I Know That God Does Not Exist

Miller writes:This past month I had the honor of teaching at Hong Kong Baptist University in a summer program sponsored by the Centre for Sino-Christian Studies. I was joined by Discovery Fellows Paul Nelson and Paul Chien. Guest lectures were also presented over the Internet by Stephen Meyer, Douglas Axe, and Gnter Bechly. The participants included students and academics from Hong Kong and from mainland China.The discussions covered a range of topics related to intelligent design in nature. I spoke about the evidence for fine tuning in the laws of physics and about the need for preexistent information to explain the origin of life. Paul Nelson explained how the materialist philosophical assumptions commonly adopted in scientific disciplines hinder progress and distort perceptions of reality. He also addressed the origin of life (using what he called “The Humpty-Dumpty Principle”), evo-devo and the origin of animal body plans, and the illicit role of theology in evolutionary reasoning. Theology in that scientific context is illicit, Paul argued, not because there is anything wrong with theology, but because the rule of methodological naturalism, which nearly all evolutionary biologists profess, pointedly excludes theological premises.

AZPaul3 writes:I don’t think anyone can show any evidence that this connection takes on the type of woo connection to some cosmic consciousness you may be hoping to believe. Again, as always, evidence, not some wishful hope, would be required to see consciousness as anything more than the human body’s user-interface into our local environment.

AZPaul3 writes:Since consciousness is an emergent property of our physical biological being a connection is obvious. I don’t think anyone can show any evidence that this connection takes on the type of woo connection to some cosmic consciousness you may be hoping to believe. Again, as always, evidence, not some wishful hope, would be required to see consciousness as anything more than the human body’s user-interface into our local environment.

Theodoric writes:What do you mean by that? That there is a connection is self evident as AZPaul3 says in his response.

The need for the "observer" to be conscious is not supported by scientific research, and has been pointed out as a misconception rooted in a poor understanding of the quantum wave function

Faith writes:Oh the "Gospel of materialism" and the "materialist faith" are just ways of describing the naturalist method of the sciences, which you seem to understand so I'm surprised you don't feel you do.

Faith writes:I tell ya, the words Percy has been choosing to eliminate from my posts are a strange collection. Thoght" for instance, and "thlnk" and now "t h e o l o g y." His h a y t r e d of me is pretty extreme.

GDR writes:When we open the hood of a car and see the engine we can see that the car moves because of the engine so that explains everything by that way of thinking.

GDR writes:I am suggesting that just as the engine needed an intelligent cause so did brain chemistry.

Thugpreacha writes:ringo just likes to argue, and I have a grudging respect of how God uses him--the atheist--to force me to sharpen my arguments.

Phat writes:Ye shall be as gods. Don't you get it?

Phat writes:God foreknew that we had a sin nature and wanted to figure everything out for ourselves rather than kowtow to His authority. It will likely take awhile longer before we admit that Dad was right all along.

Phat writes:All you are doing is quoting the book...

Phat writes:... and essentially telling me what it says.

Phat writes:All I am doing is expounding on the words and telling you what it means.