Chromosome condensation, amazing evidence of design
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
20-07-2015, 02:11 PM
RE: Chromosome condensation, amazing evidence of design
(20-07-2015 12:16 PM)Godexists Wrote:  
(20-07-2015 07:20 AM)RocketSurgeon76 Wrote:  It really is simple, GE.

When you presented scientific (I thought) evidence that something I believed (replication mutations) could not in fact contribute to the genetic diversity of a species in the long run, I changed my mind. That's what honest people do, and what science teaches us to do. It's fundamental decency.

Turned out it was a deliberate lie, designed to take advantage of someone who didn't know that was a fake journal.

It happens that is has NEVER been shown that natural processes can increase information. And the quest of the origin of the information required to make the first living being is far greater.

[Image: sdfsds11.png]

http://elshamah.heavenforum.org/t1312-co...rom-a-mind

"The inadequacy of proposed materialistic causes forms only a part of the basis of the argument for intelligent design. We also know from broad and repeated experience that intelligent agents can and do produce information rich systems: we have positive experience based knowledge of a cause that is sufficient to generate new specified information, namely, intelligence. We are not ignorant of how information arises. According to information theorist Henry Quastler...'the creation of new information is habitually associated with conscious activity' "....I described indirect evidence which is a recognized form of proof for a causal agent...if you have no theory which explains the formation of complex specified information or functional operational activity without an intelligent origin then you cannot dismiss a known cause for such phenomena. Seen or unseen such phenomena require a sufficient cause.

Quote:But it made me realize that this is the difference between us. No matter what I say, I will never reach you with facts or teach you new ideas, because your mind is made up and you are willing to stoop to any level of dishonesty to promote your agenda...

aham...

[Image: meme_g13.png]

Liar. I have already IN THIS THREAD provided examples.
This idiot doesn't even read what people write.



Soooooooo calling Muffsy ........
Time for stir-frey recipes.

Tongue

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-07-2015, 02:27 PM
RE: Chromosome condensation, amazing evidence of design
(20-07-2015 11:30 AM)Godexists Wrote:  
(20-07-2015 08:01 AM)Chas Wrote:  You are making the claim - you must prove that DNA is irreducibly complex. You have the burden of proof.

LOL... i have.

http://elshamah.heavenforum.org/t2028-or...uble-helix

refute my argument if you can.... Rolleyes

It is not an argument, it is a bunch of unsubstantiated opinions.

"How is that better explained ? Through natural processes, or intentional design ?"

"The right properties of deoxyribose and ribose are in my view far better explained through a designer, than random natural processes."

It is an argument from incredulity.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-07-2015, 02:30 PM
RE: Chromosome condensation, amazing evidence of design
(20-07-2015 02:27 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(20-07-2015 11:30 AM)Godexists Wrote:  LOL... i have.

http://elshamah.heavenforum.org/t2028-or...uble-helix

refute my argument if you can.... Rolleyes

It is not an argument, it is a bunch of unsubstantiated opinions.

"How is that better explained ? Through natural processes, or intentional design ?"

"The right properties of deoxyribose and ribose are in my view far better explained through a designer, than random natural processes."

It is an argument from incredulity.

We know from Relativity, Uncertainty and various other non-intuituve scientific discoveries, that what appears to be intuitively "the best explanation" is not even close. The only reliable basis is evidence. He has none. There is none for any "intuited" designer".

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-07-2015, 02:34 PM
RE: Chromosome condensation, amazing evidence of design
(20-07-2015 02:27 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(20-07-2015 11:30 AM)Godexists Wrote:  LOL... i have.

http://elshamah.heavenforum.org/t2028-or...uble-helix

refute my argument if you can.... Rolleyes

It is not an argument, it is a bunch of unsubstantiated opinions.

"How is that better explained ? Through natural processes, or intentional design ?"

"The right properties of deoxyribose and ribose are in my view far better explained through a designer, than random natural processes."

It is an argument from incredulity.

If he could show us the designer, he might have something. But he can't. "He's ... uhhh ... an invisible man in the sky ... and he did all this with magic." Right. That's about as scientific as a fairy tale. Come to think of it, it is a fairy tale.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-07-2015, 02:55 PM
RE: Chromosome condensation, amazing evidence of design
(20-07-2015 12:39 PM)Simon Moon Wrote:  Sorry, but DNA is not a code. It is chemistry.

[Image: my_mem11.jpg]

[Image: my_mem11.png]

Quote:DNA is a chemical. What it does is just a function of the laws of chemistry and physics working through specific chemical interactions. If it’s a code, then so is every other chemical formula.

[Image: facebo10.jpg]

Quote:If DNA is a code, then H2O is a code. Are you making that argument also?

But the bottom line is, that scientists talk about DNA being a code in order to make is easier for laypeople to understand.

Codes, by definition, have to communicate information, DNA causes chemical reactions.

River Out of Eden: A Darwinian View of Life, Dawkins writes:

“…The machine code of the genes is uncannily computer-like. Apart from differences in jargon, the pages of a molecular biology journal might be interchanged with those of a computer engineering journal.”

Elsewhere, Dawkins writes:

“What has happened is that genetics has become a branch of information technology. The genetic code is truly digital, in exactly the same sense as computer codes. This is not some vague analogy, it is the literal truth.”


http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8335231

The genetic language is a collection of rules and regularities of genetic information coding for genetic texts. It is defined by alphabet, grammar, collection of punctuation marks and regulatory sites, semantics.

What lies at the heart of every living thing is not a fire, warm breath, not a ‘spark of life’. It is information, words, instructions…Think of a billion discrete digital characters…If you want to understand life think about technology – Richard Dawkins (Dawkins 1996, 112)


http://ghr.nlm.nih.gov/handbook/basics/dna

The information in DNA is stored as a code made up of four chemical bases: adenine (A), guanine (G), cytosine ©, and thymine (T).

For the ones that deny that DNA carries literally coded information, but argue that its just metaphorically a code
. Look what Richard Dawkins has to say on the issue : See after the seventh minute:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wa55s9Gs_Eg

http://elshamah.heavenforum.org/t1281-dn...lly-a-code[/quote]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-07-2015, 02:56 PM
RE: Chromosome condensation, amazing evidence of design
(20-07-2015 02:34 PM)Grasshopper Wrote:  
(20-07-2015 02:27 PM)Chas Wrote:  It is not an argument, it is a bunch of unsubstantiated opinions.

"How is that better explained ? Through natural processes, or intentional design ?"

"The right properties of deoxyribose and ribose are in my view far better explained through a designer, than random natural processes."

It is an argument from incredulity.

If he could show us the designer, he might have something. But he can't. "He's ... uhhh ... an invisible man in the sky ... and he did all this with magic." Right. That's about as scientific as a fairy tale. Come to think of it, it is a fairy tale.

[Image: meme_g14.png]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-07-2015, 02:57 PM
RE: Chromosome condensation, amazing evidence of design
(20-07-2015 02:27 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(20-07-2015 11:30 AM)Godexists Wrote:  LOL... i have.

http://elshamah.heavenforum.org/t2028-or...uble-helix

refute my argument if you can.... Rolleyes

It is not an argument, it is a bunch of unsubstantiated opinions.

"How is that better explained ? Through natural processes, or intentional design ?"

"The right properties of deoxyribose and ribose are in my view far better explained through a designer, than random natural processes."

It is an argument from incredulity.

[Image: ignora10.png]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-07-2015, 02:59 PM
RE: Chromosome condensation, amazing evidence of design
(20-07-2015 01:35 PM)TheInquisition Wrote:  
(20-07-2015 11:33 AM)Godexists Wrote:  http://www.icr.org/article/does-bible-re...-have-fou/

next time....

[Image: my_mem10.png]

Your bible says the cosmos was created in a day, after the Earth was created.

haha. where does the bible say so ??

[Image: screen10.jpg]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-07-2015, 03:00 PM
RE: Chromosome condensation, amazing evidence of design
(20-07-2015 01:12 PM)Grasshopper Wrote:  I know this has already been pointed out, but I think it bears repeating. Even if this wanker could back up his assertions, that would do absolutely nothing to establish his "Goddidit" thesis, because there is zero evidence for that. All it would mean is that science hasn't found the answer yet. Science freely admits that. But it doesn't mean you get to fill in any answer that you want. "Goddidit" isn't even a contender.

There is no evidence for God’s existence.

https://ehyde.wordpress.com/2014/03/21/t...they-fail/

There is at least one major problem with this line as it is typically presented.

One often hears, “there is no evidence for God, therefore Christians believe in fairytales,” (or something to that effect) when what is actually meant is more like, “there is no physical proof of God’s being in the physical world, therefore Christians believe in fairytales (since all ‘real’ things are physical).”

The fact that Christians have never claimed to believe in a physical God – as merely one more physical being among all other physical beings in the universe – does not stop these sorts of atheists from thinking they have laid waste to 40 centuries of religious thought, experience, and refinement with the mere mention of this evidentiary boogieman. It rarely occurs to them that such physical proof would actually run 100% counter to Judeo-Christian theistic claims. Their argument against a physical God is actually applauded and defended by Christians.

This fact is not, of course, proof that the Christian claim is true, but merely proof that with such attacks the atheist has not even begun to swing in the direction of Christianity.

However, if what they mean is something more like, “There is no logical evidence of God’s existence…” then the straw man suddenly becomes a brick wall. The logical arguments for God are vast and time tested against some of the greatest minds of all time working tirelessly against them. They are well-known arguments and can be easily found online or in print, but let me give one quick example. I recently read someone who claimed that I conceded the atheist’s argument that God is not real since the faith teaches He is not physical. Let me help those who might struggle with this idea using a quote from David Bentley Hart: “Why can’t there be a physical explanation of existence? Because anything physical is, by definition, something that exists. So there cannot be a physical cause of existence.” The faith claims this non-physical, yet real, entity is God. His absolute “existence” is more real than physical existence by order of priority.

But besides logical arguments an additional reason why atheists often fail with this approach is because they run up against Christians with living experiences with God. There is no amount of speculative babbling from the uninitiated that can oppose the one whose faith is built on a living subjectivity to the presence of God. On these matters Kierkegaard had it right – in objectivity there is no truth for the single individual; the truth is subjectivity.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-07-2015, 03:01 PM
RE: Chromosome condensation, amazing evidence of design
(20-07-2015 02:57 PM)Godexists Wrote:  
(20-07-2015 02:27 PM)Chas Wrote:  It is not an argument, it is a bunch of unsubstantiated opinions.

"How is that better explained ? Through natural processes, or intentional design ?"

"The right properties of deoxyribose and ribose are in my view far better explained through a designer, than random natural processes."

It is an argument from incredulity.

[Image: ignora10.png]

I said "incredulity", not "ignorance".

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: