duckznutz

Brilliant stuff Synthetiq! I actually laughed out loud! Thanks. Most excellent.

__________________
Where your talents and the needs of the world cross . . there lies your vocation.

xepherys

I'm too tired to read everyon'e responses, so I'll post first and reread later. Frankly, the statements quoted by the OP are flawed on so many levels it's silly. Also, these are out of order, my apologies.

1. There is no "proof" that the universe had a beginning, will have an end or any other such finite component. Until this is fact, everything relating to this is a theory at best.

2. The last comment about energy... you even had it right at the beginning... "usable energy". Remember that just about everything has some potential energy. Plants have tons of potential energy... we usually see them as calories. Fruits especially. These are caused, in part, by the consumption of energy (primarily from the sun, but also from other "digestive" measures of the plant) into the plant itself. When we drill up oil, we burn it off in cars or power plants. This energy is released as electricity, heat and motion. Electricity is used to power other things that all, to some degree or another, generate heat. Heat itself is energy. Motion is also energy. That energy is then transferred into other things. In essence, just because we can't harness the energy of our own momentum or the energy of our electrical offcast does not mean the energy does not exist.

3. I'm still trying to get past the first three numbers listed. Why does one assume 1 and 2 and therfore derive 3? "Whatever had a beginning had a cause"... why? Just because we do not have examples doesn't mean anything. Hell, we don't even understand gravity still, and it's a primary part of what makes our world work right. "The universe had a beginning"... this was covered in my #1.

Also, scientists didn't discover new information that means the universe MUST have a beginning... though more of them believe it is likely it did. There are also those, including Stephen Hawking, that believe it may have infinite expand/collapse periods. perhaps the energy created simply loops time...? Sound silly? Doesn't mean it isn't so.

Trying to use science to prove the existance of god, any god, IMHO is a moot argument. Yes, there are Christian scientists... yes, they may not be mutually exclusive. I believe both quite probably exist (science could be made up by humans to explain things that are actually divine). Also, there is an assumption that god is eternal, infinite, omnipotent and/or omnipresent. Why? What proof is there of this? In fact, until recently (in the big picture) most deities were born out of some form of chaos, or titans or who knows what. It's pretty much only modern religions that believe in an omnipresent god that has been around forever and will continue on as such.

Just food for thought.

tug mcgroin

"I believe that religion, generally speaking, has been a curse to mankind - that its modest and greatly overestimated services on the ethical side have been more than overcome by the damage it has done to clear and honest thinking."
H.L.Menken

mbchills

__________________
rawr.

Yakk

Being a pastafarian has it's advantages.

Amoung other things, you can get married in a pasta house.

__________________
Last edited by JHVH : 10-29-4004 BC at 09:00 PM. Reason: Time for a rest.

nanotech

Hello, I’m new here. I work in the domain of advanced web development solutions, Portals and e-commerce. I believe in God and have the interest of exploring and hearing all kinds of opinions, objective and scientific analysis to the detail and discussions.

There's a lot of proof about God's existence, I’ll just mention a few now:

1- The universe could have not come by accident because a little change in the big bang would have made earth’s creation impossible.

2- All planets in our solar system cannot hold life except earth. Nipton and Pluto are 270 degrees below zero. That’s almost zero Kelvin degrees, the state when atoms stop to move and condense making huge mass and gravity impossible for any life.

3- Mercury and the planet after are several hundred degrees in heat. Mercury, the closest to sun gets 40 degrees cold below zero when not facing the sun. At the same its surface gets 400 degrees hot when facing the sun.

4- Everything, tons of things I’ve researched and read, indicate that any slight change in the earth’s atmosphere, anatomy, etc would make life impossible.

5- Scientific evidence shows that if the big bang was a little stronger, 1 in a billion, planets would have been moving apart and our solar system wouldn’t exist

6- If the big bang was just a little less strong, it would have collapsed before earth would have been created

7- One miracle of the Quran which came 1400 years ago said in a verse that there are 7 Heavens (skies). Heavens in the Quran refer to as skies. Indeed, the number of skies above earth is seven. Ionosphere, ozone layer, helium layer, others. They are scientifically proven as seven layers but I don’t remember the names now. Each layer has a vital function to life.

8- The nasal canal holds mucus and it has a layer filled with millions of tiny leg shaped protrusions (cilia) like the arms of the squid and above them is the mucus layer. These legs move the mucus in a continuous matter to our mouth so we can spit or swallow. The mucous layer has two sides. One is slippery (the side of the legs which shift the mucus) and one is sticky so that it can stick to the bacteria and inferior bodies that touch it. These bodies come from our breathing. If this micro tiny layer was upside down humanity would have not existed and every baby would catch disease and die when he was born. Because then, the cilia would stick to the mucous and cannot move and the microbes would slide on the other slippery side of the mucous and enter our mouth immediately. Therefore evolution cannot be true because this thing could not have come step by step. Beings and humans have incredibly large complexity inside that science have proven it impossible to have these come in step by step as evolution says. Because ONE and only ONE change in the billions of components that creatures are made of would have made it impossible to survive. Therefore it is impossible that the creatures would have existed without one thing as the cilia and then mated and revolutionized and had cilia. Because if they don’t have the complex structure of the cilia and the mucous layer they would have died from the beginning without the chance of having sexual intercourse and reproducing through evolution.

9- Evolution has been proven by science now to be false. Evolution will not make a new species. If you mate different types of dogs you will get a different breed of dog but it’s still a dog. You cannot get a dog with aqua features like fins so that the can swim better in the sea..

10- Science now says that the world came from the big bang. The big band was in the beginning a point of:
• infinite mass
• infinite gravity
• zero volume

11- Therefore the universe was created from nothing. That is the act of God

12- God created time. (personal opinion) [edited]

13- God knows the future because he is not bound by time.

14- Every human has a free will and every human will have a time of death and hell or heaven destiny known by God before his creation. This is because God can know time backwards, from the end to the beginning. Because he is not bound by time. So he gives you the choice of life but he knows if you are going to heaven or earth before you were born. (number 14 is based on my analysis)

15- God is not obliged to show himself to humans. In the Quran he says if you (the community) is not going to be believe he will replace them with ones whom he will love and they will love him and he will inherit them the land which the previous ones were one. He gave us the whole universe, complex bodies, blessings, life, mating, fruit and everything. He made all creatures under the control of human beings and he told us through many profits of his existence. He does not need to do more if you don’t believe.

16- You will know that God exists when you believe in him and pray to him. How? Because your life will improve and he will bless and you will have prosperity in all ways. God wants you to believe so he will bless you.

17- Human beings don’t have the power to see God. In the Quran, one of the early profits (Moses or Abraham) asked God to see him. God said that you cannot see him. But the profit insisted. So God said he will reveal to the mountain. The mountain then broke down and came to pieces from the revelation of God.

18- The final Major Blessing on human beings in the Quran. It says in the Quran that only those who enter the heaven will be given the blessing to see God. God says to the people of the heaven: “Wouldn’t I show you my blessing? The people said: You gave us everything and the heavens, what more could we want? He said “to see my face”. The people said “yes, we want to see your face”. Then he gave them the power to see him and it was the most beautiful revelation in the heavens. And then the revelation ended and God will not reveal to anyone.” These are verses I translated from the Quran

nezmot

nanotech - excuse me for pointing this out, but none of those things are proofs.

tecoyah

Having read the Qu'ran....my interpretation of the text seems a bit different from yours....but regardless. Nothing you have posted even comes close to Proving a God exists.....and nothing you post ever will. This is reality, sorry.

__________________
Holding onto anger is like grasping a hot coal with the intent of throwing it at someone else; you are the one who gets burned. - Buddha

nanotech

It’s good to know you read the Quran, I've read it too and heard interpretations which I pretty sure to be correct. But we're humans, sometimes we make a mistake. Perhaps you want to discuss the readings you sought and tell me the versus so I can check.

About the proof, yes there's proof and I thought it was clear. I'll explain further.

1- The creation of the universe is a matter of design, not coincidence. Any tiny change in the strength of the big bang, earth's gravity strength, minute change in position, etc would have made life impossible. A proof is that earth among millions or billions of planets is the only one capable of life.

2- Any less features of the human complex body would have not allowed the survival of human beings; therefore evolution could not have created humans because sexual intercourse which evolution is based on could not have existed. Because the creatures would have died of diseases, inability to hunt, search for water, and shelter if their body systems weren't complete before they could have sex and give birth. So life was created by design not coincidence or evolution. So there have had to be a designer. A higher life form which made all this and gave the property of the entire universe to the human beings only. Who could it be that would give the whole universe to human beings? Aliens made the universe, humans, life and everything then vanished? Why?

3- No other life forms on other planets have been seen on other planets. The Quran says he gave the universe to human beings. True

4- The earth has 7 layers which was said in the Quran 1400 years ago when it was impossible to make such conclusions based on science.

5- In the Islam religion, God forbids to eat pork meat and the meat of carnivores and the dead creatures. Indeed, now it’s proven the pork meat is the only meat that has microscopic warms that do not die and can live inhuman beings even when boiled! This all came 1400 years ago when there was no science.

shakran

Beliefs are NOT proof.

Read on. . .


Wow, where to start? You BELIEVE the creation of the universe is design, not coincidence. That does not PROVE anything.

You're right in that slight changes in the big bang, etc, could have changed the outcome of the universe. We happened to come about because of changes like that.

I've used this argument before but it is a good one. Credit to Dick Feynman. This morning I drove to the grocery store and I saw a blue Ford Mustang with license number NXY-932. Of all the possible license plates and all the possible makes and models of cars and all the possible colors of cars I managed to see the ONLY blue ford mustang with license number NXY-932. That's just too improbable to be coincidence. God must have sent that car to me.

Put another way (and this could help you deal with the dual concepts of evolution and "divine" creation), if you drop a glass on the floor and it breaks, each shard of glass will land in a specific place, facing a specific way. Given all the places the shards COULD have landed, it's mathematically very improbable that they landed exactly where they did. But that does not make you a god, and it does not mean the shards landed where they did because of your design.



Regarding your theory that earth is the only planet capable of sustaining life, wow, I'm amazed. Thousands of scientists all asking whether or not other planets might be able to sustain life, and YOU'VE managed to find and classify EVERY planet in the universe, and examine them even at the microscopic level to make sure there was nothing alive on them.

You're good



bzzt. Wrong. Sorry. If we had a 4 fingered hand, we'd still be here. We evolved this way. That doesn't mean it's the only way.

The only thing worse than that logic is that logic. Sexual intercourse exists even at the microscopic level. All sexual intercourse is is an exchange of genetic data. Sure it's more complicated (and more fun ) in humans, but human or planaria, it's all the same at its most basic level.


Aha. Now we figure out where you're coming from. You have a fundamental lack of understanding of the teachings of evolution. Evolution does not say that one day a monkey woke up and morphed into a human. It says that slowly, over generations, genetic traits which increased the chance of survival were passed on. There is no one creature that was the LAST of one species and that gave birth to the FIRST of the next. There was no one creature that started out as an asexually reproductive species, and then suddenly one day decided to grow a penis and see what it could do with it.





Well as you can see from my above points, the premise that the universe MUST have been designed, is false. As for the aliens comment, the same can be said for god. God made the universe, humans, life, and everything, and we haven't heard from him in nearly 2000 years?


No one has seen the inside of the brick that makes up the outer walls of my house, but that does not mean the inside of the brick does not exist.

Until a new species is discovered, no one has seen it, but that does not mean it does not exist.

Until life on other planets is discovered, no one has seen it, but that does not mean it does not exist.



Let's examine that statement. You're using the Quran to prove what the Quran says. Christians do the same thing with their bible. Interestingly enough, we're talking about books which were passed down orally for over a thousand years until the invention of the printing press made it possible for mass distribution of books.

Let's shift gears a second. Most Americans believe Benjamin Franklin flew a kite with a key attached to it in a storm, and that's how he discovered electricity. In fact there is no evidence that this actually happened and there is good evidence that it did not. But that doesn't mean that most Americans aren't hearing the story, believing it, and passing it down to the next generation.

So how can you argue that, if we can't get the Ben Franklin story right after only 200 years, and with the advantages of the media to help us record events accurately. . . If we can't do that, then exactly how did they get the bible/quran 100% correct after so many more years of being passed down, and during an era where few could read, much less write this stuff down?



The earth has 5 layers. The crust, the upper mantle, the lower mantle, the outer core, and the inner core. 6 if you count the atmosphere (why would you do this?). If the Quran says it has 7 layers, then it is wrong and this would prove that the Quran is, at least partly, inaccurate.

Ahh but there were people who ate pork and then died from the parasites in it. And after enough people died, someone figured out the pork was to blame, and then had "god" tell them to knock it off. After all if Grog the Early Man ran around yelling "hey don't eat that tasty pork that's probably your only food for a week because I think it'll kill you!" no one's gonna listen. . .But if GOD says not to eat it, then suddenly people will listen.


If you analyze religion (not just Islam, but any religion) there's an awful lot of social control in it that would not work without scaring people about what the divine being will do to them.

asaris

I just want to add a bit to the arguments that Nanotech brought up, because I think they're decent arguments that don't deserve the short shrift they've been getting. Nanotech mentions the fine-tuning argument and what I'll call for the sake of short-hand, the 'evolution is impossible' argument. I don't have the science background to make the argument that these work, but I do know enough to say that the objections mentioned are insufficent. Unfortunately, both of these arguments get really technical really quickly, especially the fine-tuning argument.

1. The fine-tuning argument
The most sophisticated versions of this argument revolve around the great constants of the universe. Unfortunately, the only constant I know anything about is the gravitional constant, so I'll stick with that. The argument goes, if the gravitational constant was even slightly different, life, actually matter as we know it, would be impossible. The only rational explanation for this is intelligent design; not that it's impossible that a universe should randomly configure itself in such a way that stars and planets should form, but that it makes more sense to think that the universe was designed in such a way that this would happen.

The main difficulty with this argument, as I see it, is we simply have no idea why these constants are the way they are. So we have no way of computing the odds.

2. The 'evolution doesn't work' argument
This argument comes up quite a bit these days. The best version I've seen revolves around the complex structures that make up human beings. It's not that we have five fingers instead of four or whatever; it's that evolutionary theory cannot explain how something like the eye could have evolved. According to evolutionary theory, the eye must have evolved from some simpler form. But in fact the eye is so complex, and its components have no evolutionary value in themselves, so it couldn't have evolved.

Actually, the example I've seen most often is the flagellum. How did this come about? It just seems implausible that it would emerge randomly as a mutation. Other people have pointed out that the large majority of mutations are harmful, not beneficial. But, not to restate a point ad nauseum, I don't have the science background to properly evaluate these arguments.

__________________
"Die Deutschen meinen, daß die Kraft sich in Härte und Grausamkeit offenbaren müsse, sie unterwerfen sich dann gerne und mit Bewunderung:[...]. Daß es Kraft giebt in der Milde und Stille, das glauben sie nicht leicht."

"The Germans believe that power must reveal itself in hardness and cruelty and then submit themselves gladly and with admiration[...]. They do not believe readily that there is power in meekness and calm."

-- Friedrich Nietzsche

nanotech

Thank you asaris for making my point clearer. Shakran, 4 or 5 fingers doesn't matter, as asaris said. There are things that have to be PERFECT FROM THE BEGINING OF CREATION TO BE ABLE TO FUNCTION. Like the eye or breathing system and others. I beleive you had some mistaken arguments which I'll be happy to give further explanation when I get back from work. Today I hope. The reason is there's also a lot of important scientific and documentary videos I want to upload on my server and show you.

nezmot

I'd like to help you guys out with your understanding of evolution - but I don't have the time right now to go into the details. Having said that, I think you're both falling for the primary misconception about evolution (which is understandable) due to Darwin's use of the phrase 'Survival of the Fittest'.

This is fine for grade-school explanations, but we should be thinking about these things along the slightly more grown-up lines of multi-dimensional, dynamically changing phase spaces, fitness landscapes and remembering that 'Survival of the Fittest' should sometimes be replaced with 'Survival of Everything that's not completely non-viable in it's current environment'.

When you've understood evolution in these terms, eyes, flagellum and man all become inevitable (yet still awe-inspiringly wonderous) results of a complex system, rather than the results of a piecing together by an invisible deity.

nezmot

Oh, and there are 5 layers to the atmosphere.

macmanmike6100

nanotech and asaris are both outright wrong on both the constants and evolution arguments. the anthropic principle (http://www.counterbalance.net/physgl...prin-body.html) is notable because it strongly supports the fact that the constants weren't created for us specifically but that we exist in our form and time as a result of these random constants.

it has been reasonably suggested that there are multiple universes (see M-theory and superstring). the constants and ratios across the entire numerical gamut have equal probability of existing: ours is not special. rather, our version of life on earth exists because there *is* a probability of it happening with this set of constants, not because the constants were "created" for us.

even more damning is the fact that even in our single universe there are billions upon billions of planets, and even conservative statistics (http://www.thekeyboard.org.uk/Extrat...ial%20life.htm) put the number of planets with the potential for carbon-based (this ignores the possibility of other forms of life, which is limiting in itself) at 10 billion! to say that we are chosen by god to "own" the universe (of which we barely own our little blue marble as it is) as humans is absurd.

just admit that you only have belief...don't pretend that you have facts or evidence.

asaris

So, macmanmike, do you have any experimental evidence indicating the existence of multiple universes? Or the anthropic principle? Or any argument for these things, rather than just asserting them? So who is relying on belief here? I'll just note that the site that you cite to describes the anthropic principle as "A controversial cosmological principle".

Moreover, that there are 10 billion planets means nothing in itself unless we know the probability of life emerging. If this probability is one in a trillion, life emerging is pretty damn lucky.

__________________
"Die Deutschen meinen, daß die Kraft sich in Härte und Grausamkeit offenbaren müsse, sie unterwerfen sich dann gerne und mit Bewunderung:[...]. Daß es Kraft giebt in der Milde und Stille, das glauben sie nicht leicht."

"The Germans believe that power must reveal itself in hardness and cruelty and then submit themselves gladly and with admiration[...]. They do not believe readily that there is power in meekness and calm."

-- Friedrich Nietzsche

nezmot

The anthropic principle doesn't really proove anything either way.

I think that's the point. There's nothing wrong with belief - we all do it (even those of us who are scientifically inclined)

What I object to is people trying to pas off pseudo-science as 'proof' that their belief is the correct one.

All we can do is highlight the flawed conclusions, point out what 'proof' actually means, and try to explain (in calm, reasonable tones, while backing carefully away) that in arguing, we're not trying to debunk your beliefs, just your methods for backing them up.

Believe away - I know I do. But don't try to prop up your ideas with flawed science and silly (numbered) assertions. It makes the person doing it look like they're riddled with doubt and are desperately trying to find anything that looks as though it might support their world view. In short, in the language of belief, trying to proove something 'scientifically' normally has the effect of making it less believable to others, not more so.

nanotech

nezmot,

I'm keeping this a scientific discussion and I'm not judging people, so don't say others have no scientific proof because all arguments I specified are scientific and many contain miracles. Miracles not come by chance but by an intelligent design, hence they are good and valid proofs. This survival of the fittest statement or argument you presented doesn't hold any weight. I will discuss this later but I came from work and gotta go sleep.

And no, the atmosphere has 7 layers not 5

Look at these charts please!
1- http://ds9.ssl.berkeley.edu/LWS_GEMS/3/layers.htm
2- http://www.evidencesofcreation.com/miracles_01_08.htm

I have interesting videos scientific videos I need to upload and show very soon.


Shakran,

You are misusing, you have quoted a part of my paragraph of 2 lines. Thereby one line alone cannot be understood. Please don't quote part of the sentence or meaning. And NO, the Quran is the only book from all the profits that has been directly written and not ever passed orally. It’s considered a sin to change the letters of the Quran. When they copy to distribute the Quran, they make sure every letter and apostrophe and comma and syllables are exactly the same as the original. The events and life and experiences and wisdoms of the prophet Mohammad came in other books called hadeef (the talking), and seera (the journey of life) and others.


Note: I have taken proofs from Quran because I have good understanding of Islam; but I also believe in all religions by God including Christianity.

tecoyah

It comes down to a very simple concept:

For all things in this world, observation is key to understanding. Evolution is the culmination of hundreds of thousands of observations documented by learned people from multiplle fields, which form a theory we use to define how what is currently observed has become what it is . This theory exists because physical evidence has made it obvious to science that it is a likely explanation for the current state of life on Earth.
Any attempt to compare Evolution with a creation event is irrellevant, as Evolutionary Theory does not claim to, nor attempt to explain what created life in the fiirst place, but rather theorizes the steps that led to what we see today based on an enormous amount of indisputable Data. Those that redirect the debate on evolution by using a creation event do themselves a disservice in the eyes of anyone who understands what the theory entails.
Some God entity may very well have Made the first forms of life, I simply dont know. It may be guiding the changes that have taken place in that life over the last Billion years, again I dont know. But, in my opinion, anyone who cant see the reality of evolution, or at least see some part of it, deserves no further attention.

__________________
Holding onto anger is like grasping a hot coal with the intent of throwing it at someone else; you are the one who gets burned. - Buddha

Astrocloud

Belief in God requires faith. Any attempt to bypass the need for faith is in fact a sign that the person attempting to "prove" this is lacking in their own faith.

In other words, don't worry about proof. Proof is for people who don't believe -and then -if you gave them proof then it wouldn't be faith.

noahfor

Explain to me the notion of the beginning of the universe. How can anyone say anything about the universe's beginning? It's impossible to even understand such a concept, much less understand the particular circumstances that surround it.

In order for there to be a beginning there must be a before, but there is no before time, so time could not have had a beginning.

shakran

No, actually you are not. You are saying "The Quran says. . . " and the quran is not a scientific text.


It depends on how you categorize it. If you, as most do, combine the troposphere and the tropopause into the lower atmosphere, and the stratosphere and the stratopause into one layer, then you have 5 layers.

Keep reading. I quoted a lot more. I broke it down because you changed subjects every sentence.

Read up on your history of the Quran. It was originally a recited text. It was never compiled as a single volume during the life of the Prophet. And in fact there were several versions until the canonical text was complied by the caliph Uthman, in 651 or 652. (source, Columbia Encyclopedia, 2003)

Furthermore, much as the christian bible came about, it was supposedly dictated to a prophit (Muhammad for you, Moses for them) by god when the prophet was mysteriously holed up away from the people. In other words, there's *no proof* that these prophets were telling the truth.

Yes, that's how it's done NOW. But originally it was not done that way. Your Quran went through issues much as the bible did - a whole bunch of different versions that someone finally decided to simplify and make one official version.



Yeah, that's fine. But you can't call them proofs. You cannot use the Quran to prove the Quran, just as I cannot just write a document and then say the document proves the document. It's circular, and it does not work. After all, if the mere existance of a document were enough to prove the document correct, all I really have to do to win this argument is type up a sheet of paper that says "the Quran is wrong" and then say that the Quran is wrong because my document says so.

nezmot

nanotech - the first link you posted has 9 layers - count them! (exosphere, thermosphere, mesosphere, stratosphere, tropshere, mesopause, stratopause, tropopause and ozone layer) and the second one you posted has 6, the Troposhpere, stratosphere, mesosphere, thermosphere, ionosphere and exosphere (as it states in the text, the Ozone layer forms a part of the stratosphere, and is not considered a layer in the same way as the others are). I can point you to a number of equally arbitrary web pages that will label ordinally (and equally arbitrarily) what is essentially a continuum of states merging into a single entity. But we're not interested in facts here, right? Just what fits the details as described in a holy book.

nezmot

None of what you posted was scientific. None of it. Lets take the post apart (again) piece by piece and show the flaws in the thinking:

This makes the (incorrect) assertion that improbable behaviour = impossible behaviour and then makes the leap of faith that the universe must have been created deliberately.

By the same standard, we can claim that because it's so unlikely for anyone to win, the lottery machine must deliberately choose who it's going to pay out to.

Scientifically, the two statements are equally ridiculous.

This doesn't mean that the universe wasn't created by God, just that your proof is no more than an assertion.

First it states that all planets in the solar system are unable to hold life. This is wrong. There are candidates for life supporting planets throughout the solar system.

Secondly, and this is the one I find the most laughable - there is no planet Nipton! No wonder it can't support life. Maybe you meant Neptune. Go figure.

Then there's this classic nonsense about how low temperature allows particles to condense into huge masses, apparently making gravity so strong, it's impossible for life!!! Please, please please read some grade-school science books.

Low temperature does not affect mass, nor therefore, can it effect gravity.

I love the 40 degrees 'cold' used here - it's quite endearing. But apart from that, this statement seems fine. Why? Because it's a simple statement describing the temperature ranges that a planet goes through and it's not trying to suggest anything superstitious. Unfortunately, because it's just a statement, and no conclusions are being drawn from it, it can't be considered a proof.

Again, this is a statement, not a proof. It does suggest however that despite your no-doubt extensive research, you've not come across the reasonably well known Gaian concept that a planet upon which life gets a foothold, has the potential to self-regulate its own temperature in a range suitable for the continuation of life. And all without any Gods waving their magic wands. For more information about this, try reading about DaisyWorld.

Again, this is another statement. Not a proof. If you're hoping to assert that improbable=impossible=deliberate again, then you're not proving it here.

Yep, same thing as number 5

We've seen (from your own links!) that the number of 'skies' is not 7. Not that I understand what that would 'prove' if it was. Trying to link a number of heavens to various layers defined by their gaseous composition does seem a little like an act of desperation. I would have left this one out.

I'm going to pull out the one piece here that I think is important

Science has not proven it impossible to have come in step by step AND evolution does not say anything of the sort!

I can't begin to say how stupid this statement is. Who, exactly is 'Science' in this case? And when and how did they prove that? And who states that evolution creates things 'step by step'?

But let's go back earlier in this point where you say "Because ONE and only ONE change in the billions of components that creatures are made of would have made it impossible to survive." now look around you, does anyone you know have this upside down system? No? Why not? Perhaps it's because every time someone was born with that condition, they died without first having children of their own and passing their genes on, thus making it less likely to crop up again. Sounds familiar? Yes, that's natural selection you're describing right there. Who'd have thought it. An argument 'for' natural selection in a post trying to argue against it. Perhaps this miracle too is listed in the Qu'ran.

Ha - I like this one even more. Evolution has been proven by 'science'? Who, please tell me, is in charge of 'science' these days and decides what is and is not proven? Your statement is verging on being a downright lie.

Evolution will not make a new species? Oh really? In the same way that improbable<>impossible<>deliberate, your failure to understand evolution<>evolution is incorrect<>God made everything on his magic drawing board.

And the process you describe (different animals mating with one another) shows up once more, that you haven't understood what evolution is.

Again this mysterious 'science' character. Who is this guy? And again, this is a statement that doesn't prove anything. Is it true or false? I don't know, it doesn't really matter. You could have just as easily described the geography and primary exports of Mexico, it would have been equally a proof for the existence of God.

Plus, you typo'd the Big Bang, as the Big Band. Which is kind of funny.

I figure, you were so excited about making this post, that you lost count of when to put the numbers in and that this is probably the conclusion you are drawing from point 10. So you're saying that infinite mass, infinite gravity and zero volume = nothing, so therefore God did it? Is that right? That may be true, but this is not a scientific proof of anything. It's an (inaccurate) assertion with no facts to back it up or explain it.

That's fair enough.

Again, that's great - and it may well be the case - but is it proof that God exists?

Let's write it out in more formal language.

God exists because: God knows the future because he is not bound by time.

So what you're saying is that god exists because god knows the future? Is that really a scientific proof?

Is this a proof of God's existence? It looks more like a theory on how God might operate with regards to destiny, life and death, assuming, of course that he does exist. Have I read that wrong?

I'm not going to comment on the rest because they're more of the same - and I expect you've gotten the message by now.

OK - I look forward to hearing this. I am not judging you either - I'm just pointing out where what you are writing is inconsistent with itself, and pointing out ideas that might fill in the gaps in your knowledge. I respect your belief - but you cannot expect to get away with posting complete untruths (or at least make totally inaccurate and unsupported statements) and not be picked up on it.

I'll accept in this case that miracles might be acceptable as scientific evidence (many others wouldn't) but we need a way to decide what does and what does not constitute a 'miracle' - For example, I really don't buy the 7 heavens thing as a miracle at all.

sentimental_arm

Can't be bothered to read everything here so forgive me if I'm repeating. Haven't got time to make stuctured arguement either, just some points for consideration: -
E = mc*mc is just for particles without momentum.
Causality as we percieve it is only a fraction of what actually happens to any particle/wave, as I believe every other entity interacts with every other entity in existence in some sort of energy/wave flux, so there'd be too much complexity for our tiny little brains to comprehend.
Superstring theory is just a theory as is all other scientific theories, even quantum chromodynamics is only experimentally accurate to certain situations to some decimal point.
Even if a God entity exists it wouldn't correlate to anything any religion has ever contemplated and wouldn't be God as most people's faith deludes them into believing.
Logical fallacies make people appear stupider than they should be.
Unconcious meandeings are more insightful than any conscious thoughts.

Horace, Odes 2.11.13-14.: "Why do you torture your poor reason for insight into the riddle of eternity? Why do we not simply lie down under the high plantane? or here under this pine tree?"

I'm going to have a wank now. Cantona

nanotech

Hi, I'm back. Sadly many false statements, let’s start with the job of correcting:

nezmot,

http://www.evidencesofcreation.com/miracles_01_08.htm

There are 7 layers, not 6, nor 7 nor 9

1. Troposphere
2. Stratosphere
3. Ozonosphere
4. Mesosphere
5. Thermosphere
6. Ionosphere
7. Exosphere

The mesopause , stratopause and tropopause are not atmosphere layers as you think
The Tropopause separates the Troposphere and Stratorsphere
The Stratopause separates the Ionosphere from the Mesosphere
The mesopause separates the Mesosphere from the Thermosphere

You count the ozone layer as a layer in the first sentence; you include that layer in the counting and you reach the number of nine. Then 2 sentences later you say the Ozone layer forms part of the stratosphere and you say it shouldn’t be counted. Don’t contradict yourself.

You mentioned 9 but 3 were not actual layers. So 9 – 3 = 6. But you forgot the Ionosphere. Hence 6 + 1 = 7.

The Ionosphere is a thick layer and not a pause. It serves as a reflectant to radio waves and humans used to transfer radio signals between continents.

Same.. The ozone layer or Ozonosphere is a thick layer = 24% of the atmosphere and it does a unique function between all layers to protect living creatures from deadly ultraviolet.

Tecoyah,

I know what evolution is and explained it previously. You can get different breeds but not different species. Let me tell you, giraffes had normal necks and they ate from the grass and the trees, but then the grass came hard to be found as the animals reproduced. The Giraffes with short necks died because they can’t reach tall trees to eat. The tall ones ate and reproduced.

Giraffe with tall neck + Giraffe with normal or tall neck have higher probability of giving birth to a giraffe with a tall neck. Hence evolution takes place this method.

That’s the maximum what evolution can do. A dog cannot grow a fin because he can swim better across the river because on the other side there is food. Let’s examine:

A dog with no fin but can swim + dog with no fin but cannot swim
or
A dog with no fin but cannot swim + dog with no fin but cannot swim
or
A dog with no fin but can swim + dog with no fin but can swim

They all have no fins. There is no DNA in the dogs body that tells it that if there is no food. And then the DNA will realize that there is food in the sea and grow a fin. The DNA cannot spy on the brain and know what the dog is thinking. Oh look.. the dog is thinking there is food on the other side, but! There is a river. Ah! So let me make a genetic code (as the DNA) and design a fin and make a reproductive cell such that when the dog has reproduction, he can have offspring that will swim to the other side…

Evolution exists, but is limited. Natural selection is the basis of evolution
Natural selection doesn’t have intelligence
Natural selection is not aware of its surroundings.
Natural selection operates on this principal:

Survival of the fittest -> the fittest reproduces and gets a fitter species
-> The fitter can survive and reproduce and get a fitter species.

But again, it’s about survival of the existing animal with the ALREADY existing DNA information.

New DNA information can only be created by adding or increasing already existing traits through reproduction.

Again, Giraffes grow a neck because its written in the DNA. The survival of the fittest occurs. The giraffes with long necks + other giraffes mate => Giraffes with long necks. The longer neck info is a result of the selection between XY(male) chromosome and YY(female) chromosome. The result offspring is nothing new. It’s the traits of the male, female, its grandfather or a genetic deformation, a mutation resulting in nonfunctional organs which may result in natural death for animals

Astrocloud,

I’m not afraid to say the truth but thanks, and I’m happy to hear from you. They believe, good, they don’t believe, I’ll provide more evidence to help it be understood and make it simpler. What I know is there is scientific important evidence that is proven through miracles of knowledge of the future. What’s unique about the miracle of the Quran is that it told us 1400 years ago what we are seeing now.

1- No body except a supreme being can know exactly the future 1400 years ago.
2- The Quran mentions that the Supreme Being is God

Hence by deduction God has existed.

Now since God shows in the Quran that he knows the future
 He is or was in the future.

So how can God be in the future and the past (1400 years ago) at the same time?
Its because he is not bound by time.

So:
1- God existed
2- God is not bound by Time
3- God told us what is happening know

 God still exists



Noahfor, I’ll be happy.

Yes the universe had a beginning it was created from a point of zero volume, infinite gravity and mass. This is what scientists say. So where was this point created from? That is creation. We cannot go deeper in understanding as human beings. There is a verse in the Quran:

“And you haven’t been given from science but a little”

Everyday there are new discoveries, new technology evolving rapidly
Micro technology (before and current)
Nanotechnology (current (development) and future)

Nano is one thousandth of a Micro. When nanotechnology comes, you will be able to buy a PC the size of a matchbox! They discovered that there is a particle even smaller than the atom. The atom is made of particles called Quarks.

Shakran,

Sorry, but no. Every verse came on the profit was written on the paper was written. It didn’t come as a whole book at one. These papers then became so much that they had to write a book. They got the papers and copied them in the order they came from on a book, without changing a letter.

As I said changing the text is considered a sin. There were a few attempts by people who meant harm to change few letters of the Quran and distribute it thinking it wouldn’t be noticed. But then they were stopped. Saudia Arabia is main country that does the task of printing and making sure all Qurans distributed as the original.

I have proved God’s existence through:
1- 1400 years ago events are coming true (not mentioned yet)

2- Miracles of science:
a- pork meat to be harmful
b- Sand as a cleaner
c- Structure of the mountain (not mentioned yet)
d- Other miracles will be shown on a new paged named “miracles” or similar

3- Miracle of the human anatomy and intelligent design wins by elimination. Evolution cannot create humans => superior life. Aliens created man and made him the superior and give him all the universe and vanished from the whole universe without a trace or a note or a book or a skeleton or anything? Very unlikely. Lets assume aliens made humans.. But aliens would be normal beings, of skeleton and muscle. So who created the Aliens? Only a supreme being as God can create Aliens.

BUT

If and only if, God did create Aliens and Aliens created man, then why and why might you, did the Aliens make a book from God where they say that God made the universe and they say in the Quran that God gave the universe to all human beings? They should have said he gave the universe to all human beings and the Aliens as well.

In either way, the Aliens if and only if they exist, they are dead, but in all cases mentioned above. God cannot die.

Therefore by elimination:
Neither evolution nor Aliens did create humans
God is the only Supreme Being left that could create humans

Now more about Aliens:

There is no way I say that science will ever find a life stronger or even more intelligent than human beings. It is simple; there is are verses in the last few pages of the Quran which gives us this info without spending billions of dollars of the US taxpayers’ money trying to find aliens:

“We gave you the universe, so pray to your God and be grateful...”

I insist on this point and say science has tried and tried and tried and will keep trying and trying and spending billions but it will not find anything. The budget for this thing (extraterrestrial search) is getting less btw because they are realizing it’s useless.

The answer is simple. Humans are the dominants in the entire universe. Anything found which is highly unlikely, will be a simpler life form as animals or unicellular organisms.

tecoyah

Question #1) Was it indeed....a Giraffe before the length in neck changed?

Question #2) What of this:



Whale Evolution:


"Call it an unfinished story, but with a plot that's a grabber. It's the tale of an ancient land mammal making its way back to the sea, becoming the forerunner of today's whales. In doing so, it lost its legs, and all of its vital systems became adapted to a marine existence -- the reverse of what happened millions of years previously, when the first animals crawled out of the sea onto land.

Some details remain fuzzy and under investigation. But we know for certain that this back-to-the-water evolution did occur, thanks to a profusion of intermediate fossils that have been uncovered over the past two decades."

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/li.../l_034_05.html

The debate on evolution is somewhat heated, and in my opinion needlessly so. Once a basic understanding of the theory is understood, much of the dissagreement no longer exists, I would recommend you spend a few minutes reading up on current theory surrounding the evidence for adaptation.

__________________
Holding onto anger is like grasping a hot coal with the intent of throwing it at someone else; you are the one who gets burned. - Buddha

nezmot

Plus, one thing that's often overlooked is the role 'selection' plays. Nope, not the life-or-death type of thing we normally associate with natural selection, but the fact that lady giraffes who happen to have a genetic predisposition for finding long-necked mates attractive, will mate more often with long-necked giraffes with the result that their progeny will likely have a longer neck (due to the father's influence) and a natural predisposition towards finding long-necked mates more attractive than shorter necked ones (due to the mother's influence). Thus a natural feedback loop is created that can potentially rocket a species off into some entirely new arena of development extremely rapidly (in geological terms).

This becomes especially evident in the examples of Peacocks, and other birds where the male develops highly coloured or decorative plumage - often to the detriment of their chances of survival with regards to predators.

nanotech

Tecoyah,

Q1) I watched documentaries many years ago. As far as I remember, the giraffes' necks all have the same number of bones but natural selection chose the taller bones.

This is very important because that means that evolution was a result of natural selection. The giraffes' with longer neck bones managed to reproduce and gave birth to giraffes' with longer neck bones. This is normal reproduction > evolution > adaptation.

Now if and only if the tallness of the giraffe came because the number of neck bones increased, then it would be a totally different story! This means that a new bone object was written in the DNA and fitted in the write manner to be in the neck. This would have meant that evolution was able to create. But its scientifically impossible for new information to be created on its own (in the DNA).

Q2) new info, sounds interesting. But gotta go sleep, I'll check it tomorrow.

good night

nezmot

I included it in the first one, because it was included in your link, and I excluded it in the second one because it was excluded in your second link. They're your (biased) links - it's not my fault they're wrong.

Here's (yet) another link, only this one hasn't been created for the sole purpose of backing up your crazy theory: Non biased link number 1, non biased link number 2, non biased link number 3, and another one - and if I could be bothered, I could add more. But it's not going to prove anything, so I will leave it there.

pig

I wrote a bunch of meandering crap a second ago and erased it. It boils down to the the opinion that I'm unconvinced we would ever know if the gravitational constant was a little different than it is now. We made up the theory of gravity, and we fit the constant. It seems to work pretty well. The same can be said for all the other constants and theories and laws. We extrapolated those laws from the world around us. I don't think we can use a mathematical model, which is based on constants which are extrapolated from the world, as we know it...then change some numbers around, and pretend that we're surprised that there is an inconsistency. I think all that these "fine tuning" go to show that the reality we experience is a much more interrelated holarchial structure than we commonly think of it to be. I'm not trying to single you out or attack you, or really even argue/debate with youasaris - no Christian bashing here, etc - I just enjoy the way you post about these topics in general.

nanotech,

I am glad that you have the beliefs yo have, and that you find evidence for your beliefs in the arguments you have posted. While I agree with some of the underlying ideas in your posts, namely that a purely scientific statistical argument is currently incapable of of explaining evolutionary development, and furthermore that the question of "why did the universe happen?" is strictly outside the realm of classical scientific inquiry, I have to say that I find much of your logic to be circular or incomplete. I don't have the time to go through all the posts, but I would like to mention that many people I know who are more familiar with evolutionary concepts that I, would say that you are cherrypicking your arguments. Take the dog vs. giraffe.

1. You state that the giraffe's neck is explainable through natural selection.

2. You state that a dog turning into a dolphin is not possible.

You have no proof for this claim. A dog turning into a dolphin in one big jump is very unlikely. A dog slowly undergoing mutations, such as webbed feet, smaller hing legs, loss of hair, etc, is not entirely probable, in one big leap...but evolution is not about big leaps.

I think you are correct in saying that the dog "wanting" the fins is unlikely to produce them. I notice you don't seem to think that the giraffe sat around wishing for a longer neck, but that it happened through natural selection.

I think, and I could be wrong, but if dogs always had to swim across a river to get their food, or were constantly in wet areas when hunting, that dogs that had webbed feet, or could otherwise swim better, would be favored. See Labarador Retreivers. If those dogs did develop any anomoly that allowed them to better adapt to their environment better, that would also be favored. Over a very, very very long time.

3. The 1400 years stuff. People have been making predictions about the future for a long time. Sometimes we can find ways to make them seem true. Sometimes it really is amazing the types of visions that people seem to have had about the future. I think that arguing for "God created the universe" because you find meaning in a prophesy is going to be difficult, within the context of a scientific discussion.

4. Let's not forget that this thread started off with a "proof that God created the universe." Evolution is in no way counter to that notion. One is a question, primarily, of why the universe was created, the other is a question of how did it unfold.

__________________
You don't love me, you just love my piggy style

raeanna74

deleted....

__________________
"Always learn the rules so that you can break them properly." Dalai Lama
My Karma just ran over your Dogma.

shakran

I'm only going to respond to what you addressed to me. The stuff you said to the others is largely wrong as well, but I'll leave it to them to debunk it.

I know that it is considered a sin now. But before it was widely distributed as a text, it was recited orally. Or are you suggesting that the Prophet somehow figured out a system for mass distribution of text long before the invention of the printing press that made mass distribution of text possible?

That's not proof.
Contaminated pork is not a miracle of science. It is also not proof.


What?!?!

Then mention it. Don't say you've proved something based on something you haven't even said.

How about showing them here? And then prove that 1) they happened and 2) Allah made them happen.



Many of us have already shown you how you are completely wrong about this. If you will not listen, then further discussion is pointless, no?


I think first you should say where the aliens came in to this debate. . . .



This doesn't even make sense.

Sorry, but once again you are using a book of faith to attempt to prove a scientific assertion. That displays a lack of logic, and a lack of scientific understanding.

This is what you BELIEVE. What you take on FAITH. And that's really the whole point of this isn't it? What you take on FAITH is different from what you can PROVE. You cannot EVER prove faith. Otherwise it wouldn't be faith. Your constant attempts to (illogically) justify your faith is an insult to that faith. Believe what you want. Have faith. If you truly believe and truly have faith in this, you do not need to prove it to anyone.

josobot

I have a little trouble with evolution. But I can imagine creation from a pantheist point of view. God ( i.e. the whole deal :after big bang, during, and before[ especially]) is creating itself. That befuddles me, so for peace of mind I define God as the "Enduring rational reality". In a sense creation and evolution merge. I only think about personal immortality for fun. Real people interest me as well as ideas.

debaser

At the risk of sounding somewhat inflamatory, you will not win an argument with a fundamentalist. Everything nanotech posted above was either an outright falsehood or a gross misunderstanding of science. Let him revel in his ignorance. The original posters thesis has been debunked thoroughly by now, and the whole proof of Gods existence has been done to death, here and elsewhere.

__________________

nanotech

Back from work, this is starting to look like a second job heh. Oh well

by pigglet:

pigglet, I understand what you're talking about. I watched a video about it. Mutation doesn't work as well as you imagine. Scientists tried to mate different breeds or species and always got mutated creatures which couldn't survive and died. You cannot get a good species with new traits that work by evolution alone. There is a scientist who said that information cannot result from no-information or something similar. There is a site that would explain to you the Darwinisim concept in terms of video and it addresses your subject. I classified all the videos to be easily found on
www.efox.tv

Shakran,

Yes, in the books it says that the verses came orally on the profit by the Angel Gabriel. Gabriel is mentioned in all religions btw. Each verse was individually written on a paper. Then the papers where compiled together in the order they came.

Actually it is because the Quran told the people about what is happening know in some verses and about the golden age (future). There is an interesting video for this subject I recommend you watch. It’s called "The Golden Age". Can be found in this page www.efox.tv

Actually it is. The Quran only said don't eat pork meat because it’s harmful and it stressed this to the fact that it is in the foundations of Islam. Then it turns out now that the pork is the only meat that has worms that lives in humans even when the meat is boiled. Who could know this at that time except a supreme being which can see microscopic creatures.

Yes, sorry to have not given more detail, but sand has microscopic objects which if you use the sand to wash your hands; it would clean you from germs and bacteria. In Islam God obliged people to wash with sand before praying if there is no water. This is a miracle of science.

There is so much info and I wish I have time to say it all but I have deadlines and projects in work so I got the assisteance of videos which hold all the info I can give in harunyahya.com. Sorry again about not going in detail, yes there is a miracle in the mountains structure. The mountain has a purpose under the earth. It has a function to act as a nail in the ground. This nail keeps the continents from shifting by the result of Lava. It was mentioned in the Quran that the mountain has this purpose in a verse. There is a video about this by the author Harun Yahya. You can find it maybe in the one that is called "creation of the universe" in the page

www.efox.tv

It is important since the proof of the existence of God depends on if there are aliens with high intelligence which have been proven to be false. In a verse in the Quran "We gave you the universe...” proves there cannot be a dominant species on man. Hence Aliens could not have existed which is proven because they cannot find any trace of aliens or possibility of life unless a supposition of billions of light years away. Does that mean that aliens created humans, which got into fast machines that run at 300,000 KM per second and went away to other galaxies without anyway that we see them? That is through telescopes etc.

This is not a lack of logic but a challenge based on the fact that neither aliens did come and talk to us, nor were we able to find them in many years and billions of dollars spent. I base this challenge from the verse of the Quran and so far it is valid.

----------

Excuse me? Who are you to say that I'm a fundamentalist? My statements happen to be more scientific and objective than yours. Furthermore I respect all religions and have friends from many religions, so how dare you call me a fundamentalist. If this is an insult, I will assume that insults are permitted here and will start doing the same.

You are very funny. I would like to compare your eye to a camera. You zoom out so far from the text and then see the whole paragraph but cannot read the words. Then you put an opinion based on how you feel.

That is untrue. I think many people who came and read, but not posted, have now increased their knowledge and found it beneficial as well as I did.

An assumption based on no proof, but based on where perhaps you live in. Perhaps you live in a community that doesn't believe God exists and made it a joke. So rather than trying to find the truth for yourself, you go with what they're saying.

But that is all ok. The purpose of this whole thing is to research and find the truth. After all I always say to myself. We are all humans of the same genetic design. So we must have been created by the same cause. But all the profits in many thousands of years had the same answer about who created everything. So as a result, I think that humans will have the same destination.

debaser

You believe in the fundamental and unwavering truth of the Q'ran. That is the definition of a fundamentalist.

And if you read the rules of the forum you will know that insults are not allowed.

Interesting, but it does nothing to validate the "science" in your original or subsequent posts.

Well, I am glad you are learning something.
No, it really has been done to death. Every BBS on the web with anything resembling a "philosophy" room has heard this argument a thousand times. Do not use science to prove God. You will either kill science or God.
I am glad that is what you think.



Here is information about the "7 heavens" argument, shamelessly ripped of from faithfreedom.org :

__________________

Bill O'Rights

No...you will not...

For my purpose, we are going to use the following definition of fundamentalism;

A usually religious movement or point of view characterized by a return to fundamental principles, by rigid adherence to those principles, and often by intolerance of other views and opposition to secularism.

While it is my belief that you are demonstrating those characteristics, you seem to feel that you are being insulted. So be it. Make your case, to me, how being refered to as a fundamentalist, when you embody the tennants of fundamentalism, is an insult.

Regardless, you most certainly will NOT resort to insults. Do I need to be any clearer on that point?

__________________
"I distrust those people who know so well what God wants them to do because I notice it always coincides with their own desires." - Susan B. Anthony

"Hedonism with rules isn't hedonism at all, it's the Republican party." - JumpinJesus

It is indisputable that true beauty lies within...but a nice rack sure doesn't hurt.

Cynthetiq

hmmm so a Koran translated in english is exactly the same as a Koran in Arabic?

Language is not so rigid that words translate from language to language easily. This is also why the Bible could have flaws as well, translation alters words just as well as human minds interpreting those words.

As far as pork and worms is concerned, well if it "specifically" said, don't eat pork due to worms that can be seen microscopically I'd agree that it's handed down from God, but it does not. It states different reasons that were apparent to those that lived in the time it was written.

__________________
I don't care if you are black, white, purple, green, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, hippie, cop, bum, admin, user, English, Irish, French, Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Buddhist, Muslim, indian, cowboy, tall, short, fat, skinny, emo, punk, mod, rocker, straight, gay, lesbian, jock, nerd, geek, Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Independent, driver, pedestrian, or bicyclist, either you're an asshole or you're not.

Coppertop

Wow. Just... wow.