Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
8 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 7/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   A Designer Consistent with the Physical Evidence
Bio-molecularTony
Member (Idle past 5378 days)
Posts: 90
Joined: 09-23-2008


Message 197 of 327 (505973)
04-20-2009 11:07 PM
Reply to: Message 184 by Phage0070
04-19-2009 12:25 AM


Before the big bang, there was no.....
Phage0070 writes:
Bio-molecularTony writes:
You see, none of these things are normal. There must be some field creating this force and in turn these effects. Nothing is taken for granted anymore.
Where in the world did you get this idea? I cannot see any logical reason to come to this conclusion, especially in the face of overwhelming evidence that the way the universe behaves is, by definition, "normal".
Before the big bang, there was no gravity. Gravity is not normal, and so did not always exist. It is not a given that it always existed. Gravity is thought to be CREATED by particle called a graviton (energy field of some kind).
The same is true with all the other forces. Before the big bang physical life did not exist nor could it. It needed to be created and it needed matter to exist to be the blocks to create it from.
So matter is not normal for it did not always exist but had to come into existence. And so to, life is not normal for the same reason. It never always existed, but came into existence later.
Life is only designed to "look" real and "look" alive. There never was anything alive to begin with. "Life" is a fool’s paradise, only the "fooled" think they are "living" entities. So by the fact you’re a machine (without a true life force) you’re by this fact not real to what you thought you were. The living "you" does not exist. The machine made to look like you is all you got. You’re not normal if you’re just a machine "designed to look alive". Physical life does not exist and is not real, just as illusions are not the real thing.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 184 by Phage0070, posted 04-19-2009 12:25 AM Phage0070 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 200 by Phage0070, posted 04-21-2009 12:08 AM Bio-molecularTony has not replied
 Message 201 by DevilsAdvocate, posted 04-21-2009 1:04 AM Bio-molecularTony has replied

Bio-molecularTony
Member (Idle past 5378 days)
Posts: 90
Joined: 09-23-2008


Message 198 of 327 (505974)
04-20-2009 11:19 PM
Reply to: Message 196 by Percy
04-20-2009 7:30 AM


Re: Physical Evidence for the Designer
bluejay #1 writes:
I attempted to initiate a discussion about the type of designer that would be fully consistent with the physical evidence available to us.
God is not physical, so there are no particles of matter that construct him. Indirect evidence galore is everywhere. But as of yet the human eye is said not to be able to see God and live. Will science some day see God, well I don't know, it would be an eye opener for sure.
The intelligence found in the design of "living system" is just one indirect way we can "see" there is a God or Creator.
All matter is said to be made from Gods powerful Holy Spirit - that's everything. The subatomic world is supernatural - moving at the speed of light, never stopping, never running out of energy. Sounds very close to being from a supernatural source. The dual nature of light and the electron are because we have nothing like it to compare it with. So there is no good explanation for what it really is like.
If something acts kind of supernatural, how do you explain it to someone? With what do you compare it to? This is the subatomic world we are just finding out about.
Edited by Bio-molecularTony, : Added new thoughts..sub-atomic world

This message is a reply to:
 Message 196 by Percy, posted 04-20-2009 7:30 AM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 199 by Coyote, posted 04-20-2009 11:50 PM Bio-molecularTony has not replied
 Message 202 by Percy, posted 04-21-2009 6:53 AM Bio-molecularTony has replied

Bio-molecularTony
Member (Idle past 5378 days)
Posts: 90
Joined: 09-23-2008


Message 203 of 327 (506031)
04-21-2009 11:00 PM
Reply to: Message 201 by DevilsAdvocate
04-21-2009 1:04 AM


All "life" can't exist unless it is made, constructed, assembled.
DevilsAdvocate writes:
Now you are applying anthropomorphic rationale into your debate. Why does life "need" to be created?
Looking at how prolific life is (especially here on Earth) once certain parameters are met, it is easy to see how life could have occurred through natural means. With the shere number of galaxies in the universe (at least 100 billion) and the number of planets that typically could be in one galaxy (at least 100s of millions to several billion). This would indicated (conservatively) that there are at a minimum several quadrillion planets in the universe (1,000,000,000,000,000,). Even if life was very rare and occurred only at a rate of 1 in a million, this extremely conservative calculation would indicate that over 1 billion planets in the universe should have some form of life on it.
I've already killed that beast a long time ago. You don't remember do you? You learned nothing from this forum, you learn "0".
All "life" can't exist unless it is made, constructed, assembled. There needs to be some smart programming instructions with enough intelligence built into the code, to automatically self-assemble with the use of bio-machinery already there waiting for instructions.
This is what is meant by life only comes from life.
This old mythical story of probabilities does not work with raw matter without intelligent coded programming - and without the machinery that does the "creating".
If you can't remember these basics - you’re a failure for life. This is one of the main cornerstones of our modern understanding of biology (Life). Get this wrong and everything else you think about gets twisted out of alignment. Screwed is a fitting word here.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 201 by DevilsAdvocate, posted 04-21-2009 1:04 AM DevilsAdvocate has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 204 by Coyote, posted 04-21-2009 11:41 PM Bio-molecularTony has not replied
 Message 205 by Michamus, posted 04-22-2009 4:28 AM Bio-molecularTony has replied
 Message 206 by DevilsAdvocate, posted 04-22-2009 5:44 AM Bio-molecularTony has not replied

Bio-molecularTony
Member (Idle past 5378 days)
Posts: 90
Joined: 09-23-2008


Message 207 of 327 (506060)
04-22-2009 5:58 AM
Reply to: Message 205 by Michamus
04-22-2009 4:28 AM


The Hall of SHAME
Message 1 of 1
04-22-2009 05:44 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Hall Shame - Quasi-Science-quibbles
Some times the only way to get some people in line is to Post their Quasi-science for all to remember.
Then we can have a HISTORY of story tellers that would have us believe they were scientific but were never further from the truth.
Let's record to moments of GREAT SHAME shell we. Maybe "they" will stop repeating their errors of intellect.
There is this thing called common knowledge, yet some would question even the VERY BASICS of the modern understanding in science.
This is not a forum for children is it. So if you wish to question the simplest things - it would be good to post of your lack of knowledge. Those that do not know should not be trying to teach those that do know. So I bring you the HALL of SHAME.
Coyote writes:
"Life only comes from life" has not been scientifically documented. It appears that it is a religious belief rather than a scientific finding.
Michamus writes:
Do you know what is wrong with this argument? Do you realize why no one takes this claim seriously? Let me explain it to you.
You are stating a hypothesis as fact, without providing any facts to substantiate it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 205 by Michamus, posted 04-22-2009 4:28 AM Michamus has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 208 by Percy, posted 04-22-2009 7:19 AM Bio-molecularTony has not replied
 Message 209 by Michamus, posted 04-22-2009 9:24 AM Bio-molecularTony has replied

Bio-molecularTony
Member (Idle past 5378 days)
Posts: 90
Joined: 09-23-2008


Message 221 of 327 (506231)
04-24-2009 6:28 AM
Reply to: Message 209 by Michamus
04-22-2009 9:24 AM


common knowledge VS common igorance
Life can only be defined as a complete system. If your endowed with the minimum level of parts to achieved a automated self-replicating system then you can qualify to be labelled by man as a "living system".
"Life" is now quite vague today. Calling a machine alive or not alive is mixing mythical ignorance with modern biology. If you guys would just put down your "life is some kind of black magic" religious Mythical ideas you would see the true reality of this thing we call existence.
Complete automated systems (Life) can not arise from non-atomically, non-complex, non-complete systems. That video is crap mythical ignorance.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 209 by Michamus, posted 04-22-2009 9:24 AM Michamus has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 222 by Phage0070, posted 04-24-2009 6:51 AM Bio-molecularTony has not replied
 Message 223 by Percy, posted 04-24-2009 7:31 AM Bio-molecularTony has not replied
 Message 224 by anglagard, posted 04-24-2009 7:36 AM Bio-molecularTony has not replied
 Message 225 by Michamus, posted 04-24-2009 11:56 AM Bio-molecularTony has not replied
 Message 226 by LucyTheApe, posted 04-24-2009 12:11 PM Bio-molecularTony has not replied
 Message 229 by bluescat48, posted 04-24-2009 4:29 PM Bio-molecularTony has not replied
 Message 231 by DevilsAdvocate, posted 04-24-2009 9:58 PM Bio-molecularTony has not replied

Bio-molecularTony
Member (Idle past 5378 days)
Posts: 90
Joined: 09-23-2008


Message 238 of 327 (506322)
04-25-2009 8:32 AM
Reply to: Message 232 by NanoGecko
04-25-2009 1:57 AM


Non-physical God - with non-physical evidence
Hi NanoGecko, well done. I have heard some things along these lines but this must be more updated information. Thanks.
_________________________________________________
The theme of this thread is kind of a joke, misnomer.
Because before creation (the big bang as it were) there was no matter, not space-time, no gravity, etc. It is said only God existed at that time. So here we have "Nothing" of a physical nature in existence. And now they ask us to show them God, or any physical evidence of his reality.
A Designer Consistent with the Physical Evidence
The only thing possible at this time (that I can think of) to show evidence of his existence are non-physical aspects for he has no physical aspects to show. God is a spirit and not blood and flesh.
His existence was before the physical universe came into being.
If you can use a telescope to see for non-physical realities then you would have a chance to find what your looking for.
But as it is, we do not know what existed before creation or how to "see" it. It's like an intelligence program becoming self-a-ware and trying to see "us" the physical reality beyond the "1's" and "0's" from the programming code. The programming code can not examine the physical motherboard not knowing of such an existence and therefore not looking for it. Not even having the "tools" to even see such a thing.
So our reality is kind of "on that par" with almighty God (J). We do not have such "tools" to see non-physical realities as yet and might never will. We are just not built to "see" the spirit realm.
Intelligence is none physical and anything like that we can show you that are not dependent on physical properties.
So wisdom, love, kindness, joy, math, chemistry mindedness, engineering intelligence. All these things linked with intelligence that is not dependent on being of a physical nature we can show you.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 232 by NanoGecko, posted 04-25-2009 1:57 AM NanoGecko has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 243 by lyx2no, posted 04-25-2009 10:51 AM Bio-molecularTony has not replied
 Message 244 by NanoGecko, posted 04-25-2009 11:46 AM Bio-molecularTony has not replied
 Message 245 by onifre, posted 04-25-2009 12:39 PM Bio-molecularTony has not replied

Bio-molecularTony
Member (Idle past 5378 days)
Posts: 90
Joined: 09-23-2008


Message 277 of 327 (506439)
04-26-2009 9:18 AM
Reply to: Message 202 by Percy
04-21-2009 6:53 AM


Intellectual Supremacy Footprint
We have all heard of the "carbon foot print" we all make on earth's environment. So in helping show "physical Evidence for a designer" I'm going to use the "intelligent design foot print" analogy.
Just as real foot prints on the moon is evidence of man's presence / existence so to God's presence is evident by his intelligent foot prints of superior technological designs. These are real and tangible, testable, seen, touched, and recorded artefacts of someone else more technologically advanced then our wildest dreams.
His technology is perceived to us as true "life", living creatures. That is in a nutshell the gap in intellectual supremacy contest, man verse God. In comparison our sticks and stones don't even qualify for any comparative measurements. Our existence is by his design and so we can not boast of individual achievements over and above the already building design structure for our individual intelligence.
So intellectual supremacy footprint is real and testable.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 202 by Percy, posted 04-21-2009 6:53 AM Percy has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 282 by onifre, posted 04-26-2009 12:09 PM Bio-molecularTony has not replied

Bio-molecularTony
Member (Idle past 5378 days)
Posts: 90
Joined: 09-23-2008


Message 280 of 327 (506449)
04-26-2009 11:56 AM
Reply to: Message 264 by anglagard
04-26-2009 1:44 AM


Intellectual Supremacy Footprint
Let's use an analogy to illustrate why life is an intelligent "creation".
The employer might remind the employee that the speed of the manufacturing process must be much faster then the decay rate of the materials. So if you work so slow as to make one car in just under a 20 year period the parts of the car that had to lay around for the last 20 years will have decayed (rust, etc.)to the point of rendering then useless to the final product and so the car is not able to start-up nor ever will.
Another illustration: If it takes 50 years to create a spaceship to fly 22 million light years to the next star system. When can you expect to get to that other star system? Answer: never!
Why? The decay rate of building materials in space is faster then on earth and 15 years is the useful life of most things built by man for space. Long before your half done the star ship the first half is useless and needs replacing already. Even if you cheated and did finish the star ship, it will never last the 22 million years of flight - if you could move at the speed of light.
The point is that the decay rate should not be faster then the construction building progress rate of the chemical reactions of a cell or any mythical simple primitive early forms of life, etc.
Bio-systems are by nature (intelligently designed) to be BIO-DEGRADABLE. The degrading factor of many bio-chemicals, etc., are part of the built-in molecular engineering design. Hormones have no off switches it is said, they just degrade and that is the end of the messenger. Many things degrade in seconds, minutes, hours, and days, etc. So the decay rate can not be faster then the useful function of the cellular systems — chemical reactions. Decay should not out strip the life of the cycle of a useful function.
In every "machine" with intelligent control systems there needs to be "logic gates" and so enzymes are part of such a logic control system.
Those chemical reactions that "NanoGecko" was referring to that would take about 1 trillion years are by default in the design of the system to never to take place. They are parts of the control - which one can depend on the fact these will never randomly happen, the chances are so remote that in the design it is considered as not able to happen. Then there is the intelligent control of the enzymes which will or will not cause a reaction. They work as a key and locking system for selectively choosing the desired pathway for creating an intelligent result.


Science is like people, if you torture it long enough, you can make it say anything!!!
Edited by Bio-molecularTony, : Some torture the sciences to force their views

This message is a reply to:
 Message 264 by anglagard, posted 04-26-2009 1:44 AM anglagard has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 283 by lyx2no, posted 04-26-2009 1:16 PM Bio-molecularTony has not replied
 Message 284 by DevilsAdvocate, posted 04-26-2009 2:21 PM Bio-molecularTony has replied

Bio-molecularTony
Member (Idle past 5378 days)
Posts: 90
Joined: 09-23-2008


Message 288 of 327 (506487)
04-26-2009 6:51 PM
Reply to: Message 284 by DevilsAdvocate
04-26-2009 2:21 PM


Re: Intellectual Supremacy Footprint
Intellectual Supremacy Footprint - Photo album
OneDrive - Error

This message is a reply to:
 Message 284 by DevilsAdvocate, posted 04-26-2009 2:21 PM DevilsAdvocate has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 289 by Coyote, posted 04-26-2009 7:00 PM Bio-molecularTony has replied
 Message 293 by monkey boy, posted 04-26-2009 10:27 PM Bio-molecularTony has replied

Bio-molecularTony
Member (Idle past 5378 days)
Posts: 90
Joined: 09-23-2008


Message 290 of 327 (506489)
04-26-2009 7:16 PM
Reply to: Message 289 by Coyote
04-26-2009 7:00 PM


Re: Intellectual Supremacy Footprint
If man is in fact a machine dressed up as a human, then the theory of blind evolution is nil and void.
That been the case Intellectual Supremacy Footprint has squashed the live out of your theme of what reality is all about. Your not only on the wrong page as to the scientific modern views, your not even in the same "REALITY". :-)Hehehehe
Pictures in the photo album are:
The three stages in the evolution of life.
Cellular Metabolic pathways
DNA computer logic pathways
Be very careful NOT TO LEARN ANYTHING NEW - It might hurt you too much

This message is a reply to:
 Message 289 by Coyote, posted 04-26-2009 7:00 PM Coyote has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 291 by Coyote, posted 04-26-2009 8:13 PM Bio-molecularTony has not replied
 Message 292 by lyx2no, posted 04-26-2009 8:26 PM Bio-molecularTony has not replied

Bio-molecularTony
Member (Idle past 5378 days)
Posts: 90
Joined: 09-23-2008


Message 294 of 327 (506506)
04-26-2009 11:45 PM
Reply to: Message 293 by monkey boy
04-26-2009 10:27 PM


Re: Intellectual Supremacy Footprint
The picture was to be downloaded - but it did not work so I left the link instead.
Lets try it again. Let me know if it worked for you too.
My space - windows live - science album

This message is a reply to:
 Message 293 by monkey boy, posted 04-26-2009 10:27 PM monkey boy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 295 by Coyote, posted 04-26-2009 11:49 PM Bio-molecularTony has not replied
 Message 296 by monkey boy, posted 04-27-2009 7:36 AM Bio-molecularTony has not replied
 Message 299 by DevilsAdvocate, posted 04-27-2009 10:21 AM Bio-molecularTony has replied

Bio-molecularTony
Member (Idle past 5378 days)
Posts: 90
Joined: 09-23-2008


Message 306 of 327 (506623)
04-28-2009 5:04 AM
Reply to: Message 299 by DevilsAdvocate
04-27-2009 10:21 AM


Get off the fence and stand up like a real ...
DevilsAdvocate writes:
So are you suggesting Tony, that each and every single chemical process: photosynthesis, chemical synthesis, biodegradation, catalyst, etc. requires God's divine hand to "stir the pot", so to speak, to make them occur? In other words, nothing could occur on its own without a divine Prime mover/"unmoved mover"/First Cause/etc?
As far as I can tell it is not really needed. Religious thought might think so but for now we find none, and "none needed" may turn out to be true. I leave it hanging in the air, it could go either any but there is not "physical" evidence of this yet.
So the "automation" of this superior form of technology is all we see and seems to be the only Cause for all it's functions. That being the case what does that tell you about "life". You tell me, if there is no "black magic" hiding from our eyes making life work, as you also say, then what does that tell you about life.
Is it not just the highly complex design that is the only source for these functions? And then does that not lead you to conclude there is a raw and simple "mechanical" foundation for all "life’s" fundamental basic inner wokings. You said it - there is no supernatural, so now you have to "sleep in the bed you yourself made". By your own theory and words I call you a machine that thinks it is alive. You in effect are the ones saying it, not the religious groups.
So is man intelligently complex or not. Is man a mechanically automated machine or not. Are we super-natural or super-automated-design? Get off the fence and stand up like a real "man/machine".

This message is a reply to:
 Message 299 by DevilsAdvocate, posted 04-27-2009 10:21 AM DevilsAdvocate has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 308 by DevilsAdvocate, posted 04-28-2009 5:55 AM Bio-molecularTony has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024