by The wanderer 142 Replies latest jw friends
But, using Einstein and his great intellectual achievements as a prop to formal religious representations of a personal God is just plain dishonest.
And irrelevant. Smart people aren't immune from being wrong. Things are true or they aren't, regardless of who believes them.
Dave
And irrelevant. Smart people aren't immune from being wrong. Things are true or they aren't, regardless of who believes them.
Except for religious assertions!
Dan The Man says:... "Vinny must WORSHIP a very ANGRY god...PERHAPS it's that JERK YHWH...LOL"
***** Let's see.... no answers to my questions from Dan. No explanations just how life with all of its complexities arrived from Dan. No rebuttals to the presented arguments from Dan. Just a "Vinny worships a very angry God blah blah blah". This is sure some kind of group, folks. : )
Your "rebuttal" was nothing of the sort.
Your argument goes something like this:
DESIGN requires a DESIGNER! NO EXCEPTIONS! Oh, except for God. Why this one exception? Umm...uh...because the Bible says so! Because it HAS to be that way! Because I say so!
Your argument is a classic example of the logical fallacy known as "special pleading". If you insist that design always requires a designer, then your God requires a designer also, or else your argument is nonsense. Which it is.
VINNY: You selectively replied to everyone's post but mine. Wasn't it clear enough? Something wrong with the premise or conclusion?
Vinny: I really wish you would quit changing the subject, I'm only 17, and I've only been studying this evolution and abiogenesis stuff for a little over one year. It's as if your jumping from subject to subject looking for something I don't know about. (Plus you have the advantage, everytime you see something you can't explain you can just use the old hackneyed: 'God did it'.)
I read your post and was prepared to defend my arguements... but you didn't touch on any of my arguements, you picked out the only sentences you could respond too, and left out the meat of my post, you only mentioned my spelling and polymers. You say they are not life forms... how do you define life? Is a virus alive? How about a cell? Bacteria? Mold? A gnat? A mouse? A computer? A cyborg? An android? The universe? An atom? You just simply said that polymers aren't alive.
In my opinion a lifeform includes but is not limited too anything that reproduces. And whether you consider them alive or not is irrelevent, I simply said that they started the whole thing, after all, it's about life arising from non life.
WE are talking about a CONTROLLED ENVIRONMENT HERE. People go to the moon today. Technology is in abundance today. So why put all of your hope into some hypothesis that has never been duplicated anywhere.
No, we are talking about CREATING A NEW LIFE FORM HERE. Why do you think that it would be simple? I don't think you understand what you are asking for... scientists are still working on figuring it out, and you want them to recreate the conditions it uccured in. WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THE CONDITIONS WERE THAT LIFE STARTED IN. How would we? It could have started in a puddle of goo, or deep under the ocean, near a volcano, on a high mountain. Plus it would have been in those conditions with a completely different atmosphere, but what the atmosphere was like we don't know, so how the heck are they supposed to recreate it? There are a lot of variables, and this is a relatively new field of study.
Counter arguement: You think abiogenesis is impossible because scientists, who have only had a few decades to work on it, can't currently create new life forms. BUT you also believe in a god who theoretically created all the life on the planet. So how come no religious leader, in the past several thousand years, has been able to prove their theory by creating new life forms?
All us atheists claim to have on our side is logic, reason and science. You claim to have an all powerfull diety and an army of angels on your side, but you expect us to be the ones with the astounding mounds of evidence with exremely expensive experiments to back it up, while you sit on you butt and make sly remarks about us, without any verifiable evidence at all. Can any theists make a new life form? (It shouldn't be too expensive or time consuming since all you need is dust right?)
And don't say that "god already did" in the beggining, otherwise the scientists have every right to say "nature already did". You want absolute proof of abiogenesis, when the only proof you have for god is that you don't believe in abiogenesis.
And you STILL haven't explained why it's less likely for a simple single-celled organism to exist without a cause, then it is for an all-knowing all-powerfull super complex omnipresent life form to exist without a cause. That's not something you can just ignore.
I happen to think a small unintelligent simple speck of life is much more likely to pop up then god.
TROUNCE TIME!
I have asked our little atheists to explain just how "DEAD MATTER" turns into "LIVING THINGS". Now read the thread, all of it folks. A lot of comments have been posted. After all of these written posts, THIS IS ALL that the little atheists could come up with in answer to how dead matter turns into living things:
Folks, our little atheists also believe that the entire UNIVERSE with all of it's PRECISION and ORDER and POWER just happened to result from some COSMIC EXPLOSION, without ANY INTELLECTUAL FORCE behind it at all, yet resulting in such precise alignment, that we humans (who came from that soup/dead-matter/polymer etc.) can tell exactly when and where planets, moons, comets, asteroids, stars etc. etc. will be located at any given moment in time.
Yep, our little atheists believe that in the middle of this intricate, expanding, gargantuan universe, our perfectly located, tilted, spinning and orbiting EARTH just happened to fall right into place (and stays in place) with atmosphere, ozone layer, water cycles, just the exact amount of oxygen and other delicately balanced systems due to some fortuitous series of LUCK. A continuous stream of "FAT CHANCES" that all just fell right into place so that all of this LIFE could then arise from those soup-like, dead matter conditions where a polymer can turn into the human brain and beyond.
Not only do our little atheists BELIEVE THIS HILARIOUS LOAD OF GARBAGE, even though it's only a scientific "hypothesis" (cause it's NEVER been duplicated in ANY CONTROLLED scientific setting, so ain't even a THEORY yet). But then, our little atheists go beyond just believing but now want to show up on this debate thread and CONVINCE OTHERS here to believe this same HILARIOUS LOAD OF GARBAGE.
Folks, like I said, this is why the web is so great today. It's all there in b&w PRINT for everybody to read for many years to come. I will be BOOKMARKING this thread.
Your "polymers" IS THE MEAT in my opinion. Which is why I focused on that portion. THAT was the only specific answer presnted to just how life arrived from dead matter on the entire thread. And I had no choice but to BURY YOU with such a lame reply as that. Sure, all LIFE, in all of its diversity, with all of its complexity is the result of those polymers replicating. heh
AAAAHAHHAHAHAHAAHHAAHAHAH
There is NO LOGIC and NO REASONABLENESS to your claims that all intelligent life and all organized systems and planets and stars galaxies just happened to fall into place without any intelligent force behind it.
AGAIN, There is just no way that it is even remotely possible that ALL of those marvelous features coming together at one time is due to a series of random, evolutionary, unguided chances. When I look at an incredible startlit sky, in my mind there is not a chance that these all happened to be formed by a similar series of just aimless, arbitrary, haphazard, hit-or-miss events; a rolling of the dice if you will. They are extremely organized. They have clearly been PUT there and brought into motion by SOMEBODY.
The many systems that allow life on this earth to exist likewise are organized, they are purposeful, intricate and finely tuned with other systems. Again, by some accidental, casual, fortuitous, stroke of luck? That simply is not reasonable or logical to myself nor most other people. I have examined both sides of the evidence. For me there is just no way these things happened without the guiding hand of intellect. For you and some others they may have come together by chance or in fact did come together by chance. I disagree. I have read the textbooks, have seen the arguments from scientists like Richard Dawkins. I consider such attempts to use abiogenesis/evolution as the explanation to explain how life arose to be far, far-fetched, and one giant stretch after another. Nothing has ever been duplicated. It bypasses the "Every beginning has a Cause" universal principle. It seeks to eliminate God altogether and then build around that premise in what many consider to be embarassing, feeble attempts of explanation. It fails miserably in my opinion and the opinion of billions of others as well.
My reasons for why there must be a Creator are plainly listed all over this thread. I have been accused of filibustering in fact. THAT is how much of this stuff is mine, from my own words. I've explained how life arrived, in detail. WHERE ARE YOUR ANSWERS FOLKS? "POLYMERS" and "I DON'T KNOW" AIN'T GONNA CUT IT.
**** Why the need to put my name up in big bold lights like this? I just replied in the order from when I last commented, and nothing was from you. You were much better off too when I simply IGNORED your original comment from much earlier back. But now that you want to push the issue, I am afraid it will not look too good for you Props. Your comment was simply out in left field. It was irrelevant to this discussion. It makes little sense then and now.
First of all let's go back and find what you commented on, and are whining about my ignoring you about.
Proplog2 said this:... "I am an atheist because the concept of an almighty omnisicence entity is incoherent. There is NO way that a finite mind can possibly determine the ultimate act of power or omnicence that would serve as proof. Suppose an entity cured a sports arena full of down syndrome children. Can you conceive of an act greater than that? Yes. It's like stating the biggest number.
You can never know if the miracle you are beholding is being performed by the "almighty" God or simply a "stronger than human entity"
I find it amazing that intelligent people can be on completely opposite sides of a spectrum and totally believe that the other side is ridiculously wrong. Vinny, you are obviously amused by the responses of the atheists that have posted. I can't speak for all atheists, but I am personally amused by yours. And yet we are quite probably of similar intelligence, and have reasonably similar life experiences.
If you wanted proof of the complexity of the human mind, I think you have it right there.
I wish you well, my friend.
Take care, live well,
Dave
I'm only 17,
This has nothing to do with the topic. I just wanted to say, LtCmd.lore, I am impressed with your keen intellect and reasoning ability at such a young age. I predict you will go very far in life.
Almost Athiest,
It really amazes me too. One person's brain allows them to be a whiz at math, but can't spell, and someone else can spell and is lousy at math. Some are believers, but to others it doesn't make a bit of sense.
Did a god create humans to be like that? If so, it hardly seems fair that he would judge the ones to who can't believe adversely because their brain can't comprehend that.
Sorrry Tetra, but I prefer the blue pill...
ROFLMFAO!!!
tetra
