Who designed cancer?

by snare&racket 148 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  StoneWall

  Vidqun said:

  No, I am not interested in the views of biologists. Let me tell you a little story: The Greeks believed in spontaneous generation. The came Antonie von Leuwenhook (spelling?) with his microscope, and Pasteur, and they proved spontaneous generation doesn't exist. These were the fathers of a new science called Microbiology. Then I turn to my biology text books to read that life did indeed originate spontaneously. You need a great amount of faith to believe that.

  And therein lies the problem with your argument. It always gets back to the catch 22.

  You're saying that life couldn't originate spontaneously and that since there are life forms they had to be created then.

  Well where did God come from? Was he created? Did he spontaneously come to be?

  He's conveniently invisible and "evidently" way more complex than these life-forms you're describing earlier, and yet just always has been and always will be. You see no signs of spontaneous life under a microscope and yet we see no signs of anything else in the universe that has no beginning or no end such as "God".

  Just as the JW's had us try and "reason" with unbelievers using the house analogy. "See that house over there? What if I told you that house had no creator/builder and just appeared one day. Would you believe it?" Once the house-holder said well NO they wouldn't believe it, then we would follow up with the universe having to have a designer/creator being so much more complex than a house.

  The part the JW's (and other theist) leave out though is the part about someone asking if you believe the guy that built the house had no parents, had no birthday and will never die. The house had to have a builder/designer but he with the much more complex body that made the house didn't have to have a designer.

  So you always get back to this conclusion one way or the other. Either life spontaneously started at some unspecified date and in a way that science as of yet hasn't figured out,(may in the future but not as yet) or God just always has been and is invisible to boot.

  Which of those two requires more "faith" to believe?
• 

  Luke

  S&R...
  
  
  
  Vidqun, I respect your faith. But the problem is, god/God has promised a lot of oh so wonderful things, but so far he/she/it hasn't showed up to fulfil any of them. Meanwhile we suffer, grow old and die. So far, science has done more to improve our lives than dusty old books of fairy tales. What is he waiting for if I may ask?
• 

  Vidqun

  Stonewall, good point. Granted, circular reasoning at its best. I believe each must work out his own salvation, whatever form it takes. Certainly, it takes a leap of faith to be religious. But what is good for the goose is good for the gander. The same goes for the theories of the biologists.

  There is a certain method in my madness. I have a scientific background so I try my best to apply scientific method, even when it comes to something abstract as God and religion. As a theory is postulated, input from all sides will decide whether the theory should be approved or rejected. I believe, at the moment, the only way one can prove the existence of God is though prophecy, i.e., accurate prediction of the future, something that we humans are incapable of. I am working on it. So far, because of a lack of information, the jury is still out on God.

  To summarize: I'm guided by the following: Scientific method starts with the postulation of a theory. The process includes observation and accumulation of evidence. From these a theory can either be proved or rejected. What complicates my quest for truth, is preconceived ideas (mine and those of others), which pose a threat to scientific method. These could 1) prevent objective reasoning to take place, 2) entice one to tamper with the evidence, 3) cause one to adapt one's data to suit the occasion, or 4) to ignore that which contradicts.

  This is what helps me get through life, for what it's worth.
• 

  Vidqun

  Luke, I agree. He must hurry, because each day we are losing I don't know how many species. A lot of animals feature prominently on the endangered list. The way global warming is going we might also have to go on the list one of these days. Then there's mad scientists playing around with 'Armageddon' viruses (see above article). Bad times ahead. I studied the prophecies of Daniel extensively, and if my interpretation is correct, a few things must still happen before the end arrives. But that's another thread altogether.
• 

  cofty

  if God had kept his hand on things, on the earth and on nature, as well as those one earth, things would not have deteriorated the way they did - Vidqun

  Vidqun, I respect your faith - Luke

  I don't.

  Medical science is our only hope. The idea that there is a god who will cure you if you are ill is a fantasy. The progress in medicine is fantastic and is accelerating at an unprecendented rate.

  Genetic medicine will beat cancer eventually.

  I have seen many a patient being stripped of their belongings by greedy oncologists - vidqun

  Easy to be a smug cynic when nothing is at stake.
• 

  Vidqun

  Cofty, my favorite saying is: Time will tell. You read the article on the 'Armageddon virus' and see what Medical Science has up its sleeve. Ten Monkeys not that far into our future after all. But let's hope you're right. Let's hope man's stupidity is not his downfall.

  I don't understand what you mean by the "smug cynic" part. If you are dying of cancer, and there's nothing they can do, I think it's unethical treating a dying patient with incredibly expensive drugs, even if there is no hope.
• 

  Luke

  Vidqun, I think Time has already told us what we need to know. Some of us just aren't willing to accept the reality. 2000+ years of a not-yet-returned Jesus has proven almost conclusively that no one is "out there" coming to "save" us. We (Science) are all we've got.
• 

  still thinking

  Well that's put me off bananas...bloody religion!!
• 

  Yan Bibiyan

  Stonewall, good point. Granted, circular reasoning at its best.

  Hmm, no. It's a special pleading. Can't tell you how many versions of the "complexity=creation" argument I've heard and when it comes to the application of the same standards one level up, the exception comes into play.

  You said it: " But what is good for the goose is good for the gander ", why the change of heart now?
• 

  snare&racket

  "There is a certain method in my madness. I have a scientific background so I try my best to apply scientific method, even when it comes to something abstract as God and religion. As a theory is postulated, input from all sides will decide whether the theory should be approved or rejected. I believe, at the moment, the only way one can prove the existence of God is though prophecy, i.e., accurate prediction of the future, something that we humans are incapable of. I am working on it. So far, because of a lack of information, the jury is still out on God."

  I spend all day, every day with scientists. You are neither scientific or follow scientific method. Your wild statements affirm that.

  In your reply, you basically just mention random terms of information that I didn't, due to their irrelevance. Yes, DNA is altered by radiation such as UV light..... AND? How does that detract from my point that if you believe we didn't evolve, god had to design sickness and disease? It also bears no connection to your odd immunity theory. Cancers as you NOW know don't all originate from viruses, and only some skin cancers come about by UV light. Still need a designer in your magic man in the sky theory. I also note you have not asked about, researched or even read about the facts we now have on the evolution of disease. All replicable in any lab.

  People like you are dangerous, you claim to represent and know science. You clearly don't. Today's science is based on the best knowledge and facts before us. It doesn't claim to have morals. Stating similar comments to... humans once believed in a flat earth and therefore our evidence for evolution today in annulled... Makes you half witted. Why are you talking about Greeks ? Thats just.....weird. Anyone that looks at, examines an openly scrutinises the evidence for evolution will come to the conclusion it's true. Is it a coincidence that it's Genesis believers that don't get it?

  If you wonder why apes don't turn into men, why evolution doesn't happen in front of our eyes, how random chance can create an eye... Then you have never picked up a book on evolution. These questions highlight ignorance and a bizzare and incorrect explanation of evolution by Christian authorities, such as the FDS. It's handy because when you pick up a textbook, you can quickly see the deceit of your religious leaders. Helps one to leave immensely. It's like knowing that toasters and tv's have a common ancestor in the microchip but claiming that this is not the case because the tv doesn't cook bread and the toaster can't get HBO.

  I sincerely don't mind you believing in a magic sky man, but don't peddle yourself as a scientist my friend. You are nothing of the sort. If you think I am being unkind, I apologise.

  Finally , been as I love irony almost as much as I love porn.... I find it amazing that you are posting the evils of modern scientists for creating a virus when you WORSHIP the designer of all diseases, all viruses, all bacteria..... You twit. They haven't made it for a lark, they make them in order to find a vaccination. Even if some crazy evil scientist on an island that resembled a skull from afar, decided to create an Armageddon banana virus.... what the hell has that got to do with a team fighting breast cancer in my local university? Science isn't a movement, a group or force, it's nothing more than a METHOD........ FOR HYPOTHESISING TRUTHS.

  P.s the god of the bible didn't design sh*t... Just to clarify.