Topic: Scientific proof that God exists? - page 496. (Read 845654 times)

This quote is a falacy:

"Nowhere in nature do we see nature selecting anything."

Do you see birds making nests underwater? No, they select tree's or buildings, and before buildings, where did the birds select? In a natural disaster like say a firestorm, Wildlife select "run away".. Does water, that can clearly flow in all directions, select 'up'? No, because it cant, unless we remove the gravity of the situation..

Natural selection.. exists, or we would not be able to, since it's safe to assume, we are of nature in itself.

"I can show you how there IS selection available to mankind, but you won't like what I show you."

I may not like what you show, but please do..?

I personally know it's a waste of time. But I enjoy it.
Seeing every contortion, every contradiction, every unanswered question and every subject change is priceless.

You guys are wasting your time.

It's easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a brainwashed person to understand there are no gods.

Do you also not think that much of the sun UV is blocked by the ozone layer? (That wasn't there since day 1)

And stop talking nonsense, the evolution through radioactivity/UV takes MILLIONS of years.
Have you ever saw a mountain come up from the ground?
No?
Do you really think that god is a better explanation for them than plate tectonics?

It's possible, I guess nothing has zero probability.

Myself I find enough awe in the observable universe to  not want/need a deity, and my "afterlife" (the part of me that is bigger than me) is ensured in the genetic code of my children.

The pattern of life IS evolution. And you can observe it first hand if you code up a genetic algo.

one self replicating molecule soon has many neighbors if raw resources are plentiful. one is all it takes, a random throw does it. a MASSIVE vat of organic chemistry, see above image.


If you fall in a rough sea before breeding you have a potentially fatal swimming test ahead of you. No choice involved, guaranteed!

The simplest life forms must also endure environmental extremes etc, it's ALL a test.

All self replicating molecules come from other self replicating molecules. No self replicating molecules occur spontaneously from non-self replicating molecules. No self replicating molecules survive individually, on their own, without a whole lot of support molecules surrounding them to maintain them in their self replicating capacity.


The only evidence that we have of a high radiation shower that produced mutations are Hiroshima and Nagasaki. No advancement in the mutations has been observed. Only retardation and death has been observed.


So far many of the mutations on earth have lived to breed, while many others have not survived. When mankind mutated from perfection in the Garden of Eden, to imperfection, he cause mutation around the whole earth. The only reason that life on earth survives this mutation long enough to continue breeding is that God has mercy on mankind, and has granted him and the world strength to live and breed.


While this paragraph doesn't make much sense, genetic algorithms are simply patterns of life translated into the language of mathematics. They have nothing to do with evolution. They simply show the ability programmed into the nature of living organisms to survive under many adverse conditions.


Nowhere in nature do we see nature selecting anything. Selection has to do with choice. What we DO see is cause and effect. As far as we scientifically see, even the choices that people make are programmed into them, so that they make the choices the way they do. While the only thing that we can scientifically see is 100% programming, no selection, I can show you how there IS selection available to mankind, but you won't like what I show you.


Actually, it was God who planned and coded this universe. There is no evidence for anything other than this. God did it because He loved mankind, before mankind existed, and even after mankind made his own faulty choices to go against God. Going against God will only cause a person to force himself/herself out of existence. Rather, why not submit to the loving God and be saved?

Three main operators drive our evolution now:

1. selection
2. mutation
3. crossover (breeding)

The selection operator is the first hurdle to overcome, and self replication does it. Initially there is zero competition so selection is zero, any self replicating molecule makes the grade, it's bloom of growth goes unhindered.

When self replicating molecules occur, then the mutation operator is the first to happen, simple replicating systems are very noisy, many dice throws end up close to self replication but just miss the ability. Once a fairly stable self replicating system is established (with small mutation level) then a sea of fairly bland chemistry happens, in that sea it is possible, given time, that some crossover mechanism will arise as a mutation, and then boom it's lit. From there the genetic code lenghtens and gains complexity through mutation, crossover and selection.

Without mutation there is no evolution, a large radiation shower of the earth, although unpleasant for the inhabitants in the short term would be like hitting the nitro button for evolution. But it's not sustainable and the button must be released fairly quickly or everything dies. Optimal mutation rate overall is that which occurs naturally through selection.

All mutations are "tried" those that don't live long enough to breed, their mutation is lost forever.

Genetic algorithms are scientific proof of evolution, you can witness emergent complexity beyond which was programmed in to the original overall system, in fact the seed genome can be junk provided a replicating gene system with crossover and mutation is established. In a simple experiment like this you select the best solutions for breeding and cull the rest, after a modest number of generations excellent solutions can be achieved. I have used this method to tweak parameters of complex systems that would be impossible to do using a brute force try all combos approach.

In real life the selection is imposed by competition and environment.

We are physical manifestations of a trinary code that has been mutated and crossed over for a long long long time.

And that's all there is to it, a "creator" is not needed. If you crave a "god" then Sol is the closest thing we got. The suns energy drives all life chemistry, directly or indirectly.

EDIT: people don't realise how large the chemistry set (observable universe) is, this snapshot covers a tiny area of sky, no bigger than a tiny dot drawn on the thumbnail of an outstretched arm. They're not stars they're galaxies! At any one moment there are countless organic chemistry reactions happening under countless conditions and there are many many moments!

If anyone finds more awe in an old story book than this image then they need to seriously expand their mind.

If the idea of evolution has to do with randomness, then, because of the difficulty involved along with probability, evolution is impossible.

If the idea of evolution has to do with cause and effect, then, because of the difficulty involved, the proof for God has to do with universe/machine > machine Maker = no evolution.

If it has to do with a combination of the two (randomness at times), or with something else entirely, then we don't have a clue, and evolution theory is entirely pointless.

I have to ask. Do you know what the theory of evolution is? It almost sounds like you think its some kind of random pick from the tree of life.
Or that guy. ( dont remember his name) that was worried about going around for millions of years waiting to evolve a mouth so he could eat.
Thre is nothing random about evolution.
You dont have to go thru every single configuration to get to your goal like that monkey in the link

Edit: Sorry I rememberd wrong. It wasnt a mouth. It was going to the toilet. Here is the link
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=60Lt5ClxG5Q

Why would you think that such a large number of stars and planets has anything to do with greater odds that certain improbable conditions exist? Those stars/planets are part of our universe. The same probability exists there as here. In fact, the probability of being able to house life on multitudes of them is far less than here, because the kind of star we have, and the position the earth holds around that star, are very favorable for life. Most of those others don't even have that.

Sorry. Me bad for assuming that you were, in part, talking about infinity when you mentioned a webpage - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infinite_monkey_theorem - that has as one of its basic premises the idea of an infinite amount of time. And, in real life, it seems that you almost have to have eternity for an infinite amount of time to exist. Sorry.

Just read what George Kavassilas has to say maan  I recommend

Wow giga off-topic.
I didn't mention anything about infinity. And even the monkey page doesn't talk about infinity.

The point is that there are (1000 billions)^2 = 100000000000000000000000000 stars in the universe. The probability of having the conditions applied in the 70s in at least one of planet around one of them is rather high IMO.

Eternity and infinity are gigantic terms. Their in-depth understanding is mostly outside of our understanding.

Nature around us suggests only beginning and ending. Such things as infinity and eternity are not clearly indicated in nature. Everything has a beginning, especially the life of plants and animals, and people. These also have an ending. No infinity and eternity.

While the cosmos is gigantic, both in the macro and the micro, we are uncertain about its continuation in either direction. We are simply too limited in our ability to observe these things at present.

Parallel Universes. Quantum mechanics suggests that for each correct solution to a puzzle (answer to a question), there are an infinite number of incorrect solutions. What's interesting is that the reverse is true in quantum mechanics as well. For each incorrect solution to a puzzle, there are an infinite number of correct answers. This is mind boggling. It also suggests that modern advancements exist simply because we believe that they exist, not because they are scientific facts. Think about it.

Consider pure randomness. Virtually ALL science is based on cause and effect, action and reaction. All scientists are trained to look at what exists, and find out more, based on what they have seen that exists already. Because of this, scientists show that there is really no probability; pure randomness doesn't seem to exist, because everything that they learn is based on cause and effect. Although we use randomness daily throughout our lives, pure randomness is so extremely abstract that we almost can't conceive of it. Only Buddhists and Hindus talk about emptying themselves in meditation. Is this where religion borders on science?

The point is, if we ever get to the point that we can start to "see" everything that exists, we just might find that there IS a beginning and end, to all of it. But what we will probably also find is that the way we fit into the universe produces in us a seeming eternal and infinite existence, at least while we are conscious.

With thousands of billions of galaxies, each containing thousands of billions of stars, the probability of finding the conditions we made then seems quite high.

And I'd prefer not I'd like to avoid play on words. I don't care about the name, did you actually read the page. At least a part of it?

Yet, God is not an idol, unless the idol happens to be God, that is.

So, how do we distinguish where the dividing line is? I mean, if I say God is a redhead, and you say that God is a blonde, and that is the only difference we have about God, we probably both are talking about the same God, only we have a difference of understanding, or one or both of us have a misunderstanding. God might have brown hair.

However, if I say God is a lizard, and you say God is a bear, and someone else says God is the sun, and yet another person says that God is simply a spirit, maybe we are talking about different gods here.

God is god, is it catholic god? Is this muslim god? Yehova vitness god? There is absolutely no problem with that, because there is none

That's right. The conditions occur in nature. The thing we are trying to figure out is how they occur in nature. We don't see the coming-together of the conditions in nature. We only see that they HAVE come together, and that they work. By bringing them together in a test tube, we were able to see that it takes great intelligence to bring the things together, even in simple form. How much greater, therefore, must be the intelligence that brought the things together in nature? That is what God is like. Highly intelligent and capable beyond understanding.


Well, it is fun to say it. But the evidence listed above shows that the reality is exactly the opposite.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infinite_monkey_theorem

As in, based in suppositions.