Vidqun

Joined

• started 26 topics
• posted 2,003 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by Vidqun

• 
  113

  I am deeply ashamed that I didn't accept evolution until a few years ago...

  by ILoveTTATT2 in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  so... i live in mexico and i am helping with an esl class (english as a second language).

  actually, i am helping with two classes.

  i get two days a week in which i just stand there and have a debate with the class, encouraging as many as possible to just talk... in english.. anyways, i like talking about subjects that generate debate.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Vidqun

  Cofty, you don’t see how saying one has no intellectual honesty could be a personal insult? Like I said, you’re funny. Accusing me of having no intellectual honesty means you view me as a liar and deceiver. Harvard ethicist Louis M. Guenin describes the "kernel" of intellectual honesty to be "a virtuous disposition to eschew deception when given an incentive for deception." Intentionally committed fallacies in debates and reasoning are called intellectual dishonesty. You are actually comparing me to JWs. Now that’s an insult!
  
• 
  113

  I am deeply ashamed that I didn't accept evolution until a few years ago...

  by ILoveTTATT2 in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  so... i live in mexico and i am helping with an esl class (english as a second language).

  actually, i am helping with two classes.

  i get two days a week in which i just stand there and have a debate with the class, encouraging as many as possible to just talk... in english.. anyways, i like talking about subjects that generate debate.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Vidqun

  Cofty, you are really funny. It's in order for you to insult and say your say, but when you receive in the same measure, you are unhappy. Talking of facts, we are still on the large genome of Amoeba and Japonica, or have you forgotten. You insist on my version, I am still waiting to be enlightened by yours. I am sure your fellow evolutionists would also be interested in your revolutionary revelation. None of them seemed to have cracked it. We are all waiting with bated breath.

  I put my money on Dr Leitch and her team to answer the conundrum eventually. Big genome means bad news for the organism, especially in the adverse conditions of today. Try to follow her logic. Having such a large genome could help explain why Paris japonica was so slow-growing and vulnerable to pollution and other extreme conditions. She added: "Having that much DNA does have consequences for the plant – plants with big genomes are at greater risk of extinction, more sensitive to pollution. Having so much DNA means every time you want to divide a cell in order to grow, you have to replicate all that DNA and it takes a lot longer."
• 
  113

  I am deeply ashamed that I didn't accept evolution until a few years ago...

  by ILoveTTATT2 in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  so... i live in mexico and i am helping with an esl class (english as a second language).

  actually, i am helping with two classes.

  i get two days a week in which i just stand there and have a debate with the class, encouraging as many as possible to just talk... in english.. anyways, i like talking about subjects that generate debate.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Vidqun

  Any flaws in Amoeba or Japonica? They work very well, thank you. By the way, let us hear your exulted explanation of their super genome size. None of the scientists seem to pinpoint the reason. However, you seem to be an expert on the subject. Can you (or Dawkins) enlighten us? You insinuate bad or superfluous design? Not that I am aware of anything amiss in that department.

  You seem to latch on a subject, and then just cannot let go. Must be the English Bulldog in you. Do you drool a lot? If so, then it must be those genes coming through strongly. If it's not "what books have you read"? then it is "you say you're a microbiologist." Now it seems to be the large Amoeba and Japonica genome. Perhaps your next tangent is going to be intellectual dishonesty, not that you would know what that means.

  As above quote show, the problem lies with you and people like you. An evolutionist/atheist is indeed a rather nasty piece of work. No accountability, no morality, no ethics. You and your ilk just carry on regardless, with no regard for future generations. What did A ha say, there's no causality, it's all just random.
• 
  113

  I am deeply ashamed that I didn't accept evolution until a few years ago...

  by ILoveTTATT2 in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  so... i live in mexico and i am helping with an esl class (english as a second language).

  actually, i am helping with two classes.

  i get two days a week in which i just stand there and have a debate with the class, encouraging as many as possible to just talk... in english.. anyways, i like talking about subjects that generate debate.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Vidqun

  Cofty, small genome, big genome, does it matter? The Amoeba is doing well. Under the right conditions, Paris japonica is doing well. Nothing wrong with their design, internally or externally. If left alone they will flourish, as will the rest of the fauna and flora on the planet. There’s one problem though. A recent Time Magazine reported on the meeting of the International Union of Geological Sciences (IUGS) and our new age, called Anthropocene:

  “For 12,000 years, we lived through an epoch known as the Holocene, which provided a stable and relatively warm climate that allowed humans to develop everything from agriculture to atomic power. But that success remade the planet we live on through widespread deforestation, overfishing of the oceans, the extinction of countless species and the altering of the planet’s climate through the emission of greenhouse gases. Most telling is the spread of radioactive material across Earth since 1950 as a result of the testing of nuclear bombs.

  “Paul Crutzen, a Nobel Prize-winning chemist, first described this human-influenced era more than a decade ago with a focus on climate change. The downside of human influence should be obvious – we’re not just changing our planet but destroying it.” Article by Justin Worland in Time Magazine, Vol. 188, No. 10-11, 2016, p. 8.
• 
  113

  I am deeply ashamed that I didn't accept evolution until a few years ago...

  by ILoveTTATT2 in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  so... i live in mexico and i am helping with an esl class (english as a second language).

  actually, i am helping with two classes.

  i get two days a week in which i just stand there and have a debate with the class, encouraging as many as possible to just talk... in english.. anyways, i like talking about subjects that generate debate.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Vidqun

  Cofty, as I told you. I don't know, I'm not a botanist or zoologist. Not sure why you are harping on this? Look at an Amoeba dubia or Camelia japonica (if that is what you mean by Japonica)? A beautiful flowering plant, yet far removed from us humans. Amoeba is a one-celled organism. Why would their genome be bigger? Good question.

  Here’s a possible answer. Might be the fact that the DNA of the single-celled organism happen to be so extensive to have resulted in a limitation of that species' adaptability? A very sloppy little computer program may well serve its simple function even though it is inefficiently written; yet, it is not likely to be useful as the hub for building a more complex program. Perhaps one of the apprentices worked on those two (as well as the cockroach and mosquito), who knows? Makes me think of Terry Pratchett, one of my all-time favorites. Now that’s a gentleman that had a spectacular imagination. Rincewind’s Australian visit is called “The Last Continent.” Do yourself a favor and read it. You need to lighten up. I stand by what I wrote. Compare that to our computers and computer programs. We don't even come close:

  ... man is undoubtably the most complex information-processing system on earth. The total number of bits handled daily in all information-processing events occurring in the human body is approximately 3 x 10²⁴. This includes all deliberate as well as all involuntary activities, the former comprising the use of language and the information required for controlling voluntary movements, while the latter includes the control of the internal organs and hormonal systems. The number of bits being processed daily in the human body is more than a million times the total amount of human knowledge stored in all the libraries of the world, which is about 10¹⁸ bits.
  

  
  Quite a few people are six feet tall. If unraveled the DNA molecule of any cell in one’s body is approximately seven feet long. The information in a single DNA strand is the equivalent of many sets of Encyclopedias. Think about it, the fertilized ovum is the size of a pinhead. That nucleus supplies all the information to construct a person.

  Some interesting discussions on the Internet, dealing with above two. But it seems, nobody knows for sure.

  Here's a few interesting observations by a botanist, Ilia Leitch, Research Scientist at the Jodrell Laboratory at Kew, concerning Paris japonica (Japanese canopy plant): 'We were astounded when we discovered that this small stunning plant had such a large genome - it’s so large that when stretched out it would be taller than the tower of Big Ben.
  

  'Some people may wonder what the consequences are of such a large genome and whether it really matters if one organism has more DNA than another. The answer to this is a resounding “yes, it does”, and the consequences operate at all levels from the cell up to the whole organism and beyond. In plants, research has demonstrated that those with large genomes are at greater risk of extinction, are less adapted to living in polluted soils and are less able to tolerate extreme environmental conditions – all highly relevant in today’s changing world.'

  This brings us back to the comparison of the computer programs, large and clunky ones and sleek and compact ones.
• 
  113

  I am deeply ashamed that I didn't accept evolution until a few years ago...

  by ILoveTTATT2 in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  so... i live in mexico and i am helping with an esl class (english as a second language).

  actually, i am helping with two classes.

  i get two days a week in which i just stand there and have a debate with the class, encouraging as many as possible to just talk... in english.. anyways, i like talking about subjects that generate debate.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Vidqun

  A ha, wrong. I first got some of the information from here. That is no secret (see previous threads):

  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=35fulERIUnU

  The rest of the information I got from two books written by Dr. Werner Gitt, called "In the beginning was information" and "Without Excuse." The books are based on articles he wrote and lectures he gave while appointed Professor and Director at the German Federal Institute of Physics and Technology (1978). He was head of the Department of Information Technology. His biography states: "He has written numerous scientific papers in the field of information science, numerical mathematics and control engineering." I have a list of his articles and lectures for those that are interested. He would write his technical articles and lectures under the auspices of the German Federal Institute. He actually invites all to disseminate the information on information in the interest of truth.

  But thanks for the link to the website. It might come in handy for future reference.

  The study of information was his life's work and I believe he knows what he is talking about there. Yes, he's not popular because what he says about information is true and the truth hurts. I don't agree with his theology though. As a Young Earth proponent, he insists that God is above His natural laws and that these do not apply to Him. I, on the other hand believe that God follows His natural laws in creation. This I base on results obtained from archaeology, linguistics, carbon dating and the fossil record.

  I have not encountered much refutation of his work on information. I believe it is because his logic is impeccable. Not many want to take him on in his own field of expertise, which was his life's work. I am a linguist at heart and his laws on information make 100% sense. Human language, computer language and DNA "language" do not fall out of the air. In each case it would come from an intelligent source, the first from a human being, the second from a computer programmer and the third arose spontaneously (by spontaneous combustion?) from the activities of basic elements, molecules, gases, electrons and energy (heat from the earth, lightning and sunlight). No, the latter must have come from a very intelligent Creator. Not rocket science at all, I'm sorry you don't see it that way. Because of that, you will have a distinct disadvantage in your life and in your studies.
• 
  113

  I am deeply ashamed that I didn't accept evolution until a few years ago...

  by ILoveTTATT2 in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  so... i live in mexico and i am helping with an esl class (english as a second language).

  actually, i am helping with two classes.

  i get two days a week in which i just stand there and have a debate with the class, encouraging as many as possible to just talk... in english.. anyways, i like talking about subjects that generate debate.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Vidqun

  Cofty, what I mean "perfect" conditions of a lab environment, i.e., scientist can create any condition they want. Still the recipe of life eludes them. According to what I see and know, I predict they will not get there. They are working on a wrong premise. And yes, as I said before, I also predict that they will not find life on Mars. It's a barren, inhospitable, atmosphereless landscape, not conducive for life at all, and definitely not conducive for life to originate.

  A ha, I am sorry to say, those are not my ideas, but those put forward by scientists of a new relatively new science, called Information Science. They were actually formulated by the German Federal Institute of Physics and Technology (Physikalisch-Technische Bundesanstalt Braunschweig).

  You talk of "uncaused events." Would you be so kind as to name a few. As far as I know, there is no such thing. And is that not the problem with the theory of evolution? Its proponents reason that the origin of life was an accident. It all happened by chance. Not only did it get kickstarted by itself, it developed into a wide variety of magnificent life forms through the process of evolution. Again, there is no such thing. I call it a huge jump of the imagination. Perhaps my problem is that I have no imagination.
• 
  113

  I am deeply ashamed that I didn't accept evolution until a few years ago...

  by ILoveTTATT2 in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  so... i live in mexico and i am helping with an esl class (english as a second language).

  actually, i am helping with two classes.

  i get two days a week in which i just stand there and have a debate with the class, encouraging as many as possible to just talk... in english.. anyways, i like talking about subjects that generate debate.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Vidqun

  Landy, you're right. Lots of things live there but the question is: Did they start there? Did they then migrate out of there, metamorphosing into a huge array of life forms to populate the earth and sea? It's a long shot and highly improbable according my understanding of life and the living. But for those that want to believe such a myth, be my guest. They are in good company. These myths have been doing the rounds for a long time.
• 
  113

  I am deeply ashamed that I didn't accept evolution until a few years ago...

  by ILoveTTATT2 in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  so... i live in mexico and i am helping with an esl class (english as a second language).

  actually, i am helping with two classes.

  i get two days a week in which i just stand there and have a debate with the class, encouraging as many as possible to just talk... in english.. anyways, i like talking about subjects that generate debate.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Vidqun

  A ha, I should add, my interpretation of natural laws would differ form yours. It starts with one’s world view. I do not look at them in isolation but fit them into an existing framework. I try to incorporate the laws of physics, chemistry, biochemistry and biology in this framework.

  Think of water boiling in a kettle. Will you be concentrating the molecules around the element or dispersing them? It doesn’t matter whether its an open or closed system. Where you have red hot lava boiling sea water, what will happen to the molecules in the sea water?

  You don't see a problem with cause and effect, I do. What was the first cause?

  As I said before, view the cell as a protein factory. Nucleus (board of directors). RNA (messengers from board of directors). Ribosomes (factory floor). Protein production. Can you see the flow of Universal Information? Nucleus > RNA > Ribosomes > Nucleus.

  Remember I said there are five prerequisites of UI. 1) Sender/receiver, emphasis on an intelligent sender. 2) Cosyntics (code + syntax). 3) Semantics; 4) Pragmatics; 5) Apobetics. If one is missing, it doesn’t qualify as UI.

  
  Cofty, hydrothermal vents would be the last place on earth where life would originate. As I said before, it probably one of the most inhospitable places on the planet. Secondly, through diffusion in sea water, free molecules would disperse, rather than aggregate. How would life form under such conditions, if it cannot be kickstarted in “perfect” conditions in a lab? This comes from observation of available evidence.

  Biogenesis is the production of new living organisms or organelles. The law of biogenesis, attributed to Louis Pasteur, is the conclusion that complex living things come only from other living things, by reproduction (e.g. a spider lays eggs, which develop into spiders). That is, modern life does not arise from non-living material, which was the position held by spontaneous generation. This is summarized in the phrase Omne vivum ex vivo, Latin for "all life [is] from life." A related statement is Omnis cellula e cellula, "all cells [are] from cells;" this conclusion is one of the central statements of cell theory. I view it as a law because it is unfalsifiable at this stage. If it is proved false, then it should be rejected. As said in prevous threads, no example exists to contradict the law, so it stands.

  [The term biogenesis was coined by Henry Charlton Bastian to mean the generation of a life form from nonliving materials, however, Thomas Henry Huxley chose the term abiogeneis and redefined biogenesis for life arising from preexisting life. The generation of life from non-living material is called abiogenesis.] See Wiki.
• 
  113

  I am deeply ashamed that I didn't accept evolution until a few years ago...

  by ILoveTTATT2 in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  so... i live in mexico and i am helping with an esl class (english as a second language).

  actually, i am helping with two classes.

  i get two days a week in which i just stand there and have a debate with the class, encouraging as many as possible to just talk... in english.. anyways, i like talking about subjects that generate debate.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Vidqun

  Cofty, I don't think a big genome could automatically be correlated with complexity. Whatever the case, I am sure there's a very good reason for it. I'll sleep on it and read up on it tomorrow. The botanists might be able to explain it.