is: god hates everyone except the Amish.
It is they and only that who will be boarding the 144,000-seater bus for the ride of their after-lives.
Sorry for the disappointment.
Stuart
Quote (t8 @ Aug. 04 2008,14:21) Quote (TimothyVI @ Aug. 02 2008,23:16) Hi T8, Did you ever wonder if that singularity of which you speak,
which was everything that existed before the big bang, may not have been God Himself?Tim
Hi Tim.It says that the Heavens declare the glory of God. So if the heavens were originally a singularity, then it was a revelation of God's glory IMHO.
But certainly it was God who was the cause. It was he who started it all.
Hi T8,The singularity was by definition that from which everything came, including the heavens. Nothing existed except the singularity. Once the singularity exploded into the universe, at that point the heavens could declare the glory of God,
because the singularity was God.Just thinking out of the box a little.
Tim
Hi TimothyVI:
Love astrophysics, Sorry if Butting in, but How are singularities and evolution related? Perhaps evolution of universe, Not that I mind at all. Was Wondering on your “the Singularity was God”? Not sure on that sorry? And other scripture or otherwise evidence here. Truly interested?
My Take is There was a Spirit universe first in which God and Angels? Christ, Satan and who knows “existed”. Then God created a huge singularity and attached it to edge of spirit realm, if such is possible, Or just created small pocket of space in unformed yet physical universe to hold it before it exploded into Phycical universe we have today.
Not sure if this is what is said to be Earth ie. Physcial universe and Spirit universe as Heavens. How GOD created Spirit universe, some-one else can grab????
Just my take… All “I know it sounded like a really “BIG BANG” to me! …. KAB-47Hi Stu
Seems to me you go beyond Atheist's non-belief into a form of Worshipping God Hatred or whatever religion that is or could be? You spend so much time tearing down GOD issues that I wonder what wrong you consider GOD did not Protect you from, that created all this lothing that so clouds your mind?
Because of this Hatred I submit you are incapable of rational thought ie. Scientific Clear-mindedness and object view-points with unbias descision making conclusions. So no test will ever satisfy your needs of proof as ever one has failed prior to the test. Now who is calvanistic as you said? You questioned me as to:Quote Would you be claiming that it is not possible for an atheist to make ‘good’ choices No even a DOG can make a fluke descision and get it right
But it may be an atheist may make some really BIG BAD ONES also, Just threw lack of info determined by his closed mind. I believe they call it “hardened their hearts”
John 12: 40
40 He hath blinded their eyes, and hardened their heart; that they should not see with their eyes, nor understand with their heart, and be converted, and I should heal them.Finally the test? Proof that GOD exists by scientific means. I challengne YOU to do just this. Take survey of 100, or what means may be mustered, of best scientific minds available to you. Look for specialists of all fields Molelecular Biology, Theorical astro-physics, Quantum Mechanics and what have your needs be. Take cross-section of population of scientists Believers and Non-believers. Ask the specialists these questions in the specific fields and ask what chance each of following, in list, may happen again by random chance not mentioning with or with-out God's Help at all.
1)-The “Big Bang” ie. creation of new universe
2)-Creation of new solar sytem with planets capable of Supporting life
3)-Start of Life in new solar sytem
4)-Establishment of Life long enough to develop man without a doomsday rock or other Mass extinction event occurring, wiping him out first
5)- creating Self-Awareness in new Man
Estimation by experts allowed. Also zero is an acceptalbe response and then mutliple it out.
Now this again “Old News” but not in sense of looking at all factors at same time. Explaining single factors away as chance it easy but looking at whole true picture at once we see the “Odds” are very much against and any betting man would be a FOOL to bet against.The final Step in our evolutionary needs is the bringing about of intelligence and self awareness in Man. Add to this Creativity and higher reasoning/analytical functions and this is final evolution of importance on Earth yet to date. I see you think you are a Brain and nervous system only.
Yes we have largest ? most developed brain of animals but is this the sole contributor of ALL these higher Functions? I say no possible way. This Brain is just another example of a big-animal Brain but not capalbe of Rational thought, but Rather Just working on same principles as animal's but having the added capablity of connecting and relaying thoughts from a Spirit/Soul to body. Definitions of both spirit and Soul are so varied as to be confusing. But I mean the Life force and Personality of the Animating Spirit. This is the invisble ingredient required to animate the Personality with all these Capablities not just a large Animal brain. The only way I can Prove this to you is a Bullet and why waste a prefectly GOOD Bullet and go to jail as you would not be able to communicate back to me I was Right … KAB-48Quote (Kimba08 @ Aug. 05 2008,01:41) Hi TimothyVI: Love astrophysics, Sorry if Butting in, but How are singularities and evolution related? Perhaps evolution of universe, Not that I mind at all. Was Wondering on your “the Singularity was God”? Not sure on that sorry? And other scripture or otherwise evidence here. Truly interested?
My Take is There was a Spirit universe first in which God and Angels? Christ, Satan and who knows “existed”. Then God created a huge singularity and attached it to edge of spirit realm, if such is possible, Or just created small pocket of space in unformed yet physical universe to hold it before it exploded into Phycical universe we have today.
Not sure if this is what is said to be Earth ie. Physcial universe and Spirit universe as Heavens. How GOD created Spirit universe, some-one else can grab????
Just my take… All “I know it sounded like a really “BIG BANG” to me! …. KAB-47
Hi Kimba,I was thinking of a singularity more as a point where some property is infinite.
For example, at the center of a black hole, according to classical theory, the density is infinite (because a finite mass is compressed to a zero volume). Thus it is a singularity.
So if you extrapolate the properties of the universe to the instant of the big bang, you will find that both the density and the temperature go to infinity, and so that is also a singularity.All I was saying to T8 was, has he ever thought about the possibility that God was that singularity.
Tim
HI TimothyVI
Very Novelle and I LOVE original thought and this is why I had to respond! First REAL thinking I hate to say I've seen with interesting ramifications. IF GOD was the singularity then after it exploded is he still? You see the Delimia?The infinite= the infinite=the infinite thinking. I beleive GOD CAN be any where anytime and if needed be ALL places but I think he may prefer a more Central Viewpoint, Obviously my Little viewpoint, What are Odds either of us is Right? Perhaps he IS Every-where ALL THE TIME? After All we are talking about the infinite and trying to ananlize him via a tiny finite viewpoint (ours). What is your view? … KAB-49
Hi Kimba08
Quote Seems to me you go beyond Atheist's non-belief into a form of Worshipping God Hatred or whatever religion that is or could be? You spend so much time tearing down GOD issues that I wonder what wrong you consider GOD did not Protect you from, that created all this lothing that so clouds your mind?
All I am doing is reacting to the biblical account of god. Don’t forget to see it from my point of view: there are no supernatural beings so it is all mock indignation. I am not actually angry at something imaginary. That would be lunacy! I pride myself on being clear about what I write. How is my thinking or expression clouded?Quote Because of this Hatred I submit you are incapable of rational thought ie. Scientific Clear-mindedness and object view-points with unbias descision making conclusions.
Aren’t you skirting round the issues with a fallacious ad hominem there? Do you have answers to my points?Quote So no test will ever satisfy your needs of proof as ever one has failed prior to the test. Now who is calvanistic as you said?
Did the calvanists ever require proof? I have never asked anyone here for proof. My greatest requests have been for one single piece of evidence that is indisputably attributable to any god (I’m not even fussy about it being the Judeo-christian one), and to tell me a single thing I cannot know because I do not believe in gods.Quote You questioned me as to: Would you be claiming that it is not possible for an atheist to make ‘good’ choices No even a DOG can make a fluke descision and get it right But it may be an atheist may make some really BIG BAD ONES also, Just threw lack of info determined by his closed mind. I believe they call it “hardened their hearts” John 12: 40 He hath blinded their eyes, and hardened their heart; that they should not see with their eyes, nor understand with their heart, and be converted, and I should heal them.
What would be an example of a ‘really BIG BAD’ choice made by a non-believer?Quote Finally the test? Proof that GOD exists by scientific means. I challengne YOU to do just this. Take survey of 100, or what means may be mustered, of best scientific minds available to you. Look for specialists of all fields Molelecular Biology, Theorical astro-physics, Quantum Mechanics and what have your needs be. Take cross-section of population of scientists Believers and Non-believers. Ask the specialists these questions in the specific fields and ask what chance each of following, in list, may happen again by random chance not mentioning with or with-out God's Help at all.
1)-The “Big Bang” ie. creation of new universe
2)-Creation of new solar sytem with planets capable of Supporting life
3)-Start of Life in new solar sytem
4)-Establishment of Life long enough to develop man without a doomsday rock or other Mass extinction event occurring, wiping him out first
5)- creating Self-Awareness in new Man
Estimation by experts allowed. Also zero is an acceptalbe response and then mutliple it out.
Now this again “Old News” but not in sense of looking at all factors at same time. Explaining single factors away as chance it easy but looking at whole true picture at once we see the “Odds” are very much against and any betting man would be a FOOL to bet against.
Opinion is irrelevant. Only facts count. It is not a matter of betting, or voting for reality. The pope could renounce every aspect of his faith, the archbishop of Canterbury could cuddle up to Richard Dawkins and give the finger up to the Lambeth conference, and John Hagee could come out as a satanist and none of that would not make any difference to determining whether there are gods. In any case you have made up your mind. Your heart is hardened!Quote The final Step in our evolutionary needs is the bringing about of intelligence and self awareness in Man.
You still don’t understand evolution. This statement is nonsensical.Quote Add to this Creativity and higher reasoning/analytical functions and this is final evolution of importance on Earth yet to date. I see you think you are a Brain and nervous system only.
Obviously I am not, but I do believe that religious experience only exists inside individual believers’ heads, and that all humans experience such sensations, just putting a different interpretation on them according to supernatural conviction.Quote Yes we have largest ? most developed brain of animals but is this the sole contributor of ALL these higher Functions? I say no possible way. This Brain is just another example of a big-animal Brain but not capalbe of Rational thought, but Rather Just working on same principles as animal's but having the added capablity of connecting and relaying thoughts from a Spirit/Soul to body. Definitions of both spirit and Soul are so varied as to be confusing. But I mean the Life force and Personality of the Animating Spirit.
The life force argument was dealt a killer blow in 1828 by Wohler who synthesised urea (a compound that contained ‘life force’) by heating ammonium isocyanate ( a compound that didn’t). This experiment is extended by modern neuroscience research. Mentally we are our brain chemistry and the neural connections in our heads. There is no animism, life force or independent ‘spirit’. You are postulating something supernatural but your best argument so far has been from personal incredulity, which has no power except with the gullible.Quote This is the invisble ingredient required to animate the Personality with all these Capablities not just a large Animal brain. The only way I can Prove this to you is a Bullet and why waste a prefectly GOOD Bullet and go to jail as you would not be able to communicate back to me I was Right .
Huh? You call my thinking clouded after that effort?!Stuart
Quote (Kimba08 @ Aug. 05 2008,15:27) HI TimothyVI IF GOD was the singularity then after it exploded is he still? You see the Delimia? Perhaps he IS Every-where ALL THE TIME? After All we are talking about the infinite and trying to ananlize him via a tiny finite viewpoint (ours). What is your view? … KAB-49
HI kimba08,If GOd was the singularity, then after the explosion God is everything that was in the singularity, but spread out.
You hit the nail on the head. People think God is this old man with a long beard sitting on a throne looking down on earth.
They think that all He has to do is sit and judge how earth is doing.
I think of God as being everywhere, and everything. He is what is holding this keyboard together that I am typing on.
He is the air that I am breathing. He is what is keeping the entire rest of the universe expanding as it should because He is the entire rest of the universe.Christianity has made God appear too small.
Tim
Stu wrote:
Quote The life force argument was dealt a killer blow in 1828 by Wohler who synthesised urea (a compound that contained ‘life force’) by heating ammonium isocyanate ( a compound that didn’t). This experiment is extended by modern neuroscience research. Mentally we are our brain chemistry and the neural connections in our heads. There is no animism, life force or independent ‘spirit’. You are postulating something supernatural but your best argument so far has been from personal incredulity, which has no power except with the gullible. Don't you think you are overstating your case just a little here. Urea has life force in it? According to the holy wikipedia, (as you like to call it):
[Urea] was the first organic compound to be artificially synthesized from inorganic starting materials… . Although Wöhler was attempting to prepare ammonium cyanate, by forming urea, he inadvertently discredited vitalism, the theory that the chemicals of living organisms are fundamentally different from inanimate matter, thus starting the discipline of organic chemistry.
That's a far cry from creating “life force” in a lab. Do you know of any experiments that actually produce a living creature from organic compounds? If not, I think that you are overselling this particular scientific discovery.
Tim
I like both your thoughts but Must say I love, because “the singularity was God.” Has a almost Biblical sound to it. But I might reverse it to: “GOD was the Singlularity”? Not sure now Just depends on your viewpoint I guess?
I saw Beauty in this statement that drew me to it like a moth to a flame. Nothing I could DO but Follow the light. When I see Beauty I also see God or god's hand of creation. Whether it is just a explanation of god's design like E=mc2 or a DNA Helix Visibily showing Encoded Genes and markers. I See God's Hand and it is Good!
This is Why I believe that the Evolutionary theory of Darwin is Correct and was God's design from Creation. What better way to provide All necessary life forms for Man later? Just because Darwin noted the principles first does not mean he had control over it as God did and does Today.
Do you see how there is no choice? God made all the Animals etc. via this mechanism that Darwin Observed and theorised but is was God's WORK not Darwins invention that created ALL. To finish off Evolution, For me at least on most part,Give me your take on this Theory I put forward? Is Evolution possibly the result of God's Work?Here are my Additions to yours on Big Bang Theory
1) The Spirit universe was formed first. ie. Had to have someplace to start and what better than a place to stay at least temporarily.This was known as “the Heaven” rather than our definintion of Stars in “Heavens” (Sky above Earth or immediate visible universe around Earth)
2)”The Earth” is what is known Now as “Our Physical Universe”. Now the “Earth” was ” without form, and void” and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.
3 And God said, Let there be light: and there was light. Is this the moment of Creation? of “Big BANG”? IE. GOD's Command “Let there be light!”?I also see God creating All the Mass of the Singularity from his own thought and therefore after explosion it is part of God everywhere. The Big Bang was just a delivery system.
Quote then after the explosion God is everything that was in the singularity, but spread out. I have felt something of this “God everywhere” but I think we must start new thread to explore further. I will try, if not Do you know proceedure? … KAB-50
HI STU:
Getting headache from backlash and although simulting at times? Times seem to be less often, as I state your bag of mockeries is now somewhat “OLD NEWS” also. Get new material. I know what you will say before you say it. Your response will be “Get some new stuff yourself no doubt.”
Aggreed! But this is way off topic of Evolution soMY Final questions and answer simply:
Quote and to tell me a single thing I cannot know because I do not believe in gods. First surely you cannot ever know GOD himself and the Blessings that are possible from him. Then your “Soul” itself and yes I know you don't believe in Imaginery things including your imaginery Soul. To me this is the ultimate in SELF DENIAL
I know “Prove to ME that I have A SOUL? right?”
MY final 2 Questions are “Prove to ME you Don't”!
And finally again “What it is that GOD did not protect you from?”
Although somewhat of a aspirin Magnet type conversation I do see alot of your points but you are blind and will not look even at yourself, your true self, right under your nose, or just above actually. Thankyou for your attention and conversation and maybe we can find another topic of interest but I'm done with Evolution and that is what we were to discuss? Chow … KAB-52Tim
New Topic on “Big Bang” OPEN! … KAB-53
Quote (WhatIsTrue @ Aug. 06 2008,01:32) Stu wrote: Quote The life force argument was dealt a killer blow in 1828 by Wohler who synthesised urea (a compound that contained ‘life force’) by heating ammonium isocyanate ( a compound that didn’t). This experiment is extended by modern neuroscience research. Mentally we are our brain chemistry and the neural connections in our heads. There is no animism, life force or independent ‘spirit’. You are postulating something supernatural but your best argument so far has been from personal incredulity, which has no power except with the gullible. Don't you think you are overstating your case just a little here. Urea has life force in it? According to the holy wikipedia, (as you like to call it):
[Urea] was the first organic compound to be artificially synthesized from inorganic starting materials… . Although Wöhler was attempting to prepare ammonium cyanate, by forming urea, he inadvertently discredited vitalism, the theory that the chemicals of living organisms are fundamentally different from inanimate matter, thus starting the discipline of organic chemistry.
That's a far cry from creating “life force” in a lab. Do you know of any experiments that actually produce a living creature from organic compounds? If not, I think that you are overselling this particular scientific discovery.
The point I made was exactly as you quoted from the Good Website: people were under the false impression that substances produced in living organisms (like urea) had a special quality, a life force, that could not be reproduced purely by chemical reactions between other substances that were without life force. this was disproven by the simple conversion by heating of the inorganic material ammonium isocyanate to urea. If we return to the original reason for mentioning it, there is no known mechanism for 'seeding' future life within matter, and this experiment of Wohler debunked the last attempt to mount this argument. You could rightly say that just because we don't know how does not mean it is not possible, but there is no observation that demands such an extraordinary claim. Not only does it pose more questions than it answers, it tries to undo well-established principles of chemistry and biology without any evidence. Sophistry is the kindest word you can use for the seeding idea.I am not making any claim for abiogenesis here, actually it is Kimba08 who is proposing a strange kind of deiochemical abiogenesis, as usual for purely ideological reasons.
Stuart
Stuart
Hi Kimba08
Quote Getting headache from backlash and although simulting at times? Times seem to be less often, as I state your bag of mockeries is now somewhat “OLD NEWS” also. Get new material. I know what you will say before you say it. Your response will be “Get some new stuff yourself no doubt.”
You are in the unusual position here of agreeing with the principle that modern species arose by descent from common ancestors, with modification, but completely misunderstanding the explanation to the point that you use natural selection to explain things that it actually flatly contradicts. Having explained that in reasonable detail, I’m at a bit of a loss to know what to say next. My opinion is that you would benefit from reading some proper books about evolution. You may then reject it because it actually does not accommodate your deist philosophy, but at least you would reject it from an informed position. Of course such a rejection would be on grounds of religious faith alone. I haven’t heard of any other reason.Quote First surely you cannot ever know GOD himself and the Blessings that are possible from him. Then your “Soul” itself and yes I know you don't believe in Imaginery things including your imaginery Soul. To me this is the ultimate in SELF DENIAL
My knowledge (which I try always to base on empirical observation to remove bias – I know you think somehow that adds bias!) is that there are very good explanations for why people think they have god-derived blessings that others deny themselves. If you cannot concede the possibility that I know something you do not (and are in a temporary state in which you cannot know it) then I wonder about the epistemology and worth of that knowledge. My experience here makes me suspect even more that people suppress that thought, fearing it may expose a delusion.Quote I know “Prove to ME that I have A SOUL? right?” MY final 2 Questions are “Prove to ME you Don't”!
I cannot prove a negative, but I would not even try until we could establish some well-rooted goalposts of definitions. What is a soul?Quote And finally again “What it is that GOD did not protect you from?”
What an absurd question to ask an atheist. Tell me why you are so disappointed there is no god!Quote Although somewhat of a aspirin Magnet type conversation I do see alot of your points but you are blind and will not look even at yourself, your true self, right under your nose, or just above actually. Thankyou for your attention and conversation and maybe we can find another topic of interest but I'm done with Evolution and that is what we were to discuss? Chow …
I hold high standards of probity. Do not blame me if you have not been able to meet them.Stuart
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
