the self replicating watch argument

[dad]

Got it. You base your beliefs about the timing for your hypothesised "change of nature" on the unverifiable legends and myths of a bronze-age nomadic tribe combined with what some unidentified "they" say and the assertions of an unidentified "secular source".

Firstly, who cares what people base a belief on? The point to remember is that a belief is a belief.

Secondly, nothing on earth is more verified than the bible.

Do not lament to me about how poor little science can't verify, confirm or deny something. No news there.

Plus your idiosyncratic and unsupported beliefs about angels and women having babies.

Science has no way of knowing or verifying or denying ancient history of the bible dealing with things spiritual in nature.

All beliefs used in models of origin sciences are unsupported.

The verified, observed and witnessed and repeated and tested life of Christ and miracles and prophesies of the bible are verified.

And you have the gall to criticise scientists for using self-consistent observations to infer facts about the universe.

When false prophets of origin sciences have the unmitigated gall to offer up their invented fables as facts or science or knowledge, it behooves honest men to criticize the con.

If you had kids, and they were told at school that babies came from storks, would you not criticize it?


Claiming that nature on earth was the same is solipsistic epistemology to try to protect the "history" and false so called science models your imagination has created.

 

[dad]

Between bicycles and trucks: Rickshaws, oxcarts..

So what? Between your supposed ancestors in the fossil record are many things you have no idea existed, or how they came to exist.

 

[dad]

But, this is not just any watch. This is an omniscient and omnipotent watch that created the universe. Though, Xinghua also wants to add the eternal designer spatula.

Not only Is the Almighty not just any watch, He ain't no watch at all. One would not look for father time in an hourglass.

You describe God as being 'No man has seen God and lived'. How do you know that there isn't an omniscient and omnipotent watch? It could be that no-one has seen it, let alone worn it on his/her wrist, and lived to tell us about it.

Since God created all things, that includes time! Watches do not create time.

 

[AnotherAtheist]

Not only Is the Almighty not just any watch, He ain't no watch at all. One would not look for father time in an hourglass.
Since God created all things, that includes time! Watches do not create time.

But, you miss the point. We're not saying that God is a watch. We're saying that if the universe was created by an omniscient and omnipotent watch, that we'd still need to explain who created this omniscient and omnipotent watch. Xianghua has already agreed that in this case, you'd need a spatula who is a 'great designer', but then that opens up the question of who made the great designer spatula, and who invented the heat-resistant nylon that it is made of.

The whole point is that you seem to agree that if the universe had been created by a omniscient and omnipotent watch, then the watch itself would need a creator. Clearly you then must agree that just because the universe was created by God and not a watch, that God must need a creator. Spatula or not.

 

[doubtingmerle]

So what? Between your supposed ancestors in the fossil record are many things you have no idea existed, or how they came to exist.

So are you admitting that living animals form a consistent nested hierarchy? That was the point. Animals do, but vehicles do not.

And your points seems to be that there are many animals that never fossilized, and perhaps some of them are consistent with the view that life is a mix and max of various designs, just like vehicles are. That's quite an odd argument. We can only deal with the evidence we have.

We have not even built trees for all 8 million or so living species with all possible measurable variables. So you suggest that, yes, all hierarchical studies so far verify evolution, but maybe someday we will find a study that doesn't?

That sounds like a crazy argument to me.

 

[hecd2]

We do see that on one side of that KT layer we have dinos, and not on the other. There was a great change in life on earth.

It was one of several extinction events.

"One of the mysteries of the history of the Earth is the layer of clay that was deposited around the entire globe 65 million years ago. The layer marks the K-T boundary .."
Disaster From Space

Did you even read that article? It describes how we know that the iridium anomaly was caused by the impact of a large meteorite. We even know where the meteorite struck. Google Chicxulub crater and Alvarex.

There is probably no need to remind you what clay is.

"The formation and alteration of clay minerals and their accumulation as clay materials can occur by a very wide range of processes. In one way or another, however, most of these processes and the environments in which they operate involve the chemical actions and physical movement of water.."

3. Formation and alteration of clay materials

A world wide physical movement of water!

Caused by a massive bolide strike.

 

[pitabread]

Did you even read that article? It describes ow we know that the iridium anomaly was causeed by the impact of a large meteorite.

Or magic space water.

 

[hecd2]

I asked the same thing, how do you test what the nature and laws on earth used to be like now? How do you test what time is like in the unknown far universe?

Dude, I previously explained to you in some detail how we know the laws of physics are the same throughout the observable universe. But since you are willingly trapped in a box of solipsism you won't countenance the evidence, preferring to rely on your made-up reality. That's your loss, not mine or anyone else's.

ETA: So don't keep asking for evidence when you are prejudiced not to even consider it.

 

[dad]

But, you miss the point. We're not saying that God is a watch. We're saying that if the universe was created by an omniscient and omnipotent watch, that we'd still need to explain who created this omniscient and omnipotent watch.

The One who created time is not a watch.

Xianghua has already agreed that in this case, you'd need a spatula who is a 'great designer', but then that opens up the question of who made the great designer spatula, and who invented the heat-resistant nylon that it is made of.

It isn't up to him.

The whole point is that you seem to agree that if the universe had been created by a omniscient and omnipotent watch, then the watch itself would need a creator. Clearly you then must agree that just because the universe was created by God and not a watch, that God must need a creator. Spatula or not.

No. The limited understanding and perspectives of man are not up to the task of figuring out God.

 

[dad]

So are you admitting that living animals form a consistent nested hierarchy? That was the point. Animals do, but vehicles do not.

When the nesting is a feature of created life, naturally creation groups will be nested. Because of things being created and in kinds, and also because of the subsequent evolving, there are connections between animals we can nest. However, since we do not know where the evolving started or stopped, or applies, and what was first created, we cannot make a proper tree of life. The tree you make will be hopelessly incomplete, and the reasons you think the animals are connected and why and when will be wrong.

So don't cast stones at those who try to make some sort of nested group of things created by man.

And your points seems to be that there are many animals that never fossilized, and perhaps some of them are consistent with the view that life is a mix and max of various designs, just like vehicles are. That's quite an odd argument. We can only deal with the evidence we have.

You are limited, yes, in that you can only deal with the few cards of the deck you do have.

We have not even built trees for all 8 million or so living species with all possible measurable variables. So you suggest that, yes, all hierarchical studies so far verify evolution, but maybe someday we will find a study that doesn't?

No. I suggest that when you stick some tree animal in as the ancestor of a dolphin and make a tree, that you are exercising a biased imagination and belief system that is drastically short of facts and full to the brim with beliefs.

The evo trees have NO worth. So be easy on Xia who tried to make a tree of man's little creations.

 

[dad]

It was one of several extinction events

Naturally, with rapid evolution in the former nature, many animals would change. You would interpret that an an extinction. Even the flood was not really an extinction, since all original kinds were saved. But in the new world, the created kinds from the ark started to evolve/adapt to the new realities and later to the new nature also. So the new types of animals would be totally misunderstood by evo science. Add to this mess the fact that probably very very very few types of animals COULD even leave fossilized remains at all, and we have science in a real muddle. That is precisely how I look at their little evo pronouncements, trees and fables.

Did you even read that article? It describes how we know that the iridium anomaly was caused by the impact of a large meteorite.

Worthless speculation that cannot be supported. It was mentioned as a theory. I look at the facts. We did have a worldwide layer with clay and iridium. Flood waters came from space and the interior of the earth, where they claim iridium comes from.

We even know where the meteorite struck.

That may be a remnant of a big fountain of the deep, and the impact may have been from below to above rather than the other way round. If you could evidence that it certainly had to be from above we could look at that. (and easily also explain that of course). Bring it.

 

[AnotherAtheist]

The One who created time is not a watch.

But, we are positing here that it was a omnipotent omniscient watch that created the universe. Clearly that's different from a normal watch, but it would still look like a watch, have hands, numbers, and a little window showing the date. So, why not call it a watch?

No. The limited understanding and perspectives of man are not up to the task of figuring out God.

Then, how can you be sure that what you think of as God is actually what God is? How do you know that God is not a watch?

 

[dad]

Dude, I previously explained to you in some detail how we know the laws of physics are the same throughout the observable universe.

You were wrong and merely stated a religious position actually.

ETA: So don't keep asking for evidence when you are prejudiced not to even consider it.

You have no evidence for either what time is like in deep space, or for what nature existed on earth in the days of early Genesis. Face it.

 

[dad]

But, we are positing here that it was a omnipotent omniscient watch that created the universe. Clearly that's different from a normal watch, but it would still look like a watch, have hands, numbers, and a little window showing the date. So, why not call it a watch?

That doesn't fit God, so the parable is unfit for comparison.

Then, how can you be sure that what you think of as God is actually what God is? How do you know that God is not a watch?

Jesus came to earth and showed us what He is like in detail. He gave a record to man.

His ways are above our ways, and so high that man simply is too small (at least right now in a fallen world) to be able to understand God and what He really is and His relation to time etc.

 

[AnotherAtheist]

That doesn't fit God, so the parable is unfit for comparison.

The watch is omniscient and omnipotent, and created the universe. That's a God in my book, even if it is a watch.

Jesus came to earth and showed us what He is like in detail. He gave a record to man.

What parts of Jesus's descriptions of God rule out God being an omniscient omnipotent watch?

His ways are above our ways, and so high that man simply is too small (at least right now in a fallen world) to be able to understand God and what He really is and His relation to time etc.

But that in itself rules out being sure that God is not a watch.

And don't forget the spatula. What about the great designer spatula?

 

[pitabread]

The evo trees have NO worth.

You mean besides that applied phylogenetics is a real thing? But y'know, why quibble over facts amirite?

 

[dad]

The watch is omniscient and omnipotent, and created the universe. That's a God in my book, even if it is a watch.

Can a watch create time?

What parts of Jesus's descriptions of God rule out God being an omniscient omnipotent watch?

What parts don't?

I don't recall the prophesy that says..'unto us is born this night...a watch...in the city of David'?

And don't forget the spatula. What about the great designer spatula?

Makes no flipping sense.

 

[dad]

You mean besides that applied phylogenetics is a real thing?

You can have a ruler that is a real thing. That doesn't mean you use it to measure feet to the moon. Your little evo tree is more of a shrub.

 

[pitabread]

You can have a ruler that is a real thing. That doesn't mean you use it to measure feet to the moon.

And phylogenetic trees are a real thing and have real-world application (esp. when it comes to genomics). You'll deny this of course, but it's just the continual trend of creationist reality denial.

It never changes.

 

[AnotherAtheist]

Can a watch create time?

An omnipotent watch can do anything, so yes it can create time.

What parts don't?

That's not the question. Which parts actually rule out a watch? I note that you have been unable to come up with a specific example ruling out a watch.

I don't recall the prophesy that says..'unto us is born this night...a watch...in the city of David'?

The watch is the creator of the universe. The son of the watch sent down to earth might have been a second hand or something.

Makes no flipping sense.

Well, naturally. We're talking about an omniscient omnipotent creator of everything. How could that make any sense. I'm pleased that you've come to realise this. Don't you see that if it makes no sense for the watch and the spatula, then it makes no sense for God and the Holy Spirit too?