+- Sinisterly (https://sinister.ly)
+-- Forum: General (https://sinister.ly/Forum-General)
+--- Forum: The Lounge (https://sinister.ly/Forum-The-Lounge)
+--- Thread: Life (/Thread-Life--49854)
RE: Life - Nailo - 05-29-2013
(05-27-2013, 02:47 AM)Keepalive Wrote:http://i4.minus.com/ifGJKcXOso8h4.png Reductio ad absurdum:headbash: and if god wrote the DNA code, then it's very messy work. There are unused junk strands, lethal mutations, and congenital diseases mixed in with the valid gene sequences. This would seem to indicate god wrote the segments of code for diabetes, congenital heart disease, elephantiasis, and a list of hundreds of disorders and deformities. We humans have only begun to understand and tinker with DNA; however, natural, biological processes write a new example of the code every time an oganism reproduces sexually. Gene pairs are randomly selected and recombined to create a unique individual inside the egg. If biological processes are capable of writing this code with such proficiency, why is it unreasonable to suppose such processes created the code in the first place?(05-26-2013, 08:17 PM)LiveFaster Wrote: "your answer Based on the Unmanaged Evolution theory,(which you don't have Prove of it) "
I have 2 questions for you , Do you accept evolution or not? how about abiogenesis ? i want make a rebuttal but i don't wanna waste time if you don't even hold acceptance to the most "legit" theory's as how life came to be in this planet.
First We was talked about The Unmanaged Evolution Theory..
and I Think It's Obvious ,that i don't Believe in it(Who made the first element,I think It's Impossible to be this Complicated Process had done without Managing,..
Monkeys For Example,They Have Brain and Have Some intelligence,Even So Did THey Created Anything Over the Years?
How You Can Believe,That Blind Evolution Has Done The living Cell ,That Has Created The DNA?!
About "Abiogenesis" I think that Louis Pasteur& Francesco Redi ً Was Confuted This Theory.. So I don't Need to Talk About It.
RE: Life - Keepalive - 05-29-2013
[/quote]
http://i4.minus.com/ifGJKcXOso8h4.png Reductio ad absurdum:headbash:
[/quote]
In the Monkeys Example I didn't meant,That We evolved from them, I was saying That They are Better From the absolute Blindness ,Even So they Couldn't make any Creation Thing in this World(like humans does)..
Im sorry if It was incorrect!
So every Thing Created It self Blindly,And evolving Blindly!
I don't think it's make any sense.
[/quote]
and if god wrote the DNA code, then it's very messy work. There are unused junk strands, lethal mutations, and congenital diseases mixed in with the valid gene sequences. This would seem to indicate god wrote the segments of code for diabetes, congenital heart disease, elephantiasis, and a list of hundreds of disorders and deformities
[/quote]
We was Said That God Didn't Make Us To be Perfrect In Earth,He did the Defects for a Reason.
[/quote]
Gene pairs are randomly selected and recombined to create a unique individual inside the egg. If biological processes are capable of writing this code with such proficiency
[/quote]
It was Programmed That Way
[/quote]
why is it unreasonable to suppose such processes created the code in the first place?
[/quote]
When i say Since The antivirus Detects the Viruses by Him Self ,With his Own ,without intrusion from me(Regardless to the update, Cause We don't know The Future, But God Do)..
I Shouldn't Say Who Programmed it?!
Just Across my mind ,So also Sorry if it was incorrect.
RE: Life - Keepalive - 05-29-2013
P.S
This is Was Said For Who Claim That there's No God:
"You Should Believe in This Five Impossibilities..
1-That life emerges from No life
2-That the organizing is generated automatically from the chaos
3-That the laws of nature Created it self
4-that the Result Came then the Cause
5-That the universe is tossing it out of nowhere for no reason and without breeder . "
RE: Life - chmod - 05-30-2013
(05-29-2013, 07:08 PM)Keepalive Wrote: P.S
This is Was Said For Who Claim That there's No God:
"You Should Believe in This Five Impossibilities..
1-That life emerges from No life
2-That the organizing is generated automatically from the chaos
3-That the laws of nature Created it self
4-that the Result Came then the Cause
5-That the universe is tossing it out of nowhere for no reason and without breeder . "
As opposed to people of faith believing one impossibility - a man who lives in the sky did it.
There are lots of explanations as to the origins of the universe/us, I don't have time to go into depth now but if anyone's interested I'll be glad to post it here later
RE: Life - Keepalive - 05-30-2013
(05-30-2013, 06:06 AM)chmod Wrote:(05-29-2013, 07:08 PM)Keepalive Wrote: P.S
This is Was Said For Who Claim That there's No God:
"You Should Believe in This Five Impossibilities..
1-That life emerges from No life
2-That the organizing is generated automatically from the chaos
3-That the laws of nature Created it self
4-that the Result Came then the Cause
5-That the universe is tossing it out of nowhere for no reason and without breeder . "
As opposed to people of faith believing one impossibility - a man who lives in the sky did it.
There are lots of explanations as to the origins of the universe/us, I don't have time to go into depth now but if anyone's interested I'll be glad to post it here later
How you Mention 'God' As" Man"! and do you know what is the real meaning of The "Sky"..
Do you have Enough Knowledge About Religions?
RE: Life - Solixious - 05-30-2013
(05-30-2013, 11:57 AM)Keepalive Wrote:(05-30-2013, 06:06 AM)chmod Wrote:(05-29-2013, 07:08 PM)Keepalive Wrote: P.S
This is Was Said For Who Claim That there's No God:
"You Should Believe in This Five Impossibilities..
1-That life emerges from No life
2-That the organizing is generated automatically from the chaos
3-That the laws of nature Created it self
4-that the Result Came then the Cause
5-That the universe is tossing it out of nowhere for no reason and without breeder . "
As opposed to people of faith believing one impossibility - a man who lives in the sky did it.
There are lots of explanations as to the origins of the universe/us, I don't have time to go into depth now but if anyone's interested I'll be glad to post it here later
How you Mention 'God' As" Man"! and do you know what is the real meaning of The "Sky"..
Do you have Enough Knowledge About Religions?
I'm sure he did not mean to offend you.
More importantly, it is necessary to try to find the truth instead of trying to dig bits of truth in what you believe. You asked him if he had enough knowledge about religion. How many religion have you read about? Do you know how many religions even exist this world?
On the other hand, how much have you read about science that you claimed that people who are atheists believe in the impossibilities you mentioned? As the old saying goes, half knowledge is very dangerous. So it seems.
RE: Life - chmod - 05-30-2013
As @Solixious stated my intent was not to offend you, and please except my apologies. I was merely to bring attention to how impossible the idea of God appears to me.
I have studied religion at school (although that was a long time ago now) and have read parts of the bible but find it all very hard to believe. I have also studied physics and the a little astronomy and find that evidence makes a lot more sense to me, so as you can see I have made an informed decision.
RE: Life - Linuxephus™ - 05-30-2013
(05-30-2013, 11:57 AM)Keepalive Wrote: How you Mention 'God' As" Man"! and do you know what is the real meaning of The "Sky"..This is where intentionally being offended by choice versus the intent of offending comes into play, viz., the comment by Chmod was not so much offending as it was you taking offense, by choice.
Do you have Enough Knowledge About Religions?
And once again, God is not Religion. Religion is that which was and is Man Made in the use of Man's Understanding of God.
Not that which defines God.
(05-30-2013, 03:33 PM)chmod Wrote: As @Solixious stated my intent was not to offend you, and please except my apologies. I was merely to bring attention to how impossible the idea of God appears to me.
I have studied religion at school (although that was a long time ago now) and have read parts of the bible but find it all very hard to believe. I have also studied physics and the a little astronomy and find that evidence makes a lot more sense to me, so as you can see I have made an informed decision.
Essentially, you have chosen the intellectual route of understanding from a scientific point of view, many of which are indeed proven, not counting Theories, and of which many even acknowledge scientifically the existence of God even though their own means of defining God yet remains largely theoretical even whilst acknowledging God in the same statement.
You find what little of the Bible you have read "hard to believe" due to the choice of choosing the scientifically intellectual route versus the spiritual route of understanding which leads to the intellectual understanding as a byproduct of what is required to be understood spiritually first and foremost.
Thus, based upon your understanding of choice, does not invalidate the facts for what they are regardless as logic dictates an individual's chosen line of understanding still leads to them reaching a self chosen conclusion that does not dictate or change the facts for what they are nonetheless.
These word should make perfect sense to you.
Why?
Because my job is to teach when required.
And above all else, I'm an expert in the H[uman]U[ser]I[nterface].
RE: Life - chmod - 05-30-2013
Agreed although Stephen Hawking did famously and controversially publish a book in which he denies the existence of God, the short conclusion being that time did not exist before the big bang and therefore the was no time for a God to exist or create a universe the book is called "The Grand Design" and I thoroughly recommend anyone interested in the scientific theory of the universe to read it as it goes far more in depth than I ever could here
RE: Life - Linuxephus™ - 05-30-2013
(05-30-2013, 06:11 PM)chmod Wrote: Agreed although Stephen Hawking did famously and controversially publish a book in which he denies the existence of God, the short conclusion being that time did not exist before the big bang and therefore the was no time for a God to exist or create a universe the book is called "The Grand Design" and I thoroughly recommend anyone interested in the scientific theory of the universe to read it as it goes far more in depth than I ever could here
The same Hawking whom a number of years ago was well known for having been a firm believer in the same God he alleges not to exist.
Such would be the same as me stating the Sun does not exist.
Despite ample evidence to the contrary, it merely suggests he has no method by which to disprove what is proven.
Thus, if according to Hawking that "God doesn't exist"; a Man confined to a wheelchair, subject to the very Laws of Physics in evidence, I'd suggest his modus operandi was to intentionally draw attention to himself by causing the very controversy he knew would ensue.
This doesn't take into account his flawed logic that all which is finite is subject to Time and the Law of Physics that very accurately define Time on the merit God has always existed, therefore there is no point in Time as we measure it that He didn't exist, including before Time is listed as having started at the precise point the Big Bang took place.
Hence, God not being subject to Time, logically concludes that Hawkings line of thought based upon finite understanding fails to disprove what each individual in this world is programmed/hard-wired to already know.
What this encompasses is yet another case of finite understanding failing to explain what is simply Written and already available.
And my personal viewpoint on Hawkings dissertation is merely this: If God does not exist, then what fathomable logic leads one to argue the merits of what doesn't exist because logic dictates if God doesn't exist, then there would be no ongoing, pea-brained debates upon the subject because one would not even know of it's existence in order to argue in the negative.