Knowsnothing

Joined

• started 34 topics
• posted 1,279 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by Knowsnothing

• 
  49

  How would atheists respond to this?

  by Knowsnothing in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  http://www.everystudent.com/wires/godreal.html.

  british philosopher, dr. antony flew, has been a leading spokesperson for atheism, actively involved in debate after debate.

  however, scientific discoveries within the last 30 years brought him to a conclusion he could not avoid.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Knowsnothing

  So there you have it - Flew giving whole-hearted support to the doctrine of Jehovah's Witnesses.

  Ugg, I wonder if he was aware of disfellowshipping and blood transfusions. So, what is he accepting here, paradise earth or knocking on doors?
• 
  49

  How would atheists respond to this?

  by Knowsnothing in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  http://www.everystudent.com/wires/godreal.html.

  british philosopher, dr. antony flew, has been a leading spokesperson for atheism, actively involved in debate after debate.

  however, scientific discoveries within the last 30 years brought him to a conclusion he could not avoid.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Knowsnothing

  Suppose your argument is correct. You can replace "designer" with "the fundamental law of the universe" and your speculation applies equally well. On the other hand, a "fundamental law of the universe" need not have (for instance) a son or emotions like God has (and which is rather strange, how can God have emotions without a brain? How can God have a son without a body?), so it is a simpler hypothesis. Why should i then choose God?

  Why is there a fundamental law of the universe? "That's just the way it is."

  Precisely because the universe contain matter in a non-trivial (ie. non-equilibrium) configuration. You can ask why that is so, and modern cosmology can give you the answer: the universe underwent inflation some 13.7 billion years ago. You can argue that God pulled in the universe and caused it to inflate, but that is another mystery -- why there is information is an answered question.

  There seems to be a giant leap from "universal information" (if you want to call it that) to "DNA information."

  And honestly, are you arguing that DNA does not need "decoding"?

  I dont think anyone argue that...

  No, but doesn't it seem strange to you that it needs decoding? Why does DNA decode?

  The big bang theory is not the theory that there once was nothing and then something. It is a theory which describe the very early stages of the universe, nothing else.

  If you assume "absolutely nothing", our language simply stop working in terms of making any explanations. To me your argument boil down to this:

  Atheists cannot explain why the universe exist without assuming something. Assuming something allways existed is "bad" or "unacceptable" when atheists do it.

  I can explain why something exist if i assume something allways existed. It is not "bad" or "unacceptable" when i assume something allways existed.

  Point taken.
• 
  49

  How would atheists respond to this?

  by Knowsnothing in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  http://www.everystudent.com/wires/godreal.html.

  british philosopher, dr. antony flew, has been a leading spokesperson for atheism, actively involved in debate after debate.

  however, scientific discoveries within the last 30 years brought him to a conclusion he could not avoid.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Knowsnothing

  someone or something must have interfered in order for things to work (a designer), then it only get's you to that point.

  Why?

  Why the exact laws of physics, for example? Perhaps for me it is difficult to see that the universe simply has these laws? Especially from a random explosion.

  the universe, as observed, needed someone to put in all the laws. The universe, as we know, could not simply come about on its own.

  Why not?

  Because, as far as we know, there was nothing and then there was something. Unless you want to get into m-theory, which is really theoretical, abstract, and so far has no concrete evidence. So, matter simply came with these properties (point of melting, chemical reactions, gravitational pull, etc.?)
• 
  49

  How would atheists respond to this?

  by Knowsnothing in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  http://www.everystudent.com/wires/godreal.html.

  british philosopher, dr. antony flew, has been a leading spokesperson for atheism, actively involved in debate after debate.

  however, scientific discoveries within the last 30 years brought him to a conclusion he could not avoid.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Knowsnothing

  Well betsy, no one can really claim to KNOW anything. We are always learning and I am certainly open to learn more. If you easily knock down my arguments, fine. It benefits all. It benefits me in that I can start to see the flaws in my logic. It is placed on an open forum where others can see my flaws as well and perhaps learn from them. It benefits the arguer in sharpening their rhetoric.

  Believe me, my username was chosen with all the unwitting wit available.
• 
  33

  is it normal for a father, to walk hand in hand in public with his adult daughter?

  by varian in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  talking about europe and the western world....

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Knowsnothing

  But sometimes I think, that we have injected fear of normal physical affection into families that goes above and beyond necessary.

  Agreed. There is nothing wrong with this act, although it probably will be ill-perceived by some.
• 
  49

  How would atheists respond to this?

  by Knowsnothing in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  http://www.everystudent.com/wires/godreal.html.

  british philosopher, dr. antony flew, has been a leading spokesperson for atheism, actively involved in debate after debate.

  however, scientific discoveries within the last 30 years brought him to a conclusion he could not avoid.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Knowsnothing

  Something being awesome does not prove the existence of a designer. Such a designer would have to be billions of times more complex than their design---yet where did the designer come from? - NC

  I see this argument used many times. The only thing complexity in nature proves is that nature, most likely, could not have come either by chance, or by gradual complexity. Therefore, when one get's to that position and realises someone or something must have interfered in order for things to work (a designer), then it only get's you to that point. A designer. No one is saying where the designer came from. Perhaps the designer is self-contained.

  As one continues to analyze natural properties, there is a basis or axiom from which one derives all hypothesis and observations. At some point, we all say, "that's just the way it is." Maybe, with the designer, that's just the way it is. Maybe he need no one to create him. But the universe, as observed, needed someone to put in all the laws. The universe, as we know, could not simply come about on its own.

  So, DNA contains 3 billion pieces of information. "Junk DNA" aside, why is there even information to begin with? And honestly, are you arguing that DNA does not need "decoding"?
• 
  34

  on the fence - an introduction

  by so confused in

  1. jw
  2. experiences

  i was brought up around the truth.

  my dad was disfellowshiped when i was young, around 6-7. he was a elder and very devoted even going to jail when he was younger for the truth.

  he had a stroke and started preaching things that the society was not teaching and he was disfellowshiped.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Knowsnothing

  Welcome! Glad your husband sees things for what they are.
• 
  49

  How would atheists respond to this?

  by Knowsnothing in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  http://www.everystudent.com/wires/godreal.html.

  british philosopher, dr. antony flew, has been a leading spokesperson for atheism, actively involved in debate after debate.

  however, scientific discoveries within the last 30 years brought him to a conclusion he could not avoid.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Knowsnothing

  http://www.everystudent.com/wires/Godreal.html

  British philosopher, Dr. Antony Flew, has been a leading spokesperson for atheism, actively involved in debate after debate. However, scientific discoveries within the last 30 years brought him to a conclusion he could not avoid. In a video interview in December 2004 he stated, "Super-intelligence is the only good explanation for the origin of life and the complexity of nature." 1 Prominent in his conclusion were the discoveries of DNA. Here's why.

  computer programming:

  DNA code:

  DNA in our cells is very similar to an intricate computer program. In the photo on the left, you see that a computer program is made up of a series of ones and zeros (called binary code). The sequencing and ordering of these ones and zeros is what makes the computer program work properly.

  In the same way, DNA is made up of four chemicals, abbreviated as letters A, T, G, and C. Much like the ones and zeros, these letters are arranged in the human cell like this: CGTGTGACTCGCTCCTGAT and so on. The order in which they are arranged instructs the cell's actions.

  What is amazing is that within the tiny space in every cell in your body, this code is three billion letters long!! 2

  To grasp the amount of DNA information in one cell, "a live reading of that code at a rate of three letters per second would take thirty-one years, even if reading continued day and night." 3 Wait, there's more.

  It has been determined that 99.9% of your DNA is similar to everyone's genetic makeup. 4 What is uniquely you comes in the fractional difference in how those three billion letters are sequenced in your cells.

  The U.S. government is able to identify everyone in our country by the arrangement of a nine-digit social security number. Yet, inside every cell in you is a three-billion-lettered DNA structure that belongs only to you. This code identifies you and continually instructs your cells' behavior.

  You Can See Why DNA Is Important

  Dr. Francis Collins, director of the Human Genome Project (that mapped the human DNA structure) said that one can "think of DNA as an instructional script, a software program, sitting in the nucleus of the cell." 5

  Perry Marshall, an information specialist, comments on the implications of this. "There has never existed a computer program that wasn't designed...[whether it is] a code, or a program, or a message given through a language, there is always an intelligent mind behind it." 6

  Just as former atheist Dr. Antony Flew questioned, it is legitimate to ask oneself regarding this three billion letter code instructing the cell...who wrote this script? Who placed this working code, inside the cell?
• 
  16

  Am I a Return Visit? Suggestions needed

  by Flat_Accent in

  1. jw
  2. experiences

  so there i was enjoying saturday kitchen, when i hear a rattle on the door.

  i open it and who should i see but the same jw from last time, and she brought a friend with her.. in her hand was the memorial invitation, and she asked if i would come.

  my words obviously didn't travel far, because she asked me again 2 minutes later.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Knowsnothing

  If so, what should I ask this mysterious Steve character?

  Disprove the Flood. It works wonders. Tree-ring dating baby! Yeah!
• 
  31

  The peace in the worldwide brotherhood. Proof that it's gods organization?

  by BreathoftheIndianNose in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  and things are within a week or two of being d.a.ed/d.f.ed, and my jw best friend sent me an email to check how i was doing.

  i was fairly sure that he was very much on the edge of leaving to, or at least that he didn't believe it for a long time.

  so i sent him an email in reply and told him basically everything i believed and the reasons i knew jws are not the true religion, and i also told him i was leaving.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Knowsnothing

  mP, sorry about the Buddhist generalization.

  Another comment on the OP. Israel went through all kinds of wars. Christians had internal disruptions, immorality and such. It's all relative. To me, proof would be a column of fire following around everywhere. That would be bad-ass and unmistakable.