CyborgPirateNinja wrote:So I ask everyone in this topic:(As seen in another topic)We take a watch, We deconstruct it and throw it in one of our pockets.We shuffle the pocket and take out the watch.The watch (probably) wouldn't be constructed.But given infinite tries, With only limited parts, We could create a watch by only shuffling our pocket!(So every chance bigger then zero gets reviewed and thus every state of the watch is observed)

Now, I fail to see that there is a god simply because we consist of parts.Because the universe got shuffled with the correct seed that created us.

in my theory it is related to christianity, but not fully.it supports everything, evolution, god, the time-space continium.

i believe that trillions of years ago God created science or allowed science to work. once this began the universe eventually was created by the big bang. atoms formed and galaxies formed. then skip all the evolution stuff and lets go to today. God looks in once and awhile, performing a "miracle". But mainly God just sits back and lets everything roll. Here's the part that people call be crazy for. I think i am the only person in the universe. the only live person that is. i believe that every living thing has its own universe, but every universe is synchronized. if someone steps out of synch, it messes with the time space continium, creating a time-paradox. this has not happened and i believe it will be very hard to make it occur. do i believe in an after-life. to be honest i have no idea, but i'll accept whatever God throws my way.

Why did life appear on Earth in the first place?I think thats the greatest question to ask. The most scientific/logical answer that someone told me is that matter tends to find a way to conserve energy. This doesnt make sense to me because there are organisms that consume energy and decays it using it as kinetic energy. All matter is decaying in a matter of fact. Someone explain this to me!?

Well, as interesting a debate as this is, there is no way to "prove" weather or not god exists, at least until we die. But that dosen't mean we cant have fun trying to answer impossible questions, now does it? Now before i add my personal opinion,

Furthermore, the E. coli bacterial flagellum simply could not have evolved gradually over time. The bacterial flagellum is an "irreducibly complex" system. An irreducibly complex system is one composed of multiple parts, all of which are necessary for the system to function. If you remove any one part, the entire system will fail to function. Every individual part is integral. There is absolutely no naturalistic, gradual, evolutionary explanation for the bacterial flagellum. (Michael Behe, Darwin's Black Box, 1996.)

I have encountered this example before, and while yes, no single part of the motor can act as a motor without the other parts, we have been able to identify independent uses for at least a few of the parts (sorry, i cant remember them at the moment, if anyone's really i can track the information down again). Each part has its own seaperate use, and while there are plenty of examples of so called "irreducibly complex systems," the parts of theses systems have other, often unrelated uses on their own.

Wow.. Very fallacious argument. You based your whole argument off a falsely assumed premise (that Jesus Christ does not exist). You said that you can prove he doesn't exist. How? Please share. Oh, wait, what's that? You know what it is? B.C. That's right, BC. Time was literally split on the existence of Jesus Christ. The switch between B.C. and A.D. is undeniable.

Yes, you cannot prove that he didn't exist, but outside of the Bible itself (which is hardly an independent source), there is little or no (none that i'm aware of anyway, but i very rarely claim to know everything) proof that he existed. He is not, to my knowlage, mentioned by any historians who lived at the time, nor have any sorts of records of his existence been found (if anyone knows of any independent primary sources that mention him, please prove me wrong).

But to actually answer the question instead of just picking other peoples answers apart, while I find the idea of an all powerful being implausable, it only seems logical to me that there are beings far more powerful than us out there. After all, there are beings much smaller than us, and i doubt were really the most impressive things the universe has to offer. I imagine we ourselves look pretty godlike to an ant, or a bacteria.

All things that are, are ours. But we must care. For if we do not care, we do not exist. If we do not exist, than there is nothing but blind oblivion...What can the harvest hope for, if not the care of the reaper man? -Terry Pratchett's Reaper Man

Time was literally split on the existence of Jesus Christ. The switch between B.C. and A.D. is undeniable.

Well.. actually 'Time' wasn't 'literally' split till 525 years after AD, by a lad named Dionysius Exiguus, and he relied heavily on the Julian calendars (years named after the consults) to make that estimate of 525 years. So I wouldn't consider that proof in any way.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anno_Salutis#History

I have only read the first article, the one called, A System Planned in Its Every Detail.

The discription of the article is:

Crazy A.O. wrote:How complex systems prove the existence of God and refute the theory of Darwin.

A part in the middle is:

Crazy A.O. wrote:The point that deserves attention here is that evolution can by no means explain the system briefly summarized above. Evolution maintains that today’s complex organisms have evolved from primitive cellular forms by the gradual accumulation of small structural changes. However, as stated clearly, the system in the stomach could in no way have been formed step by step. The absence of even one factor would bring about the death of the organism.

First of all, i think that a good step by step process would be, if the beings with bad development would die before they could breed. So only the genes or features of the ones "working" would be passed along and develop further.

And the conclusion is:

Crazy A.O. wrote:The human body resembles a huge factory made up of many small machines that work together in perfect harmony. Just as all factories have a designer, an engineer and a planner, the human body has an “Exalted Creator.”

Jumping to conclusions?

So because it's complex, and this A.O. guy, who wrote this propaganda of stupidity. Dont understand how it works. It must be made by an Exalted Creator? The only thing this is proof of, is that this guy should try reading som other books too, and stop making stuff up.

I dont have anything against people who belive something else than me, but this is just plain odd. Normaly i dont care mutch for the whole religion thing. I have known a few bright minds, both muslim and christian. But i have never heard anyone saying stuff like this, and claming it is proof.

And honestly, no offence intended to any religion. Or to LoneFury4590 for that matter.

I have only read the first article, the one called, A System Planned in Its Every Detail.

The discription of the article is:

Crazy A.O. wrote:How complex systems prove the existence of God and refute the theory of Darwin.

A part in the middle is:

Crazy A.O. wrote:The point that deserves attention here is that evolution can by no means explain the system briefly summarized above. Evolution maintains that today’s complex organisms have evolved from primitive cellular forms by the gradual accumulation of small structural changes. However, as stated clearly, the system in the stomach could in no way have been formed step by step. The absence of even one factor would bring about the death of the organism.

First of all, i think that a good step by step process would be, if the beings with bad development would die before they could breed. So only the genes or features of the ones "working" would be passed along and develop further.

How can our digestive system for example 'evolve'? As its said that without one part of the system the rest won't work. And evolution is an "improvement" or like you say "development" of an old design so as to make it better. So what is the old design of the digestive system? There isn't even proof of that existing.Quote from: http://www.islamreligion.com/articles/10032/ (An article I highly recommend you read)"According to the theory of evolution, every living species has sprung from a predecessor. A previously-existing species turned into ‘something else’ with time and all species have come into being in this way. According the theory, this transformation proceeds gradually over millions of years. If this was the case, then numerous intermediary species should have existed and lived within this long transformation period. For instance, some half-fish/half-reptiles should have lived in the past, which had acquired some reptilian traits in addition to the fish traits they already had. Or there should have existed some reptile-birds, which acquired some bird traits in addition to the reptilian traits they are believed to have had in the past, as “transitional forms.” If such animals had really existed, there should be millions and even billions of them in number and variety. More importantly, the remains of these strange creatures should be present in fossil records. The number of these transitional forms should have been even greater than the present animal species and their remains should be found all over the world. In The Origin of Species, Darwin explained:“If my theory be true, numberless intermediate varieties, linking most closely all of the species of the same group together must assuredly have existed. Consequently evidence of their former existence could be found only amongst fossil remains.”Even Darwin himself was aware of the absence of such transitional forms. It was his hope that they would be found in the future......"

Evolution is a "theory" which I find not strong enough to stand since there are no solid proofs to back it up. This theory by Charles Darwin asserts that all creatures evolved within a chain of coincidences and essentially mutated from one another. According to the fundamental assertion of this theory all living things go through minute and coincidental changes. If these coincidental changes help the creature then it gains advantage over the others, which in turn is carried onto following generations. Regarding the “coincidental changes”, Darwin could not provide a comprehensive definition to this concept due to the lack of genealogical knowledge in his time. But the future evolutionists who tried to put forth the concept of “mutation” on this subject. "Mutation is arbitrary disconnections, dislocation or shifts of genes in living things." The most important point is that there is not one single mutation in history that is shown to have improved the condition of the genetic information of a creature. Nearly all the known cases of mutations disable or harm these creatures and the rest are neutral in effect. Therefore, to think that a creature can improve through mutation is the same as shooting into a crowd of people hoping that the consequent injuries will result in healthier and improved individuals. Cited: http://www.islamreligion.com/articles/301/

And the conclusion is:

Crazy A.O. wrote:The human body resembles a huge factory made up of many small machines that work together in perfect harmony. Just as all factories have a designer, an engineer and a planner, the human body has an “Exalted Creator.”

Jumping to conclusions?

So because it's complex, and this A.O. guy, who wrote this propaganda of stupidity. Dont understand how it works. It must be made by an Exalted Creator? The only thing this is proof of, is that this guy should try reading som other books too, and stop making stuff up.

I dont have anything against people who belive something else than me, but this is just plain odd. Normaly i dont care mutch for the whole religion thing. I have known a few bright minds, both muslim and christian. But i have never heard anyone saying stuff like this, and claming it is proof.

What he means by it being complex is that all the processes occurring would rely on each other and none can exist without the other. I'd also like to enlighten you to the second law of thermodynamics a.k.a law of entropy (if you haven't heard of it before) which is one of the basic laws of physics. It states that system when left on their own prefer states of lowest energy and highest entropy. I've read many posts here and every one seemed to ignore this law. Some one spoke of trying out password combinations and finally getting the right password for a successful hack to an evolution. But here it is the guys trying out the password combinations and and it isn't like randomly taking place (the guy has a brain...). In evolution we are talking about atoms and molecules over which there is no control over coming together to for complex systems.

Quote from: http://www.islamreligion.com/articles/3986/ (Another article which I would recommend)"Evolutionary theory ignores this fundamental law of physics. The mechanism offered by evolution totally contradicts the second law. The theory of evolution says that disordered, dispersed, and lifeless atoms and molecules spontaneously came together over time, in a particular order, to form extremely complex molecules such as proteins, DNA, and RNA, whereupon millions of different living species with even more complex structures gradually emerged. According to the theory of evolution, this supposed process—which yields a more planned, more ordered, more complex and more organized structure at each stage—was formed all by itself under natural conditions. The law of entropy makes it clear that this so-called natural process utterly contradicts the laws of physics....The evolutionist author Roger Lewin expresses the thermodynamic impasse of evolution in an article in Science:One problem biologists have faced is the apparent contradiction by evolution of the second law of thermodynamics. Systems should decay through time, giving less, not more, order.""

And honestly, no offence intended to any religion. Or to LoneFury4590 for that matter.

The link "http://www.islamreligion.com/category/39/" includes other topics relevant to the existence of God (like "the obvious existence of God", "Thermodynamics falsifies evolution", "the fossil record refutes evolution" etc.) so its not just the first topic that wanted to highlight. S

How can you even conclude that if evolution is wrong, a creator must be right?

Even if evolution is wrong, it does not in any way prove a creator.

Have you got any other theories? (:And mind, I do not believe in God just because there are no other "theories" to believe in...

Out beyond ideas of wrongdoing and right doing, there is a field. I will meet you there.

Evolution doesn't disobey any rules of thermodynamics. When one part of a system becomes more ordered, the surroundings become more disordered to compensate. I think that is implied in the first rule of thermodynamics. So a small part of the system like Earth can become more ordered while the overall surrounding system becomes increasingly disordered, and the universe is supposedly expanding right? The second law of thermodynamics applies to closed systems, which our bodies/planets aren't. But this doesn't mean there is or isn't a God, physics, or evolution. Physics and evolution and God probably work together somehow. I don't know, but I like to think so.

Last edited by nigelpurc on Wed Oct 03, 2012 6:25 pm, edited 1 time in total.

If we didn't evolve from small one-celled organisems, then please explain to me why mitochondrial DNA is so different from human DNA in the nucleus, even if it's in the same cell. And just in case you're wondering I actually study chemestry and the loss in entropy of the molecule doesn't even come close to the loss of energy by making these molecules. And becouse the Gibbs free energy calculates if a reaction goes spontaneous or not, most of these reactions actually go spontaneous. Most reactions (if not all) I do in my tests combine molecules to a larger molecule and by that creating less entropy, but they definitely work.

Sorry if this post is a bit incoherent, but I'm a bit high on Ether (someone broke a 5 liter flask today )