John_M Posted January 13, 2005 Share Posted January 13, 2005 To the post Starter, encoded in your own _|337 speak. Enjoy. '/0u|2 d1|23k7 1|\|\/01\//\/\3|\|7 1|\| 7|-|15 155u3 15 |\|39471\/3 70 7|-|3 k|-||215714|\| \/\/4'/ 0F 11F3, 4|\|d '/0u|2 \/\/|23k|<1355|\|355 1|\| p0575 15 |\|07 900d. 1 \/\/15|-| F0|2 '/0u 70 83113\/3 1|\| 90d, 8u7 '/37 |-|0\/\/ 4|23 '/0u |-|3|23 4|\|d 7'/p1|\|9 4|\|d |234d1|\|9 7|-|15 p057, 90d /\/\4d3 '/0u, 50 4kk3p7 7|-|47 4|\|d /\/\0\/3 0|\| 70 7|-|3 |2341 11F3, 7|-|3 k|-||215714|\| 11F3. |-|4\/3 4 |\|1k3 d4'/, 4|\|d 90d 81355. Have a nice day everyone. And post starter, get back to me as soon as possible. CPT John M. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mircleman Posted January 13, 2005 Share Posted January 13, 2005 Ok lets do it this way, this will prove there is indeed a design of a being of some sort What is the mathamatical possability that the universe, galaxy, earth, animals man etc with all of its order and biological setup of animals and humans the nature way the body fights off diease, or nature and the way it replenishes it's self millions of examples. What are the mathamatical equation or possability that it is all just happened by accident, with no design or purpose over millions of years anyone with the number for that? I do ....answer Infintly an impossability. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheDogsBed Posted January 13, 2005 Share Posted January 13, 2005 (edited) Reading through it personally i find it hard to see how someone writing letters from prison, knowing he would be executed, would have a lot to gain by reassuring peoples faith as Paul did. Then try reading Oscar Wilde's 'De Profundis'. We all have things to gain by our actions, whether it be self-serving or otherwise. That is our fundamental flaw. At the base level we our designed to continue the species. However, mix that with our own desire to accomplish, to make our mark, to be remembered, and so forth, you are left with a very toxic cocktail of ego and good-intent. The two rarely marry well and very rarely stay married for life. You are free to form your own opinions on life, however from what i can see the more people think about such matters believing God doesn't exist, the more life seems so pointless. I have seen people end up in one of two camps; nihilism - the belief that there is quite frankly no point to anything (in which case why bother existing) or existentialism (i must create a false sense of purpose, "eat drink and be merry for tomorow we die"). Whilst you could argue that "neither are satisfactory, but they happen to be true" it does reduce life down to a pointless drag. Fine, if thats how you like it however i wouldn't use the word "enjoy" when admitting i don't have real purpose, surely that starts to wear down on people eventually. :/ 585287251[/snapback] I'm confused as to why you believe that if a man chooses not to believe in God then his life must be considered pointless? Given that our role is to continue the species, a simple procreative act meets the purpose of life, at the base level. Why do you expect or indeed desire for life to have more purpose than this? Is the sheer brilliance of the continued success of a species, despite massive relative adversity not enough for you? How can procreation be pointless? It simply cannot. It is, afterall, what allows you and I to be having this debate today. You see, it seems to me that many 'believers' are as guilty of a binary mode of thinking as us non-believers. You seem to believe that if I don't have God then I have nothing at all of any great substance. That is absolutely untrue and unjust. I can look out of my window right now and see a million stars in the sky. The very notion that they exist and that we don't truly and fully understand why they exist or what they will do tomorrow is purpose enough for life; to thrive to understand. Frankly, I don't want all of the answers dictated to me from a book. That, to me, is arrogance at a level that is beyond measure, and indeed, makes for a very dull life. I would argue that if you have all the answers, you know the origin and you know the end then what is the point of the taking part? You know and I know that I cannot disprove the Bible, and as I have said before, that is the sheer brilliance of it. It has centuries of twisting, bending, legend, myth and other features on its side. Science, in comparison, is a junior lightweight, but it is growing all the time. I have every confidence that one day we will see the answer and it won't be that of a supreme being. One thing I am almost certain of however, is that anything that has man as its author is subject to the weaknesses which are synonymous to man. Edited January 13, 2005 by SniperX Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gigapixels Veteran Posted January 13, 2005 Veteran Share Posted January 13, 2005 Ok lets do it this way, this will prove there is indeed a design of a being of some sort What is the mathamatical possability that the universe, galaxy, earth, animals man etc with all of its order and biological setup of animals and humans the nature way the body fights off diease, or nature and the way it replenishes it's self millions of examples. What are the mathamatical equation or possability that it is all just happened by accident, with no design or purpose over millions of years anyone with the number for that? I do ....answer Infintly an impossability. 585288715[/snapback] It's an impossibility to you. Not to me, or any other atheist. You have your mind set that there is some "God" somewhere that created everything. Let me ask you this: how come in the Bible there is no mention of dinosaurs and the earlier creatures that walked the Earth? Since we have complete evidence of them existing, doesn't that refute what the Bible says? Doesn't the Bible say life started with Adam & Eve? If so, the Bible's wrong. This was pointed out earlier in the thread, but I thought I'd point it out again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdb264c Posted January 13, 2005 Share Posted January 13, 2005 (edited) [1.] Your methods of trying to "prove" evolution (such as dating fossils via c14 dating), or even your "theories" designed to support ideas about the "big bang", such as "red shift" can be observed as being false, however.[2.] From where i stand, and admitidly i have spent a lot of time reading the creation / evolution debate, most evidence is stacking up to support an young earth and a creator.? 585285971[/snapback] Not sure how to quote several times, so please, allow me to change your original text by adding numbers. 1. You can't keep telling us this C14-argument, it's an old argument by the Creationists and it's really not valid as I'm sure you know that when dating the earth we don't use C14 but for example Samarium/Neodyme (147Sm/143Nd). And what about red shift? Are you about to use the argument by Hovind that light might get tired? 2. Please, which are these evidence of a creator/young earth that outnumbers science? 1. "The probability of the chance formation of a hypothetical functional ?simple? cell, given all the ingredients, is acknowledged2 to be worse than 1 in 10to the power of 57800. This is a chance of 1 in a number with 57,800 zeros.? To try to put this in perspective, there are about 10 to the power of 80 (a number with 80 zeros) electrons in the universe. Even if every electron in our universe were another universe the same size as ours that would ?only? amount to 10 to the power of 160 electrons." 2. After that have a poke around here: http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/qa.asp i will be very impressed if you can prove any faults with what:)ou find :) 3. As you probably have read, when God created man he was "perfect".? He was given free will and he chose to disobey God and he "fell".? 4. HOWEVER none have yet been found whereincreasesncreases genetic information, even in those rare instances where the mutation confers an advantage. 585287251[/snapback] 1. So, the world created in the way the bible samore more probable?? 2. I just want to make sure, are you actually inviting whoever's on this thrany faultny fault on Answersingenesis-site? 3. As I mentioned receivedreceived the free will when they ate from the tree of knowledge og good and evil!note not given it! 4. Again a stupid creationist argument, I don't understand how you could blindly repeat these things. First of all, define "information" and "increase"! Second, we know that there are mutations at the time of gene duplications and there are several examples when these new copies have gained information, for example the change of the pancreatic enzyme RNAse1 to RNAse1b and the formation of two enzymes in the histidine biosynthesis pathway that were formed in a gene duplication. Edited January 13, 2005 by jdb264c Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mircleman Posted January 13, 2005 Share Posted January 13, 2005 . "The probability of the chance formation of a hypothetical functional ?simple? cell, given all the ingredients, is acknowledged2 to be worse than 1 in 10to the power of 57800. This is a chance of 1 in a number with 57,800 zeros. To try to put this in perspective, there are about 10 to the power of 80 (a number with 80 zeros) electrons in the universe. Even if every electron in our universe were another universe the same size as ours that would ?only? amount to 10 to the power of 160 electrons." case closed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheDogsBed Posted January 13, 2005 Share Posted January 13, 2005 How is it case closed, given the odds of the alternative? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Grasshopper Posted January 13, 2005 Share Posted January 13, 2005 It's an impossibility to you. Not to me, or any other atheist. You have your mind set that there is some "God" somewhere that created everything.Let me ask you this: how come in the Bible there is no mention of dinosaurs and the earlier creatures that walked the Earth? Since we have complete evidence of them existing, doesn't that refute what the Bible says? Doesn't the Bible say life started with Adam & Eve? If so, the Bible's wrong. This was pointed out earlier in the thread, but I thought I'd point it out again. 585288907[/snapback] then again. I say no. it says god made the heaven and earth. trees and grasses and vegatation after thier kind.Then animals. man he made last. it seems to me that science and theology go hand in hand. Evolution with the universe, animals,trees,bugs etc. Man he made and molded himself out of clay, breathed life into us and made us different from the animals. I can't prove thats how he did it. But to me it would be a logical conclusion. he even states the order in which he does it. Sounds like me you can put the two together. And from an earlier post. Giants and leviathans are mentioned. and leviathons are not whales in the old testement. they are a Huge sea creatures not stated as a whale. you can read that in JOB. anyway, I hope that might enlighten some. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheDogsBed Posted January 13, 2005 Share Posted January 13, 2005 As for the "Big Bang", if you are interested try reading this new article... http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs2005/0112quasar.asp :) Thanks for the link. It read well until I got to the inevitable: "So the lesson is this. If you hang your hat on the big bang because the majority believes it, you will be embarrassed when it falls. This quasar comes as thorn in the sides of those who believe in the ruling paradigm?but many don?t and expect the weight of the anomalies to eventually sink it. Would I be any less or more embarrassed than those who had their belief shattered by the proving of it? Instead trust in the One Who made it all and you?ll never be dismayed." So, that wasn't written with any particular bias in mind then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ph3412t3h13 Posted January 13, 2005 Author Share Posted January 13, 2005 So, that wasn't written with any particular bias in mind then? 585289223[/snapback] lol and after all that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dpen2000 Posted January 13, 2005 Share Posted January 13, 2005 1. So, the world created in the way the bible says would be more probable?? 585288933[/snapback] Yeah. Actually. If I have a die, a random roll may or may not produce a six. However, if I place the die on the table: six up, then it is absolutely probable that a six is on the table. Why is it? Because I have eliminated the probability/chance element of the situation. Similarly, believing that god takes away the improbability of cells appearing by chance... because a god would not operate on chance, he would simply place the die on the table six up. David Pendray Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gigapixels Veteran Posted January 14, 2005 Veteran Share Posted January 14, 2005 then again. I say no. it says god made the heaven and earth. trees and grasses and vegatation after thier kind.Then animals. man he made last. it seems to me that science and theology go hand in hand. Evolution with the universe, animals,trees,bugs etc. Man he made and molded himself out of clay, breathed life into us and made us different from the animals. I can't prove thats how he did it. But to me it would be a logical conclusion. he even states the order in which he does it. Sounds like me you can put the two together. And from an earlier post. Giants and leviathans are mentioned. and leviathons are not whales in the old testement. they are a Huge sea creatures not stated as a whale. you can read that in JOB. anyway, I hope that might enlighten some. 585289174[/snapback] Alright then. When does it actually mention dinosaurs? It says nothing of dinosaurs, nothing of the single-celled organisms that preceded everything, and nothing of any sort of evolution. Things being created one by one is NOT evolution. I'm out of this debate. I get far too frustrated when people fail to see the fallacies in their views, or aren't even the slightest bit open to a different opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ph3412t3h13 Posted January 14, 2005 Author Share Posted January 14, 2005 I'm out of this debate. I get far too frustrated when people fail to see the fallacies in their views, or aren't even the slightest bit open to a different opinion. 585289275[/snapback] SEE THIS IS THE PROBLEM STOP CALLING OTHER PEOPLES OPINIONS FALSE!!!!!!! **** when u start doing that we get nowhere thats the problem Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheDogsBed Posted January 14, 2005 Share Posted January 14, 2005 Yeah. Actually. If I have a die, a random roll may or may not produce a six. However, if I place the die on the table: six up, then it is absolutely probable that a six is on the table. Why is it? Because I have eliminated the probability/chance element of the situation. Similarly, believing that god takes away the improbability of cells appearing by chance... because a god would not operate on chance, he would simply place the die on the table six up.David Pendray 585289246[/snapback] That has to be the weakest and least logical reason I have read thus far. It is based on the almost laughable notion that a God would not operate on chance? Where does that come from? That is a very poor excuse for logic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ph3412t3h13 Posted January 14, 2005 Author Share Posted January 14, 2005 That has to be the weakest and least logical reason I have read thus far. It is based on the almost laughable notion that a God would not operate on chance? Where does that come from? That is a very poor excuse for logic. 585289305[/snapback] um i dont believe in god but i think that if there actually was a god he wouldnt do stuff based on luck man Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheDogsBed Posted January 14, 2005 Share Posted January 14, 2005 umi dont believe in god but i think that if there actually was a god he wouldnt do stuff based on luck man 585289321[/snapback] That's not the point. The point of the debate is, does God exist. This guy already presupposes that he does by stating the he would place the dice six up. It just doesn't make sense. It is akin to me stating that because I've seen a bird can fly then so can I. I can't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gigapixels Veteran Posted January 14, 2005 Veteran Share Posted January 14, 2005 SEE THIS IS THE PROBLEMSTOP CALLING OTHER PEOPLES OPINIONS FALSE!!!!!!! **** when u start doing that we get nowhere thats the problem 585289301[/snapback] Sorry, I worded it wrong... I just get tired of it when people leave NO possibility for anything else. I am open to there being a God, but until I see proof, I don't believe it. Most people on here are saying "No, there's no other possibility. Blah blah blah..." That's what frustrates me. They just think far too highly of their own views to accept the fact that they may be wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dpen2000 Posted January 14, 2005 Share Posted January 14, 2005 That's not the point. The point of the debate is, does God exist. This guy already presupposes that he does by stating the he would place the dice six up. It just doesn't make sense.It is akin to me stating that because I've seen a bird can fly then so can I. I can't. 585289346[/snapback] I make no apology for presupposing god in answering that question: the question missed the point that the only element of the bible's narrative of creation that is seemingly improbable is god existance. Assuming, he does exist, the rest of the bible narrative on creation is far more probable than chance. Then again, the question I responded to had little merit: How, after all, does one assign probabilty or improbability to the existance of god? David Pendray Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheDogsBed Posted January 14, 2005 Share Posted January 14, 2005 Sorry, I worded it wrong... I just get tired of it when people leave NO possibility for anything else. I am open to there being a God, but until I see proof, I don't believe it. Most people on here are saying "No, there's no other possibility. Blah blah blah..." That's what frustrates me. They just think far too highly of their own views to accept the fact that they may be wrong. 585289374[/snapback] For an Einstein, you have little patience. :) Do you think that your own views were forged overnight? If not, why would you be able to convince someone else to change theirs as a result of a forum debate? Personally, I find it rewarding enough to see how others see and view things and compare it to the way that I do and then spend more time pondering why, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheDogsBed Posted January 14, 2005 Share Posted January 14, 2005 I make no apology for presupposing god in answering that question: the question missed the point that the only element of the bible's narrative of creation that is seemingly improbable is god existance. Assuming, he does exist, the rest of the bible narrative on creation is far more probable than chance. Then again, the question I responded to had little merit: How, after all, does one assign probabilty or improbability to the existance of god?David Pendray 585289423[/snapback] Am I the only one seeing the simple notion that I could apply your exact same principle to the dice method. If I believe in it then the rest just falls into place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dpen2000 Posted January 14, 2005 Share Posted January 14, 2005 That has to be the weakest and least logical reason I have read thus far. It is based on the almost laughable notion that a God would not operate on chance? Where does that come from? That is a very poor excuse for logic. 585289305[/snapback] Actually it was perfectly simple and logical: pity I could not have been more consise. That aside. As to your objection: I think it a laughable notion to suggest a god would operate on chance. If you were out to create a universe, would you operate on chance; no of course not. Assuming a god has equal or greater powers of logic than you or I, it is fair to assume he would not use chance either. David Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dpen2000 Posted January 14, 2005 Share Posted January 14, 2005 Am I the only one seeing the simple notion that I could apply your exact same principle to the dice method. If I believe in it then the rest just falls into place. 585289440[/snapback] I wholeheartedly agree with you. If one believes in god, everything does fall into place: whether that be miracles, creation of the universe: that was the exact point I was making. David Pendray Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gigapixels Veteran Posted January 14, 2005 Veteran Share Posted January 14, 2005 For an Einstein, you have little patience. :) Do you think that your own views were forged overnight? If not, why would you be able to convince someone else to change theirs as a result of a forum debate?Personally, I find it rewarding enough to see how others see and view things and compare it to the way that I do and then spend more time pondering why, etc. 585289433[/snapback] Yes, I admit, I have far too little patience for my own good ;). I'm simply saying that I don't like it when people are NOT open to others' opinions. Yes, I think mine is the right one, but I'm still open to other possibilities. I feel the same way though. I do like to see others' beliefs and ponder over reasons why/why not they would work, etc... I mean, I'm a very analytical person; I can't help but wonder about things like that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheDogsBed Posted January 14, 2005 Share Posted January 14, 2005 (edited) I wholeheartedly agree with you. If one believes in god, everything does fall into place: whether that be miracles, creation of the universe: that was the exact point I was making. Well that's just silly and you'll forgive me if I don't count it as anything but an analogy. A weak one but an analogy nonetheless. Edit: That aside. As to your objection: I think it a laughable notion to suggest a god would operate on chance. And I would expect nothing less of you. As surely you would expect me to place the same belief of God being a supreme being as you do, no? I don't. I don't believe in his existance at all, let alone that he is as incapable or capable as the rest of us of stumbling upon chance events and occurrences. That is the whole point of this debate. Edited January 14, 2005 by SniperX Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dpen2000 Posted January 14, 2005 Share Posted January 14, 2005 Well that's just silly and you'll forgive me if I don't count it as anything but an analogy. A weak one but an analogy nonetheless. 585289493[/snapback] I don't believe we have or ever did have an argument. I was not originally responding to your comments in my initial post. {edit: My original post was an aside commenting on a particular question. It was an obvious point: not an attempt at answering your question of whether god exists. Sad we wasted so many posts in reference to it. David Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts