Total Posts:225|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Missing Link in Creationism (ID)

iamanatheistandthisiswhy
Posts: 720
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/16/2014 6:55:44 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
Many theists reject Evolution saying that there are missing links, but this argument can be used against advocates of creationism (ID). So my question looking for scientifically verifiable proof after all ID is meant to be a scientific theory.

Where is the proof for your missing link? Where is the proof for your god?
MadCornishBiker
Posts: 23,302
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/16/2014 7:27:20 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/16/2014 6:55:44 PM, iamanatheistandthisiswhy wrote:
Many theists reject Evolution saying that there are missing links, but this argument can be used against advocates of creationism (ID). So my question looking for scientifically verifiable proof after all ID is meant to be a scientific theory.

Where is the proof for your missing link? Where is the proof for your god?

The proof of God is all around you. The proof of creation is in the intelligence of it's design and the totally holistic nature of everything on the earth, no part being independent of any other.

To use just the one example, if the earth were not a completely holistic system, how come what we are doing to the climate in the West, is having such a bad effect on climate everywhere else in the globe (except for Antarctica which is, ironically currently isolated by the southern Jetstream. However the evidence currently shows that even that is only a temporary situation.

Those who deny climate change and man's influence on it are merely burying their heads in the sand, a pointless exercise.

The trouble is that you only see the influence of God if you look at the whole, not always at the parts, though microbiology is going some way towards changing that. Otherwise you are very much in danger of failing to see the forest, because one tree is in your way. Which is the mistake that most people make by specialising in one area of study.
iamanatheistandthisiswhy
Posts: 720
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/16/2014 7:33:05 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/16/2014 7:27:20 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 1/16/2014 6:55:44 PM, iamanatheistandthisiswhy wrote:
Many theists reject Evolution saying that there are missing links, but this argument can be used against advocates of creationism (ID). So my question looking for scientifically verifiable proof after all ID is meant to be a scientific theory.

Where is the proof for your missing link? Where is the proof for your god?

The proof of God is all around you. The proof of creation is in the intelligence of it's design and the totally holistic nature of everything on the earth, no part being independent of any other.

To use just the one example, if the earth were not a completely holistic system, how come what we are doing to the climate in the West, is having such a bad effect on climate everywhere else in the globe (except for Antarctica which is, ironically currently isolated by the southern Jetstream. However the evidence currently shows that even that is only a temporary situation.

Those who deny climate change and man's influence on it are merely burying their heads in the sand, a pointless exercise.

The trouble is that you only see the influence of God if you look at the whole, not always at the parts, though microbiology is going some way towards changing that. Otherwise you are very much in danger of failing to see the forest, because one tree is in your way. Which is the mistake that most people make by specialising in one area of study.

How is climate change or the nature of the climate systems proof of god? All of this is explained easily by rates of evaporation/pressure difference/heat exchange/temperature/etc so this does not make god.

I was just asking for some simple scientifically verified proof, that's all nothing special.
MadCornishBiker
Posts: 23,302
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/16/2014 7:39:25 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/16/2014 7:33:05 PM, iamanatheistandthisiswhy wrote:
At 1/16/2014 7:27:20 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 1/16/2014 6:55:44 PM, iamanatheistandthisiswhy wrote:
Many theists reject Evolution saying that there are missing links, but this argument can be used against advocates of creationism (ID). So my question looking for scientifically verifiable proof after all ID is meant to be a scientific theory.

Where is the proof for your missing link? Where is the proof for your god?

The proof of God is all around you. The proof of creation is in the intelligence of it's design and the totally holistic nature of everything on the earth, no part being independent of any other.

To use just the one example, if the earth were not a completely holistic system, how come what we are doing to the climate in the West, is having such a bad effect on climate everywhere else in the globe (except for Antarctica which is, ironically currently isolated by the southern Jetstream. However the evidence currently shows that even that is only a temporary situation.

Those who deny climate change and man's influence on it are merely burying their heads in the sand, a pointless exercise.

The trouble is that you only see the influence of God if you look at the whole, not always at the parts, though microbiology is going some way towards changing that. Otherwise you are very much in danger of failing to see the forest, because one tree is in your way. Which is the mistake that most people make by specialising in one area of study.

How is climate change or the nature of the climate systems proof of god? All of this is explained easily by rates of evaporation/pressure difference/heat exchange/temperature/etc so this does not make god.

I was just asking for some simple scientifically verified proof, that's all nothing special.

That is up to you to work out, but I explained why it is proof of God because it shows how everything is designed to work together.

If you do not wish to accept that as evidence that is up to you, but it is none the less.

The proof is also that, by adding random elements we are forcing the pace of climate change as well as destroying our own habitat.

Like the Apostles I see that sort of thing as definitive proof of God, if you choose not to accept it, that is your choice, and frankly will be your problem.
iamanatheistandthisiswhy
Posts: 720
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/16/2014 7:48:16 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/16/2014 7:39:25 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 1/16/2014 7:33:05 PM, iamanatheistandthisiswhy wrote:
At 1/16/2014 7:27:20 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 1/16/2014 6:55:44 PM, iamanatheistandthisiswhy wrote:
Many theists reject Evolution saying that there are missing links, but this argument can be used against advocates of creationism (ID). So my question looking for scientifically verifiable proof after all ID is meant to be a scientific theory.

Where is the proof for your missing link? Where is the proof for your god?

The proof of God is all around you. The proof of creation is in the intelligence of it's design and the totally holistic nature of everything on the earth, no part being independent of any other.

To use just the one example, if the earth were not a completely holistic system, how come what we are doing to the climate in the West, is having such a bad effect on climate everywhere else in the globe (except for Antarctica which is, ironically currently isolated by the southern Jetstream. However the evidence currently shows that even that is only a temporary situation.

Those who deny climate change and man's influence on it are merely burying their heads in the sand, a pointless exercise.

The trouble is that you only see the influence of God if you look at the whole, not always at the parts, though microbiology is going some way towards changing that. Otherwise you are very much in danger of failing to see the forest, because one tree is in your way. Which is the mistake that most people make by specialising in one area of study.

How is climate change or the nature of the climate systems proof of god? All of this is explained easily by rates of evaporation/pressure difference/heat exchange/temperature/etc so this does not make god.

I was just asking for some simple scientifically verified proof, that's all nothing special.

That is up to you to work out, but I explained why it is proof of God because it shows how everything is designed to work together.

If you do not wish to accept that as evidence that is up to you, but it is none the less.

The proof is also that, by adding random elements we are forcing the pace of climate change as well as destroying our own habitat.

Like the Apostles I see that sort of thing as definitive proof of God, if you choose not to accept it, that is your choice, and frankly will be your problem.

Please realize I am not denying climate change. That is evident. The scientific community is almost unanimous on this and the accumulation of research and severe weather occurrences is physical evidence of this. That is what I mean by proof, published and verified.
GarretKadeDupre
Posts: 2,023
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/16/2014 8:17:17 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/16/2014 6:55:44 PM, iamanatheistandthisiswhy wrote:
Many theists reject Evolution saying that there are missing links, but this argument can be used against advocates of creationism (ID). So my question looking for scientifically verifiable proof after all ID is meant to be a scientific theory.

Where is the proof for your missing link? Where is the proof for your god?

Yay I get to be the first to actually answer your question!

I say that creationism means that a supernatural being designed life

I say that one creationism's links is the fact that DNA is information, and since 100% of all other information is produced by intelligent beings, it follows that DNA is produced by an intelligent being, and since DNA is the information for life, and the supernatural being (called god) designed life, DNA is evidence for creationism

happy? =)
Proof that people witnessed living dinosaurs:
http://www.debate.org...
GarretKadeDupre
Posts: 2,023
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/16/2014 8:18:11 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/16/2014 8:17:17 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
At 1/16/2014 6:55:44 PM, iamanatheistandthisiswhy wrote:
Many theists reject Evolution saying that there are missing links, but this argument can be used against advocates of creationism (ID). So my question looking for scientifically verifiable proof after all ID is meant to be a scientific theory.

Where is the proof for your missing link? Where is the proof for your god?

Yay I get to be the first to actually answer your question!

I say that creationism means that a supernatural being designed life

I say that one creationism's links is the fact that DNA is information, and since 100% of all other information is produced by intelligent beings, it follows that DNA is produced by an intelligent being, and since DNA is the information for life, and the supernatural being (called god) designed life, DNA is evidence for creationism

happy? =)

Maybe I didn't answer your question, after all. Oops.

It's because I haven't formulated a Scientific Theory of Creationism yet.
Proof that people witnessed living dinosaurs:
http://www.debate.org...
iamanatheistandthisiswhy
Posts: 720
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/16/2014 8:41:58 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/16/2014 8:18:11 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
At 1/16/2014 8:17:17 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
At 1/16/2014 6:55:44 PM, iamanatheistandthisiswhy wrote:
Many theists reject Evolution saying that there are missing links, but this argument can be used against advocates of creationism (ID). So my question looking for scientifically verifiable proof after all ID is meant to be a scientific theory.

Where is the proof for your missing link? Where is the proof for your god?

Yay I get to be the first to actually answer your question!

I say that creationism means that a supernatural being designed life

I say that one creationism's links is the fact that DNA is information, and since 100% of all other information is produced by intelligent beings, it follows that DNA is produced by an intelligent being, and since DNA is the information for life, and the supernatural being (called god) designed life, DNA is evidence for creationism

happy? =)

Maybe I didn't answer your question, after all. Oops.

It's because I haven't formulated a Scientific Theory of Creationism yet.

That would be nice. Actually, now that I think about it I have yet to see a cohesive scientific theory of creationism. I have read about examples of intelligent design, but not a cohesive theory. I think I need to track that down.
GarretKadeDupre
Posts: 2,023
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/16/2014 8:55:21 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
How's this?

Garret's Theory of Creationism

1. God is defined as "an intelligent, supernatural being." My hypothesis is that all information is designed by intelligence. DNA is information that is required by all natural life, and all intelligence requires life, so it was designed by God.

falsify it by showing information created by inanimate process (geology, etc.)

...

Meh, I tried. Not the most scientific theory lol but its a start
Proof that people witnessed living dinosaurs:
http://www.debate.org...
eNo
Posts: 80
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/16/2014 8:58:30 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/16/2014 6:55:44 PM, iamanatheistandthisiswhy wrote:
Many theists reject Evolution saying that there are missing links, but this argument can be used against advocates of creationism (ID). So my question looking for scientifically verifiable proof after all ID is meant to be a scientific theory.

Where is the proof for your missing link?

Clearly you have never met my sister!!!
"Scholarly opinion, even well informed scholarly opinion, is not evidence."
iamanatheistandthisiswhy
Posts: 720
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/16/2014 9:00:28 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/16/2014 8:58:30 PM, eNo wrote:
At 1/16/2014 6:55:44 PM, iamanatheistandthisiswhy wrote:
Many theists reject Evolution saying that there are missing links, but this argument can be used against advocates of creationism (ID). So my question looking for scientifically verifiable proof after all ID is meant to be a scientific theory.

Where is the proof for your missing link?

Clearly you have never met my sister!!!

Your sister is God, I always thought it was my sister the way she can make anyone do anything. ;)
bulproof
Posts: 25,247
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/16/2014 9:01:08 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/16/2014 8:17:17 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
At 1/16/2014 6:55:44 PM, iamanatheistandthisiswhy wrote:
Many theists reject Evolution saying that there are missing links, but this argument can be used against advocates of creationism (ID). So my question looking for scientifically verifiable proof after all ID is meant to be a scientific theory.

Where is the proof for your missing link? Where is the proof for your god?

Yay I get to be the first to actually answer your question!

I say that creationism means that a supernatural being designed life

I say that one creationism's links is the fact that DNA is information, and since 100% of all other information is produced by intelligent beings, it follows that DNA is produced by an intelligent being, and since DNA is the information for life, and the supernatural being (called god) designed life, DNA is evidence for creationism

happy? =)
Where did you get the figure 100%? The electromagnetic spectrum contains information. Fail.
Religion is just mind control. George Carlin
eNo
Posts: 80
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/16/2014 9:06:34 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/16/2014 9:00:28 PM, iamanatheistandthisiswhy wrote:
At 1/16/2014 8:58:30 PM, eNo wrote:
At 1/16/2014 6:55:44 PM, iamanatheistandthisiswhy wrote:
Many theists reject Evolution saying that there are missing links, but this argument can be used against advocates of creationism (ID). So my question looking for scientifically verifiable proof after all ID is meant to be a scientific theory.

Where is the proof for your missing link?

Clearly you have never met my sister!!!

Your sister is God, I always thought it was my sister the way she can make anyone do anything. ;)

HA! Touche my friend! ;)
"Scholarly opinion, even well informed scholarly opinion, is not evidence."
iamanatheistandthisiswhy
Posts: 720
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/16/2014 9:22:38 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/16/2014 8:55:21 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
How's this?

Garret's Theory of Creationism

1. God is defined as "an intelligent, supernatural being." My hypothesis is that all information is designed by intelligence. DNA is information that is required by all natural life, and all intelligence requires life, so it was designed by God.

falsify it by showing information created by inanimate process (geology, etc.)

...

Meh, I tried. Not the most scientific theory lol but its a start

So, if DNA can be self assembled from its nucelobases would that count as proof of information created by an inanimate process. There have been various studies showing this.

Here are some examples of DNA driving and self assembling.
http://www.pnas.org...
http://pubs.acs.org...
and
http://link.springer.com...
(Unfortunately this springer link is a book chapter so I am basing this on the abstract and have not read the chapter looks interesting though)
GarretKadeDupre
Posts: 2,023
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/16/2014 9:28:20 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/16/2014 9:01:08 PM, bulproof wrote:
At 1/16/2014 8:17:17 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
At 1/16/2014 6:55:44 PM, iamanatheistandthisiswhy wrote:
Many theists reject Evolution saying that there are missing links, but this argument can be used against advocates of creationism (ID). So my question looking for scientifically verifiable proof after all ID is meant to be a scientific theory.

Where is the proof for your missing link? Where is the proof for your god?

Yay I get to be the first to actually answer your question!

I say that creationism means that a supernatural being designed life

I say that one creationism's links is the fact that DNA is information, and since 100% of all other information is produced by intelligent beings, it follows that DNA is produced by an intelligent being, and since DNA is the information for life, and the supernatural being (called god) designed life, DNA is evidence for creationism

happy? =)
Where did you get the figure 100%? The electromagnetic spectrum contains information. Fail.

Congratulations, if you're right, then you falsified my theory and it was just so young :'(

However, I'm using the definition of Information that vlens3 or whatever his name used, I'm too lazy to look it up but I remember he said it was defined in the 80s I think... the UTI or something? idk I only saw that post, that's all I know about it

I wonder if the spectrum of radiation falls under that definition

At 1/16/2014 9:22:38 PM, iamanatheistandthisiswhy wrote:
At 1/16/2014 8:55:21 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
How's this?

Garret's Theory of Creationism

1. God is defined as "an intelligent, supernatural being." My hypothesis is that all information is designed by intelligence. DNA is information that is required by all natural life, and all intelligence requires life, so it was designed by God.

falsify it by showing information created by inanimate process (geology, etc.)

...

Meh, I tried. Not the most scientific theory lol but its a start

So, if DNA can be self assembled from its nucelobases would that count as proof of information created by an inanimate process. There have been various studies showing this.

Here are some examples of DNA driving and self assembling.
http://www.pnas.org...
http://pubs.acs.org...
and
http://link.springer.com...
(Unfortunately this springer link is a book chapter so I am basing this on the abstract and have not read the chapter looks interesting though)

If it qualifies as information, sure (I should define information)

But I don't think it does if it doesn't actually "inform" anything... the DNA would have to be able to be used by something to code for proteins... hmm....
Proof that people witnessed living dinosaurs:
http://www.debate.org...
GarretKadeDupre
Posts: 2,023
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/16/2014 9:29:49 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
On second thought, no iamanatheistandthisiswhy, it wouldn't count.

Because that was done in a lab, involving intelligence. It would have to bee observed in nature, like in a puddle in the forest or something lol
Proof that people witnessed living dinosaurs:
http://www.debate.org...
bulproof
Posts: 25,247
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/16/2014 10:10:41 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/16/2014 9:28:20 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
At 1/16/2014 9:01:08 PM, bulproof wrote:
At 1/16/2014 8:17:17 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
At 1/16/2014 6:55:44 PM, iamanatheistandthisiswhy wrote:
Many theists reject Evolution saying that there are missing links, but this argument can be used against advocates of creationism (ID). So my question looking for scientifically verifiable proof after all ID is meant to be a scientific theory.

Where is the proof for your missing link? Where is the proof for your god?

Yay I get to be the first to actually answer your question!

I say that creationism means that a supernatural being designed life

I say that one creationism's links is the fact that DNA is information, and since 100% of all other information is produced by intelligent beings, it follows that DNA is produced by an intelligent being, and since DNA is the information for life, and the supernatural being (called god) designed life, DNA is evidence for creationism

happy? =)
Where did you get the figure 100%? The electromagnetic spectrum contains information. Fail.

Congratulations, if you're right, then you falsified my theory and it was just so young

There is no if. Fail
Religion is just mind control. George Carlin
iamanatheistandthisiswhy
Posts: 720
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/16/2014 10:20:27 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/16/2014 9:29:49 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
On second thought, no iamanatheistandthisiswhy, it wouldn't count.

Because that was done in a lab, involving intelligence. It would have to bee observed in nature, like in a puddle in the forest or something lol

Fair enough, but it is self assembly which means that the nucleobases are put there and then left. Granted specific conditions (temperature) but everything requires specific temperatures like water boils at 100 C at 1 atm.
MadCornishBiker
Posts: 23,302
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/16/2014 10:35:04 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/16/2014 7:48:16 PM, iamanatheistandthisiswhy wrote:
At 1/16/2014 7:39:25 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 1/16/2014 7:33:05 PM, iamanatheistandthisiswhy wrote:
At 1/16/2014 7:27:20 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 1/16/2014 6:55:44 PM, iamanatheistandthisiswhy wrote:
Many theists reject Evolution saying that there are missing links, but this argument can be used against advocates of creationism (ID). So my question looking for scientifically verifiable proof after all ID is meant to be a scientific theory.

Where is the proof for your missing link? Where is the proof for your god?

The proof of God is all around you. The proof of creation is in the intelligence of it's design and the totally holistic nature of everything on the earth, no part being independent of any other.

To use just the one example, if the earth were not a completely holistic system, how come what we are doing to the climate in the West, is having such a bad effect on climate everywhere else in the globe (except for Antarctica which is, ironically currently isolated by the southern Jetstream. However the evidence currently shows that even that is only a temporary situation.

Those who deny climate change and man's influence on it are merely burying their heads in the sand, a pointless exercise.

The trouble is that you only see the influence of God if you look at the whole, not always at the parts, though microbiology is going some way towards changing that. Otherwise you are very much in danger of failing to see the forest, because one tree is in your way. Which is the mistake that most people make by specialising in one area of study.

How is climate change or the nature of the climate systems proof of god? All of this is explained easily by rates of evaporation/pressure difference/heat exchange/temperature/etc so this does not make god.

I was just asking for some simple scientifically verified proof, that's all nothing special.

That is up to you to work out, but I explained why it is proof of God because it shows how everything is designed to work together.

If you do not wish to accept that as evidence that is up to you, but it is none the less.

The proof is also that, by adding random elements we are forcing the pace of climate change as well as destroying our own habitat.

Like the Apostles I see that sort of thing as definitive proof of God, if you choose not to accept it, that is your choice, and frankly will be your problem.

Please realize I am not denying climate change. That is evident. The scientific community is almost unanimous on this and the accumulation of research and severe weather occurrences is physical evidence of this. That is what I mean by proof, published and verified.

Don't worry, I didn't think you were stupid enough to deny either it, or man's influence on it.

What you are not doing is thinking about the deeper significance of what is happening, why it is happening.

However, that is because like so many people you are leaving God out of the equation. That is a bit like trying to understand rainfall without including gravity in your calculations.

Then you put too much faith in the opinions of others without having confidence in yourself to assess what you see all around you.

How can you expect scientists to give you proof of the existence of God when most not only don't believe in him, but don't want to either.

Jesus often referred to the flood of Noah's day. How could he have understood it without including his father in his calculations? How could anyone?

That is why scientists will never find the answers, because they are leaving the biggest factor out of their calculations. They are refusing to accept that what is evidence for God really is evidence for God.

I was talking about climate change, albeit only in my local area decades before the scientists even got round to thinking about it. All that was needed was a brain to think and a memory to remember how things were changing.

I didn't need published papers to tell me what was happening, I could see it with my own eyes.

It is the same with God. If you rely on "published and peer reviewed" papers to find the evidence then you will never see it, because you are relying on them seeing it for you.

You have a brain, use it. Think for yourself don't rely on others doing your thinking for you. Too many people do that, on both sides of the religious divide, and all they get is secondhand knowledge often twisted by others to suit what they want to believe.

I didn't get to the state I am in by just listening to others. OK I listened, but then I checked what they said against my own observations, until I had proved the reliability of scripture, then I used that as my guide and always will, I have never accepted any belief, no matter who told me about it, without testing it to destruction first.

Nor should you, so don't rely on what scientists tell you. Listen to them by all means, but think for yourself.
MadCornishBiker
Posts: 23,302
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/16/2014 10:38:39 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/16/2014 10:10:41 PM, bulproof wrote:
At 1/16/2014 9:28:20 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
At 1/16/2014 9:01:08 PM, bulproof wrote:
At 1/16/2014 8:17:17 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
At 1/16/2014 6:55:44 PM, iamanatheistandthisiswhy wrote:
Many theists reject Evolution saying that there are missing links, but this argument can be used against advocates of creationism (ID). So my question looking for scientifically verifiable proof after all ID is meant to be a scientific theory.

Where is the proof for your missing link? Where is the proof for your god?

Yay I get to be the first to actually answer your question!

I say that creationism means that a supernatural being designed life

I say that one creationism's links is the fact that DNA is information, and since 100% of all other information is produced by intelligent beings, it follows that DNA is produced by an intelligent being, and since DNA is the information for life, and the supernatural being (called god) designed life, DNA is evidence for creationism

happy? =)
Where did you get the figure 100%? The electromagnetic spectrum contains information. Fail.

Congratulations, if you're right, then you falsified my theory and it was just so young

There is no if. Fail

Oh there is always an if.

For instance, IF you ever get anything right that will be a real miracle all by itself.

Also, IF you were 1% as clever as you like to think you are we would all be in trouble.
iamanatheistandthisiswhy
Posts: 720
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/16/2014 10:46:33 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/16/2014 10:35:04 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 1/16/2014 7:48:16 PM, iamanatheistandthisiswhy wrote:
At 1/16/2014 7:39:25 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 1/16/2014 7:33:05 PM, iamanatheistandthisiswhy wrote:
At 1/16/2014 7:27:20 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 1/16/2014 6:55:44 PM, iamanatheistandthisiswhy wrote:
Many theists reject Evolution saying that there are missing links, but this argument can be used against advocates of creationism (ID). So my question looking for scientifically verifiable proof after all ID is meant to be a scientific theory.

Where is the proof for your missing link? Where is the proof for your god?

The proof of God is all around you. The proof of creation is in the intelligence of it's design and the totally holistic nature of everything on the earth, no part being independent of any other.

To use just the one example, if the earth were not a completely holistic system, how come what we are doing to the climate in the West, is having such a bad effect on climate everywhere else in the globe (except for Antarctica which is, ironically currently isolated by the southern Jetstream. However the evidence currently shows that even that is only a temporary situation.

Those who deny climate change and man's influence on it are merely burying their heads in the sand, a pointless exercise.

The trouble is that you only see the influence of God if you look at the whole, not always at the parts, though microbiology is going some way towards changing that. Otherwise you are very much in danger of failing to see the forest, because one tree is in your way. Which is the mistake that most people make by specialising in one area of study.

How is climate change or the nature of the climate systems proof of god? All of this is explained easily by rates of evaporation/pressure difference/heat exchange/temperature/etc so this does not make god.

I was just asking for some simple scientifically verified proof, that's all nothing special.

That is up to you to work out, but I explained why it is proof of God because it shows how everything is designed to work together.

If you do not wish to accept that as evidence that is up to you, but it is none the less.

The proof is also that, by adding random elements we are forcing the pace of climate change as well as destroying our own habitat.

Like the Apostles I see that sort of thing as definitive proof of God, if you choose not to accept it, that is your choice, and frankly will be your problem.

Please realize I am not denying climate change. That is evident. The scientific community is almost unanimous on this and the accumulation of research and severe weather occurrences is physical evidence of this. That is what I mean by proof, published and verified.

Don't worry, I didn't think you were stupid enough to deny either it, or man's influence on it.

What you are not doing is thinking about the deeper significance of what is happening, why it is happening.

However, that is because like so many people you are leaving God out of the equation. That is a bit like trying to understand rainfall without including gravity in your calculations.

Then you put too much faith in the opinions of others without having confidence in yourself to assess what you see all around you.

How can you expect scientists to give you proof of the existence of God when most not only don't believe in him, but don't want to either.

Jesus often referred to the flood of Noah's day. How could he have understood it without including his father in his calculations? How could anyone?

That is why scientists will never find the answers, because they are leaving the biggest factor out of their calculations. They are refusing to accept that what is evidence for God really is evidence for God.

I was talking about climate change, albeit only in my local area decades before the scientists even got round to thinking about it. All that was needed was a brain to think and a memory to remember how things were changing.

I didn't need published papers to tell me what was happening, I could see it with my own eyes.

It is the same with God. If you rely on "published and peer reviewed" papers to find the evidence then you will never see it, because you are relying on them seeing it for you.

You have a brain, use it. Think for yourself don't rely on others doing your thinking for you. Too many people do that, on both sides of the religious divide, and all they get is secondhand knowledge often twisted by others to suit what they want to believe.

I didn't get to the state I am in by just listening to others. OK I listened, but then I checked what they said against my own observations, until I had proved the reliability of scripture, then I used that as my guide and always will, I have never accepted any belief, no matter who told me about it, without testing it to destruction first.

Nor should you, so don't rely on what scientists tell you. Listen to them by all means, but think for yourself.

I have researched this. That is why I am so bold with my claims as it has verification.
GarretKadeDupre
Posts: 2,023
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/16/2014 11:32:28 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/16/2014 10:10:41 PM, bulproof wrote:
At 1/16/2014 9:28:20 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
At 1/16/2014 9:01:08 PM, bulproof wrote:
At 1/16/2014 8:17:17 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
At 1/16/2014 6:55:44 PM, iamanatheistandthisiswhy wrote:
Many theists reject Evolution saying that there are missing links, but this argument can be used against advocates of creationism (ID). So my question looking for scientifically verifiable proof after all ID is meant to be a scientific theory.

Where is the proof for your missing link? Where is the proof for your god?

Yay I get to be the first to actually answer your question!

I say that creationism means that a supernatural being designed life

I say that one creationism's links is the fact that DNA is information, and since 100% of all other information is produced by intelligent beings, it follows that DNA is produced by an intelligent being, and since DNA is the information for life, and the supernatural being (called god) designed life, DNA is evidence for creationism

happy? =)
Where did you get the figure 100%? The electromagnetic spectrum contains information. Fail.

Congratulations, if you're right, then you falsified my theory and it was just so young

There is no if. Fail

Do you even know what definition of "information" I'm using? If you don't know, I'll find the source, but I would also like if you post your source for the claim that radiation contains information.

At 1/16/2014 10:20:27 PM, iamanatheistandthisiswhy wrote:
At 1/16/2014 9:29:49 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
On second thought, no iamanatheistandthisiswhy, it wouldn't count.

Because that was done in a lab, involving intelligence. It would have to bee observed in nature, like in a puddle in the forest or something lol

Fair enough, but it is self assembly which means that the nucleobases are put there and then left. Granted specific conditions (temperature) but everything requires specific temperatures like water boils at 100 C at 1 atm.

But it took intelligence to choose which nucleobases were put there. I think it may be possible that my theory is not falsifiable, but I won't give up hope yet! After all, its my pet theory, and I have to take care of it, nurture it, feed it, protect it from skeptics like you who would seek to do it harm, etc.
Proof that people witnessed living dinosaurs:
http://www.debate.org...
iamanatheistandthisiswhy
Posts: 720
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/16/2014 11:44:43 PM
Posted: 2 years ago

At 1/16/2014 10:20:27 PM, iamanatheistandthisiswhy wrote:
At 1/16/2014 9:29:49 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
On second thought, no iamanatheistandthisiswhy, it wouldn't count.

Because that was done in a lab, involving intelligence. It would have to bee observed in nature, like in a puddle in the forest or something lol

Fair enough, but it is self assembly which means that the nucleobases are put there and then left. Granted specific conditions (temperature) but everything requires specific temperatures like water boils at 100 C at 1 atm.

But it took intelligence to choose which nucleobases were put there. I think it may be possible that my theory is not falsifiable, but I won't give up hope yet! After all, its my pet theory, and I have to take care of it, nurture it, feed it, protect it from skeptics like you who would seek to do it harm, etc.

Ok, but larger chemicals can come (i.e nucelobases, amino acids, salts) from simple chemical reactions.
MadCornishBiker
Posts: 23,302
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/17/2014 6:19:56 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/16/2014 10:46:33 PM, iamanatheistandthisiswhy wrote:
At 1/16/2014 10:35:04 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 1/16/2014 7:48:16 PM, iamanatheistandthisiswhy wrote:
At 1/16/2014 7:39:25 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 1/16/2014 7:33:05 PM, iamanatheistandthisiswhy wrote:
At 1/16/2014 7:27:20 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 1/16/2014 6:55:44 PM, iamanatheistandthisiswhy wrote:
Many theists reject Evolution saying that there are missing links, but this argument can be used against advocates of creationism (ID). So my question looking for scientifically verifiable proof after all ID is meant to be a scientific theory.

Where is the proof for your missing link? Where is the proof for your god?

The proof of God is all around you. The proof of creation is in the intelligence of it's design and the totally holistic nature of everything on the earth, no part being independent of any other.

To use just the one example, if the earth were not a completely holistic system, how come what we are doing to the climate in the West, is having such a bad effect on climate everywhere else in the globe (except for Antarctica which is, ironically currently isolated by the southern Jetstream. However the evidence currently shows that even that is only a temporary situation.

Those who deny climate change and man's influence on it are merely burying their heads in the sand, a pointless exercise.

The trouble is that you only see the influence of God if you look at the whole, not always at the parts, though microbiology is going some way towards changing that. Otherwise you are very much in danger of failing to see the forest, because one tree is in your way. Which is the mistake that most people make by specialising in one area of study.

How is climate change or the nature of the climate systems proof of god? All of this is explained easily by rates of evaporation/pressure difference/heat exchange/temperature/etc so this does not make god.

I was just asking for some simple scientifically verified proof, that's all nothing special.

That is up to you to work out, but I explained why it is proof of God because it shows how everything is designed to work together.

If you do not wish to accept that as evidence that is up to you, but it is none the less.

The proof is also that, by adding random elements we are forcing the pace of climate change as well as destroying our own habitat.

Like the Apostles I see that sort of thing as definitive proof of God, if you choose not to accept it, that is your choice, and frankly will be your problem.

Please realize I am not denying climate change. That is evident. The scientific community is almost unanimous on this and the accumulation of research and severe weather occurrences is physical evidence of this. That is what I mean by proof, published and verified.

Don't worry, I didn't think you were stupid enough to deny either it, or man's influence on it.

What you are not doing is thinking about the deeper significance of what is happening, why it is happening.

However, that is because like so many people you are leaving God out of the equation. That is a bit like trying to understand rainfall without including gravity in your calculations.

Then you put too much faith in the opinions of others without having confidence in yourself to assess what you see all around you.

How can you expect scientists to give you proof of the existence of God when most not only don't believe in him, but don't want to either.

Jesus often referred to the flood of Noah's day. How could he have understood it without including his father in his calculations? How could anyone?

That is why scientists will never find the answers, because they are leaving the biggest factor out of their calculations. They are refusing to accept that what is evidence for God really is evidence for God.

I was talking about climate change, albeit only in my local area decades before the scientists even got round to thinking about it. All that was needed was a brain to think and a memory to remember how things were changing.

I didn't need published papers to tell me what was happening, I could see it with my own eyes.

It is the same with God. If you rely on "published and peer reviewed" papers to find the evidence then you will never see it, because you are relying on them seeing it for you.

You have a brain, use it. Think for yourself don't rely on others doing your thinking for you. Too many people do that, on both sides of the religious divide, and all they get is secondhand knowledge often twisted by others to suit what they want to believe.

I didn't get to the state I am in by just listening to others. OK I listened, but then I checked what they said against my own observations, until I had proved the reliability of scripture, then I used that as my guide and always will, I have never accepted any belief, no matter who told me about it, without testing it to destruction first.

Nor should you, so don't rely on what scientists tell you. Listen to them by all means, but think for yourself.

I have researched this. That is why I am so bold with my claims as it has verification.

If you mean Evolution, it has not been and cannot be verified since to verify it one would have to observe it in action,and even then one would need to be able to show that it truly is Evolution and not merely adaptation within a kind (i. e. finches adapting into other types of finch to suit their food source, but still remaining finches), as scripture shows it to be.

But then, if you have researched it thoroughly you already know this.
MadCornishBiker
Posts: 23,302
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/17/2014 6:26:44 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/16/2014 11:32:28 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
At 1/16/2014 10:10:41 PM, bulproof wrote:
At 1/16/2014 9:28:20 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
At 1/16/2014 9:01:08 PM, bulproof wrote:
At 1/16/2014 8:17:17 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
At 1/16/2014 6:55:44 PM, iamanatheistandthisiswhy wrote:
Many theists reject Evolution saying that there are missing links, but this argument can be used against advocates of creationism (ID). So my question looking for scientifically verifiable proof after all ID is meant to be a scientific theory.

Where is the proof for your missing link? Where is the proof for your god?

Yay I get to be the first to actually answer your question!

I say that creationism means that a supernatural being designed life

I say that one creationism's links is the fact that DNA is information, and since 100% of all other information is produced by intelligent beings, it follows that DNA is produced by an intelligent being, and since DNA is the information for life, and the supernatural being (called god) designed life, DNA is evidence for creationism

happy? =)
Where did you get the figure 100%? The electromagnetic spectrum contains information. Fail.

Congratulations, if you're right, then you falsified my theory and it was just so young

There is no if. Fail

Do you even know what definition of "information" I'm using? If you don't know, I'll find the source, but I would also like if you post your source for the claim that radiation contains information.

As far as I am aware radiation per se does not contain data, but can be a carrier for data (information). The actual radiation itself usually has a fixed base frequency, with the data being carried in variations of frequency or amplitude (i. e. radio waves, which are electromagnetic radiation, as is the light that is probably carrying this post at least part of the way to your computer).
bulproof
Posts: 25,247
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/17/2014 6:45:30 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/17/2014 6:26:44 AM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 1/16/2014 11:32:28 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
At 1/16/2014 10:10:41 PM, bulproof wrote:
At 1/16/2014 9:28:20 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
At 1/16/2014 9:01:08 PM, bulproof wrote:
At 1/16/2014 8:17:17 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
At 1/16/2014 6:55:44 PM, iamanatheistandthisiswhy wrote:
Many theists reject Evolution saying that there are missing links, but this argument can be used against advocates of creationism (ID). So my question looking for scientifically verifiable proof after all ID is meant to be a scientific theory.

Where is the proof for your missing link? Where is the proof for your god?

Yay I get to be the first to actually answer your question!

I say that creationism means that a supernatural being designed life

I say that one creationism's links is the fact that DNA is information, and since 100% of all other information is produced by intelligent beings, it follows that DNA is produced by an intelligent being, and since DNA is the information for life, and the supernatural being (called god) designed life, DNA is evidence for creationism

happy? =)
Where did you get the figure 100%? The electromagnetic spectrum contains information. Fail.

Congratulations, if you're right, then you falsified my theory and it was just so young

There is no if. Fail

Do you even know what definition of "information" I'm using? If you don't know, I'll find the source, but I would also like if you post your source for the claim that radiation contains information.

As far as I am aware radiation per se does not contain data, but can be a carrier for data (information). The actual radiation itself usually has a fixed base frequency, with the data being carried in variations of frequency or amplitude (i. e. radio waves, which are electromagnetic radiation, as is the light that is probably carrying this post at least part of the way to your computer).

As far as you're aware madman? bwuahahahahahahahahaha.

No seriously! The village idiot opens with that line. bwuahahahahahaha.

Madman you and aware are seperated by more parsecs than it's possible to count.

bwuahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
Religion is just mind control. George Carlin
iamanatheistandthisiswhy
Posts: 720
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/17/2014 7:52:34 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/17/2014 6:19:56 AM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 1/16/2014 10:46:33 PM, iamanatheistandthisiswhy wrote:
At 1/16/2014 10:35:04 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 1/16/2014 7:48:16 PM, iamanatheistandthisiswhy wrote:
At 1/16/2014 7:39:25 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 1/16/2014 7:33:05 PM, iamanatheistandthisiswhy wrote:
At 1/16/2014 7:27:20 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 1/16/2014 6:55:44 PM, iamanatheistandthisiswhy wrote:
Many theists reject Evolution saying that there are missing links, but this argument can be used against advocates of creationism (ID). So my question looking for scientifically verifiable proof after all ID is meant to be a scientific theory.

Where is the proof for your missing link? Where is the proof for your god?

The proof of God is all around you. The proof of creation is in the intelligence of it's design and the totally holistic nature of everything on the earth, no part being independent of any other.

To use just the one example, if the earth were not a completely holistic system, how come what we are doing to the climate in the West, is having such a bad effect on climate everywhere else in the globe (except for Antarctica which is, ironically currently isolated by the southern Jetstream. However the evidence currently shows that even that is only a temporary situation.

Those who deny climate change and man's influence on it are merely burying their heads in the sand, a pointless exercise.

The trouble is that you only see the influence of God if you look at the whole, not always at the parts, though microbiology is going some way towards changing that. Otherwise you are very much in danger of failing to see the forest, because one tree is in your way. Which is the mistake that most people make by specialising in one area of study.

How is climate change or the nature of the climate systems proof of god? All of this is explained easily by rates of evaporation/pressure difference/heat exchange/temperature/etc so this does not make god.

I was just asking for some simple scientifically verified proof, that's all nothing special.

That is up to you to work out, but I explained why it is proof of God because it shows how everything is designed to work together.

If you do not wish to accept that as evidence that is up to you, but it is none the less.

The proof is also that, by adding random elements we are forcing the pace of climate change as well as destroying our own habitat.

Like the Apostles I see that sort of thing as definitive proof of God, if you choose not to accept it, that is your choice, and frankly will be your problem.

Please realize I am not denying climate change. That is evident. The scientific community is almost unanimous on this and the accumulation of research and severe weather occurrences is physical evidence of this. That is what I mean by proof, published and verified.

Don't worry, I didn't think you were stupid enough to deny either it, or man's influence on it.

What you are not doing is thinking about the deeper significance of what is happening, why it is happening.

However, that is because like so many people you are leaving God out of the equation. That is a bit like trying to understand rainfall without including gravity in your calculations.

Then you put too much faith in the opinions of others without having confidence in yourself to assess what you see all around you.

How can you expect scientists to give you proof of the existence of God when most not only don't believe in him, but don't want to either.

Jesus often referred to the flood of Noah's day. How could he have understood it without including his father in his calculations? How could anyone?

That is why scientists will never find the answers, because they are leaving the biggest factor out of their calculations. They are refusing to accept that what is evidence for God really is evidence for God.

I was talking about climate change, albeit only in my local area decades before the scientists even got round to thinking about it. All that was needed was a brain to think and a memory to remember how things were changing.

I didn't need published papers to tell me what was happening, I could see it with my own eyes.

It is the same with God. If you rely on "published and peer reviewed" papers to find the evidence then you will never see it, because you are relying on them seeing it for you.

You have a brain, use it. Think for yourself don't rely on others doing your thinking for you. Too many people do that, on both sides of the religious divide, and all they get is secondhand knowledge often twisted by others to suit what they want to believe.

I didn't get to the state I am in by just listening to others. OK I listened, but then I checked what they said against my own observations, until I had proved the reliability of scripture, then I used that as my guide and always will, I have never accepted any belief, no matter who told me about it, without testing it to destruction first.

Nor should you, so don't rely on what scientists tell you. Listen to them by all means, but think for yourself.

I have researched this. That is why I am so bold with my claims as it has verification.

If you mean Evolution, it has not been and cannot be verified since to verify it one would have to observe it in action,and even then one would need to be able to show that it truly is Evolution and not merely adaptation within a kind (i. e. finches adapting into other types of finch to suit their food source, but still remaining finches), as scripture shows it to be.

But then, if you have researched it thoroughly you already know this.

Bollocks, and now I will produce the evidence and you will deny it. Yet you still have not provided proof for your god which proves the point of this forum.

http://www.talkorigins.org...
srehtiw
Posts: 491
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/17/2014 5:17:55 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/17/2014 6:45:30 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 1/17/2014 6:26:44 AM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 1/16/2014 11:32:28 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
At 1/16/2014 10:10:41 PM, bulproof wrote:
At 1/16/2014 9:28:20 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
At 1/16/2014 9:01:08 PM, bulproof wrote:
At 1/16/2014 8:17:17 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
At 1/16/2014 6:55:44 PM, iamanatheistandthisiswhy wrote:
Many theists reject Evolution saying that there are missing links, but this argument can be used against advocates of creationism (ID). So my question looking for scientifically verifiable proof after all ID is meant to be a scientific theory.

Where is the proof for your missing link? Where is the proof for your god?

Yay I get to be the first to actually answer your question!

I say that creationism means that a supernatural being designed life

I say that one creationism's links is the fact that DNA is information, and since 100% of all other information is produced by intelligent beings, it follows that DNA is produced by an intelligent being, and since DNA is the information for life, and the supernatural being (called god) designed life, DNA is evidence for creationism

happy? =)
Where did you get the figure 100%? The electromagnetic spectrum contains information. Fail.

Congratulations, if you're right, then you falsified my theory and it was just so young

There is no if. Fail

Do you even know what definition of "information" I'm using? If you don't know, I'll find the source, but I would also like if you post your source for the claim that radiation contains information.

As far as I am aware radiation per se does not contain data, but can be a carrier for data (information). The actual radiation itself usually has a fixed base frequency, with the data being carried in variations of frequency or amplitude (i. e. radio waves, which are electromagnetic radiation, as is the light that is probably carrying this post at least part of the way to your computer).

As far as you're aware madman? bwuahahahahahahahahaha.

No seriously! The village idiot opens with that line. bwuahahahahahaha.

Madman you and aware are seperated by more parsecs than it's possible to count.

bwuahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

Insulting him is not proving him wrong. Any idiot can insult but can you prove his claim wrong?
Ramshutu
Posts: 4,063
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/17/2014 5:22:01 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/16/2014 8:55:21 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
How's this?

Garret's Theory of Creationism

1. God is defined as "an intelligent, supernatural being." My hypothesis is that all information is designed by intelligence. DNA is information that is required by all natural life, and all intelligence requires life, so it was designed by God.

falsify it by showing information created by inanimate process (geology, etc.)

...

Meh, I tried. Not the most scientific theory lol but its a start

Clouds that look like things.
Idealist
Posts: 2,520
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/17/2014 6:27:03 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/16/2014 6:55:44 PM, iamanatheistandthisiswhy wrote:
Many theists reject Evolution saying that there are missing links, but this argument can be used against advocates of creationism (ID). So my question looking for scientifically verifiable proof after all ID is meant to be a scientific theory.

Where is the proof for your missing link? Where is the proof for your god?

No one in the world can either prove or disprove the existence of God, but it's not hard to postulate a logical reason why that might be so, and might even have been necessary to achieve God's objectives. I personally am not a religious person, but I know better than to close my mind to anything at this point. Every idea we have to explain the beginning of existence and the genesis of life is totally mind-blowing. The point is it's not possible to make free, unbiased opinions about good and evil or right and wrong if we are presented with evidence for or against an objective source of morality. Every scientist knows that once the experiment begins it is very important not to become personally attached to its outcome. Presumably the temporary life we now live-in would be nothing more than a prelude to our real existence, the nature of which would be decided by our personal use of our free will in this life. If God created the universe then he resides outside it, and we're not able to breach that barrier. We all either believe or we don't, and we can't just choose what we believe. After all, what are our beliefs but the sum-total of all our experiences and how we interpret them? No matter how strong our feelings are today, not a single one of us knows how we'll feel about this a year from now.