PROOFS OF THE EXISTENCE OF GOD

[dmmesdale]

Why do you think it took 6000 (or 20000 or what ever amount you think it took) years for the industrial and technological revolutions? Is it because things go very slow and slowly progress and then sometimes there might be fast advancments? Thhere are still tribes that have neither of those and one tribe in a property of India doesn't even have fire. Why is it taking them so long to advance?

There are books all about that and the building of societies. Its very interesting. But basically when some groups finally figured out how to seed they settled in that area and grew they then had new problems from when they were small groups hunting and gathering they then needed writing and shelter and to domesticate animals and so on .

Why it took so long to seed? Perhaps because they thrived or at least survived without it. Why look for new things when you are doing fine without it? You should read books and articles about it. I'm not doing it justice.

If they were humans, then they did not walk around for 190,000 years when they could domesticate animals and ride them. It is all contrived nonsense. Why ride an animal when we can walk?

 

[DogmaHunter]

Robert Sanders' Review of Signature in the Cell is Lacking Objectivity and Understanding | Jewish & Israel News Algemeiner.com

• Saunders: (2) “Specified Information” is a bogus concept, and one which Meyer never actually defines…This quite clearly illustrates the flaw in Meyer’s reasoning. I don’t believe that linguistic information or computer code are directly analogous to biological information.

It is amazing how transparently self-contradictory this is. In his objection (1) Saunders claims that there are plenty of chemical and biological mechanisms which increase biological information and then in (2) he claims that the concept of “specified biological information” is a non-existent concept! In fact, Meyer spends many pages in the book explaining in detail the nature of “information” and the concept of “specified information.” (Take a look at the index under “specified information.”) It is even more amazing in light of the fact that other Origin of Life researchers understand quite clearly what “specified information” is while Saunders claims to be totally baffled by the concept. Dawkins, in River Out of Eden: “Genes themselves…are living strings of pure digital information…the machine code of the genes is uncannily computer-like…DNA messages are pure digital code.” Dr. Paul Davies: “In a living organism we see the power of software, or information processing, refined to an incredible degree…the problem of origin of life reduces to one of understanding how encoded software emerged spontaneously from hardware…how did nature go digital?” Bill Gates: “DNA is like a computer program but far, far more advanced than any software we’ve ever created.” Biophysicist Manfred Eigen: “Our task is to find an algorithm, a natural law that leads to the origin of information.” Dr. Hubert Yockey: “Genetic code is constructed to confront and solve the problems of communication and recording by the same principles found…in modern communication and computer codes.” In short, all Origin of Life researchers understand that the simplest living cell is packed with enormous amounts of specified information and science is at present clueless as to how it originated.

Origin of life researchers also understand that the "simplest living cell" today has been evolving for at least 3.8 billion years.

Regardless of "specified information" being bogus or not - it's just a label with no explanatory power whatsoever (unjustified loaded implications notwithstanding).

The fact of the matter is that there IS a well-supported model which explains how genetic information develops over time. It's called evolution.

As for the origins of life, it is currently unknown.


Sure, you can compare genetics with some kind of enormous software program that does batch processing, the sequence of the instructions being determined by the DNA. I actually have made such comparisions as well. Richard Dawkins, esteemed evolutionary biologist, has no problems with such a comparision either.

But you need to understand that it is just a comparision. It means that we can draw an analogy between both.

None of them are saying that it IS a computer code. And all of them have a good understanding of the biological processes that mold this "code" into what it is today. Which is an understanding that you don't seem to have (or don't want to know about).

 

[DogmaHunter]

If they were humans, then they did not walk around for 190,000 years when they could domesticate animals and ride them. It is all contrived nonsense. Why ride an animal when we can walk?

I'm not really sure when the domestication of horses etc took place but I don't really consider it all that relevant either.

The progression of "jungle dwellers" to "settlers" and "empires" was a long hard road and it did not happen overnight.

Lot's of factors contributed to it and every major change had its reasons and necessities.
The biggest one most likely being abrupt changes in the environment. Volcano eruptions, ice ages, etc.

I'm sure you know for example, that tool making (hammers, spears, 'knives', clothes, etc) is FAR older then society or even Homo Sapiens itself.

Between 15.000 and 5000 years ago, there was an explosion of advancement, yes.

And the reason is quite simple: the discovery of primitive agriculture.
Now, tribes could settle in a single place. Had to, actually, since they needed to stay close to their crops.

This basic simple thing (settling) opened up a can of worms wich completely transformed the social structure and the way of life of Homo Sapiens in a very short time.

No longer being nomadic, our ancestors soon had more "stuff" then they could carry.
This meant they needed places to stash their "stuff". This opened up another can of worms: when you have a lot of "stuff", you might want to keep track of it. "property" became a thing. "stealing" gained a new dimension. And how do you keep track of stuff, if not by some type of symbolic writing? Hello, written language.

Now that they had written language, it opened up another dimension: written communication. That promoted trade with other tribes - and boom, yet another "social contract" saw the light of day. Now, records could be kept concerning agreements and dealings between tribes.

Another major change in homo sapiens culture was a direct result of the written word: the inheriting of knowledge, for the sake of knowledge. Now, you could write down what you learned and pass it on to the next generation, without having to rely on oral traditions.

And on and on it goes.
All this, and much more, was set into motion, by the single discovery of "hey, we could simply GROW our food in that field there- instead of having to search for it every day of the year!! Imagine that!"

Or how one or two simple ideas or discoveries can change the world.

 

[xianghua]

What if the Eiffel Tower would actually be a giant flower made from organic components?
.

good question. what if the Eiffel tower was made from wood and had the ability to replicate itself? you will conclude design or a natural process?

 

[xianghua]

I've been a lurker and I have seen you and others say the same thing but it is like he isn't reading any of the posts because he asks the same questions over and over and over again. I actually laugh because it is so ridiculous. I understand being ignorant and denying evolution but when he and other creationists are corrected or told something like this or say "evolution is just a theory" or "it doesn't add new information" or "so a monkey gave birth to a human." or "where are the half cat half ant?" etc., it isn't simply ignorance anymore. Unless they really aren't reading any of the replies which is quite possible.

first: if evolution can be prove you are welcome to show that. im realy open to scientific evidence. but remember that we are talking about evolution in the family level- like a cat evolving into a dog or a mouse evolvling into a raccoon and so on.

about the evidence for design: you are welcome to check this a rgument:

the self replicating watch argument

can you show me why you are think it's wrong?

 

[xianghua]

Evidence of intelligent manufacture; refined materials, tool marks, etc.

tool marks? how you can identify a tool marks? more than this: if a designer will create a watch without a tool marks, you cant conclude design because of this?

 

[Speedwell]

tool marks? how you can identify a tool marks? more than this: if a designer will create a watch without a tool marks, you cant conclude design because of this?

Right (assuming that your "tool marks" stands for all of the various possible evidences of intentional manufacture). Design can either be concluded or not, but it cannot be ruled out. But design cannot be concluded merely on the basis of complexity or functionality.

 

[Speedwell]

first: if evolution can be prove you are welcome to show that. im realy open to scientific evidence. but remember that we are talking about evolution in the family level- like a cat evolving into a dog or a mouse evolvling into a raccoon and so on.

If either of those two things ever happened it would disprove evolution absolutely.

 

[Motherofkittens]

If they were humans, then they did not walk around for 190,000 years when they could domesticate animals and ride them. It is all contrived nonsense. Why ride an animal when we can walk?

As I said there are still tribes that are hunters and gatherers. One tribe doesn't even have fire. Why don't you ask them?

 

[Motherofkittens]

first: if evolution can be prove you are welcome to show that. im realy open to scientific evidence. but remember that we are talking about evolution in the family level- like a cat evolving into a dog or a mouse evolvling into a raccoon and so on.

about the evidence for design: you are welcome to check this a rgument:

the self replicating watch argument

can you show me why you are think it's wrong?

Thanks. I already know about it though, I was a creationist. If you're looking for a cat to turn into a dog then you don't understand evolution. Nobodies saying that happens. Can you in your own words write a basic description of what you think evolution is? Perhaps than I could or others could, help with your misunderstandings.

 

[Walter and Deborah]

Thanks. I already know about it though, I was a creationist. If you're looking for a cat to turn into a dog then you don't understand evolution. Nobodies saying that happens. Can you in your own words write a basic description of what you think evolution is? Perhaps than I could or others could, help with your misunderstandings.

Can you put this in your own words? what is evolution - Google Search

 

[Motherofkittens]

Can you put this in your words? what is evolution - Google Search

If its not too long I'll try. My head hurts and I feel like I have to throw up.

 

[Radrook]

If its not too long I'll try. My head hurts and I feel like I have to throw up.

Understandable! These vehement discussions can cause powerful vascular dilations accompanied by severe bouts of vertigo sometimes

 

[Motherofkittens]

Can you put this in your words? what is evolution - Google Search

I did thow up, not that you need to know. of course it is a lot more complicated and there is a lot more to it and you really should have years of study. Here I go. Evolution says that all animals and all plants, everyone of them is related.

Some more closely related than others it is just like a family tree and we know this for fact because of the fossil record and DNA (these are the same tests where we can say "you the baby daddy". )How we evolve we have some fundamental forces like of course natural selection, which we hear a lot about as well as mutations, sexual selection, genetic drift and gene flow. Because of that each creature is a little different from its parents. And all creature are in a struggle for survival and to pass their genes along (which doesn't usually work, at least not forever because 99.9 percent of all plants and animals are extant. ) When something changes like say the environment gets a lot warmer the creatures that are already more able to handle the heat will be more likely to survive and pass its genes along and then perhaps later on more and more of those creatures are adapted to the warming environment. Thats how populations evolve.

What is a good or bad change really just depends on what their situation iin their ninche is at the time they are alive. Now I suggust reading a biology text book because there as a lot more to it and they go in more detail and say it way better than I could. I'm not a biologist and I don't write very well or am able to get across as much as I want. I have several learning disabilities including ADD so I'm sure its rambling. I have very little focus.

 

[Motherofkittens]

Understandable! These vehement discussions can cause powerful vascular dilations accompanied by severe bouts of vertigo sometimes

I think I was looking at my tablet too long. I'm gonna go rest.

 

[Radrook]

I think I was looking at my tablet too long. I'm gonna go rest.

That is a good idea.

Weird though. In my case I get real drowsy, decide to take a rest and as soon as my body hits the mattress I am wide awake again. Hopefully you don't suffer from that annoying anomaly.

Hope you feel better. God bless.

 

[Walter and Deborah]

I did thow up, not that you need to know. of course it is a lot more complicated and there is a lot more to it and you really should have years of study. Here I go. Evolution says that all animals and all plants, everyone of them is related.

Some more closely related than others it is just like a family tree and we know this for fact because of the fossil record and DNA (these are the same tests where we can say "you the baby daddy". )How we evolve we have some fundamental forces like of course natural selection, which we hear a lot about as well as mutations, sexual selection, genetic drift and gene flow. Because of that each creature is a little different from its parents. And all creature are in a struggle for survival and to pass their genes along (which doesn't usually work, at least not forever because 99.9 percent of all plants and animals are extant. ) When something changes like say the environment gets a lot warmer the creatures that are already more able to handle the heat will be more likely to survive and pass its genes along and then perhaps later on more and more of those creatures are adapted to the warming environment. Thats how populations evolve.

What is a good or bad change really just depends on what their situation iin their ninche is at the time they are alive. Now I suggust reading a biology text book because there as a lot more to it and they go in more detail and say it way better than I could. I'm not a biologist and I don't write very well or am able to get across as much as I want. I have several learning disabilities including ADD so I'm sure its rambling. I have very little focus.

Glad to know that you are doing better from your throwing up, We thank you for sharing what you did, as you have in the above, and for being so patient with us. That what you have shared is very important to us.

 

[AV1611VET]

Glad to know that you are doing better from your throwing up, We thank you for sharing what you did, as you have in the above, and for being so patient with us. That what you have shared is very important to us.

... Hi! Nice to meet you and welcome to CF!

Um ... about your signature though ... ?

 

[DogmaHunter]

good question. what if the Eiffel tower was made from wood and had the ability to replicate itself? you will conclude design or a natural process?

What if a designed thing weren't designed? would it still be designed?

 

[AV1611VET]

What if a designed thing weren't designed? would it still be designed?

A designed anomaly?