Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
What is the definition of life?'Life' on Earth is distinguishable, by us, from 'the Earth', y'know(?)
That's what we develop objective tests and defintions for.
Varies .. its provisional and depends on the context/environment also.What is the definition of life?
Kind of subjective one might say?Varies .. its provisional and depends on the context/environment also.
Depends on what level of consistency you can achieve by giving it that interpretation!Kind of subjective one might say?
It looks to me that neither one of us have been able to give a definition of life.Depends on what level of consistency you can achieve by giving it that interpretation!
Looks to me like you haven't specified a consistent context.It looks to me that neither one of us have been able to give a definition of life.
That's kind of the point. Life doesn't have a consistent context, at least that I can see. That's why I don't think life can be defined. Yet it exist. Kind of a funny thing there.Looks to me like you haven't specified a consistent context.
No .. life has specific contexts which are very consistent. You just haven't specified any of them.That's kind of the point. Life doesn't have a consistent context, at least that I can see. That's why I don't think life can be defined. Yet it exist. Kind of a funny thing there.
it isHow do you tell? Why is that not the way one detects design in human-made objects?
how do you qualify to say how things on this forum are defined?Why should I want to refute any of it? I'm an Anglican, educated up to and including a Bachelor's degree by Roman Catholics. I'm familiar with the content of your link and agree with most of it. You can play definition games all you want, but as the term is customarily used in this forum, "Intelligent Design" refers specifically to an hypothesis about the development of biological complexity concocted by the Discovery Institute. If you use the term "Intelligent Design" here without explaining that you are intending it merely as a synonym for divine creation you will only cause confusion--as you did. I know enough about the Catholic Church to know that you are wrong. If nothing else, Roman Catholics reject the Protestant Doctrine of Sola Scriptura which is fundamental to creationism.
"Catholics are free to believe, or not believe, in evolution..." So there you have it: by your own admission, the Pope himself is not a creationist and does not require faithful Catholics to be, either.
Those are all evidence that God exists and created the universe. I see no evidence of creationism at all. If you think otherwise, show me the evidence for the literal historical inerrancy of Genesis and that accepting it as such is a requirement for Salvation. In the meantime stop insulting Roman Catholics by calling them creationists.
Did you miss the statement of dogma, I doubt that the Pope disregards it, it clearly addresses creation of everything by God. He is simply saying that creationism can coexist with evolutionism."Catholics are free to believe, or not believe, in evolution..." So there you have it: by your own admission, the Pope himself is not a creationist and does not require faithful Catholics to be, either.
None of the above is scientific evidence for design.[/QUOTE]Intelligent design is NOT a scientific theory, not even a scientific hypothesis
THE SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE OF AN INTELLIGENT CREATOR
I. The Big Bang
II.The Borde-Vilenkin Guth Proof
III. Evidence From Entropy
IV. Something, Nothing,and Creation
V. Fine-Tuning
VI. Conclusion
Obviously reading the linked resource would have eliminated much confusion and provided more than adequate evidence. The 7 Essential Modules - Credible Catholic
You dont seem to understand what scientific evidence (or even science period) entails.I would have to disagree as would the author of this article: Are We Special? The Anthropic Coincidences*
You define it when you unable to accomplish a task or have a difficulty accomplishing a task. At that point you have a need for something to help.How do you identify when a need is present?
So if there is a purpose for say, humans, then our so-called 'creator', must have identified a need where humans could somehow help that 'creator'?You define it when you unable to accomplish a task or have a difficulty accomplishing a task. At that point you have a need for something to help.
Is physics part of science, I have to ask because I do not want anyone to say these things are not part of science. If you are looking for the specific values of these things and the probabilities of all of those values all coming together to create an environment favorable to life on earth, that information is in the original linked evidence that you rejected. The 7 Essential Modules - Credible CatholicYou dont seem to understand what scientific evidence (or even science period) entails.
God does not need humans, God need nothing. What could you possibly need when you are all powerful.So if there is a purpose for say, humans, then our so-called 'creator', must have identified a need where humans could somehow help that 'creator'?
Same goes for the purpose for 'the universe'?
Thats not how probility works.Is physics part of science, I have to ask because I do not want anyone to say these things are not part of science. If you are looking for the specific values of these things and the probabilities of all of those values all coming together to create an environment favorable to life on earth, that information is in the original linked evidence that you rejected. The 7 Essential Modules - Credible Catholic
There are a number of other constraints, limited values for forces—gravity, electromagnetic, weak nuclear, strong nuclear—and fundamental constants, including that for particle masses and number of particles that are needed for life to evolve. In summary, Ellis puts the Anthropic Principle as the following:
“Life is possible because both the laws of physics and the boundary conditions for the universe have a very special nature. Only particular laws of physics, and particular initial conditions in the Universe, allow the existence of intelligent life of the kind we know. No evolutionary process whatever is possible for any kind of life if these laws and conditions do not have this restricted form.” Are We Special? The Anthropic Coincidences*
You have arrived at a logical contradication then ..God does not need humans, God need nothing. What could you possibly need when you are all powerful.
Crikey. My phone was designed by God to type this to you.Need rock to break window. This rock was designrd.
If it is not measured how can one reliably infer ‘too much complexity’? The very concept implies a quantitive measurement.IC is not measured but rather inferred when the trait (such as the eye) is too complex to evolve by Darwinian mechanisms.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?