Science vs. Creationism

[PearlWatson]

I am wondering how is your mind not closed about greatest truth like Evolution? But it accepts greatest lie on earth about God. Something is messed up here. Really strange.

Depends on what you mean by "evolution."

I takes more faith to believe in Darwinian ideology, that a molecule randomly generated its way into a molecular scientist, than it does to believe in a creator or designer.

Most of your faith rests on the stories of paleontologists extrapolated from bone fragments.

Do you realize what little data the supposed "evolution" of the whale rests on?

Red shows the actual bone fragments they have and the rest is the extrapolation:

Pakicetus

Ambulocetus

Your house is built on sand, my friend.

 

[carolinajazz]

Think about it. It is better to be an atheist or at least agnostic. Nothing to lose, all to gain.

"Nothing to lose?"

(Romans 1:18-23) 18 For God’s wrath is being revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who are suppressing the truth in an unrighteous way, 19 because what may be known about God is clearly evident among them, for God made it clear to them. 20 For his invisible qualities are clearly seen from the world’s creation onward, because they are perceived by the things made, even his eternal power and Godship, so that they are inexcusable. 21 For although they knew God, they did not glorify him as God nor did they thank him, but they became empty-headed in their reasonings and their senseless hearts became darkened. 22 Although claiming they were wise, they became foolish 23 and turned the glory of the incorruptible God into something like the image of corruptible man and birds and four-footed creatures and reptiles.

 

[PearlWatson]

That's the nifty thing about gene duplication; you have one gene continuing to produce the same proteins, while the copy can mutate, producing new information. So after you get more information, you get new information.

There is nothing nifty about Down's Syndrome or cancer.

The process of duplication only lends itself to information loss.

At no time can a copy of a book come out with a random new chapter, but an existing chapter can be lost.

 

[MVP]

Do you realize what little data the supposed "evolution" of the whale rests on?
Your house is built on sand, my friend.

You obviously ignoring live evidence of evolution being caught - dolphin with rear flippers or whale with atavistic legs. It is enough to look at any whale skeleton to clearly see that it once was land animal as remnants of hind legs are still present.
I thought we are not going to go that road again?

 

[MVP]

"Nothing to lose?"

(Romans 1:18-23) 18 For God’s wrath is being revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who are suppressing the truth in an unrighteous way, 19 because what may be known about God is clearly evident among them, for God made it clear to them. 20 For his invisible qualities are clearly seen from the world’s creation onward, because they are perceived by the things made, even his eternal power and Godship, so that they are inexcusable. 21 For although they knew God, they did not glorify him as God nor did they thank him, but they became empty-headed in their reasonings and their senseless hearts became darkened. 22 Although claiming they were wise, they became foolish 23 and turned the glory of the incorruptible God into something like the image of corruptible man and birds and four-footed creatures and reptiles.

So what am I losing according to this fairy tale written 2000+ years ago by some shepherds?

 

[MVP]

If you withhold a belief in God and He does exist you have infinite loss.
If you believe in God and He doesn't exist you have lost nothing.

^Makes no sense to me whatsoever.
If afterlife exists and I did not believe in it before I died - I gained new life, great, fantastic, I am stoked!
If afterlife does not exist but you believed in - it just think how it sucks for you after you die.

 

[PearlWatson]

^Makes no sense to me whatsoever.
If afterlife exists and I did not believe in it before I died - I gained new life, great, fantastic, I am stoked!
If afterlife does not exist but you believed in - it just think how it sucks for you after you die.

Because you haven't taken into consideration what happens to unbelievers in the "afterlife." The only way you have a chance as an unbeliever is if the Mormon's are right and they can do a proxy baptism for you.

If afterlife does not exist believers won't realize that it "sucks" for them because they will no longer exist.

 

[babe]

Because you haven't taken into consideration what happens to unbelievers in the "afterlife." The only way you have a chance as an unbeliever is if the Mormon's are right and they can do a proxy baptism for you.

If afterlife does not exist believers won't realize that it "sucks" for them because they will no longer exist.

I can see one other possibility in this little scenario. . . . well, maybe more than one more. . . .

One possibility is that there is a God who exists, maybe even cares about us, and will deal with all of us far better than we have yet imagined. . . .whether we "believe" in any particular limited but false notion of "God" or not. This would be, I suppose, the "Best of All Possible Gods". Probably isn't really thrilled with the idea of actually talking to us because we are hell-bent on making something else of "God" and wouldn't accurately relate any possible "revelation". This would also be, I suppose, the male-God who just knows better than to talk to people who won't understand. . . . .

If an atheist dies, and discovers life goes on, he can still ask questions and dispute whatever anyone wants to tell him, and disbelieve in anything he wants. With a whole lifetime of denial skills, he could still wonder if he's just dreaming and imagining that he's still conscious, and conclude that consciousness is as unprovable as the Holy Ghost.

If religious believers in God die, and don't wake up, there was nothing to lose in the first place. They lived their dream, and loved it while they lived. I'd say that is the glorious way to live, no matter what. The atheist has simply chosen to die before dreaming. . . . .

 

[One Brow]

It can't be new information if it already existed. I'm talking about recombinants, which are rearrangements of already existing genetic information.

The old information is destroyed, and new information created, by re-organization.

This is designed variation. It is why we have different colored eyes, skin, and hair. Why finches have different sized beaks. It is why we have different breeds of cats, dogs, birds, etc.

You mean on two different strands of DNA, or do you mean the shuffling of genes during meiosis?

 

[One Brow]

Much ado about nothing.

Not only are the bacteria still bacteria, but they didn't even develop a new ability.

Thriving on citrate was a new ability, and of course they were still bacteria, because no miracle occurred.

 

[One Brow]

You ain't aware of Pascal's wager?

If you withhold a belief in God and He does exist you have infinite loss.
If you believe in God and He doesn't exist you have lost nothing.

If us God-believers don't have an eternal soul then we ain't aware of shattered hopes once we are dead.

1) Even if an atheist loses the wager, we still live forever. No loss.
2) You still lose the wager if you accept the wrong religion.
3) What sort of god would accept worship based on the analysis of Pascal's wager?

 

[One Brow]

Red shows the actual bone fragments they have and the rest is the extrapolation:

The extrapolation is also built on time, creatures know to have existed, etc. The case for evolution is stronger than the case for any one creature.

 

[One Brow]

There is nothing nifty about Down's Syndrome or cancer.

You have confused chromosomal and gene duplication.

The process of duplication only lends itself to information loss.

Again, by any testable definition of information, it also leads to gains.

At no time can a copy of a book come out with a random new chapter, but an existing chapter can be lost.

I've seen actual books with accidentally repeated pages or paragraphs.

 

[One Brow]

Because you haven't taken into consideration what happens to unbelievers in the "afterlife."

What? I experience pain for a few billion years, adjust to it, and live forever. After I have been alive for a trillion years, those first few billion will be all but forgotten.

 

[babe]

You have confused chromosomal and gene duplication.



Again, by any testable definition of information, it also leads to gains.



I've seen actual books with accidentally repeated pages or paragraphs.

One Brow is doing good posts here. And he's actually right on the facts.

God certainly isn't going to accept any calculated table of probabilities as a worthy "faith". Like the country song says, He ain't gonna settle for anything less than our Love.

 

[Deleted member 848]

You have confused chromosomal and gene duplication.

Both of you are wrong.

One Brow: Although Down Syndrome most commonly occurs from non-disjunction of the 21st chromosome (leading to three copies), the actual root of the cause is the over expression of a certain region of genes (known as the Down Syndrome critical region), found on the q arm of the 21st chromosome (21q22.1–q22.3), which spans a few 'critical genes' such as DYRK1 & DSCR3 (which tend to drive the DS phenotype moreso, in a disease with such broad expressivity).

Hence, if this q22 region is translocated onto another chromosome (as can occur via Robertsonian Translocations) then you can still have Down Syndrome even without three copies of chromosome 21.


PearlWatson: duplication does not always lend itself to information loss. Also, your definition of recombination is narrow-scoped, and inaccurate.

 

[babe]

What? I experience pain for a few billion years, adjust to it, and live forever. After I have been alive for a trillion years, those first few billion will be all but forgotten.

And, from what I've seen of OB hereabouts, he would be just that persistent in his stand.

OB, God loved you before you ever got into this position, and He is even more persistent than you are. One of these days you're just gonna know that, too.

God sees your few billion years and raises the bet to a trillion. After that, you'll know He listens, and knows how to teach you the needed lesson. . . . .

But of course, I'm a Mormon, so I take all those Hell/Fire/SulfurPots and other horrid imaginary torments as figurative metaphors, not reality. The suffering with which we will have to live hereafter is our failures to choose the good over the evil in our lives here. . . . the pains of all the things that might have been, and the pains of being what we've chosen to be. . . . .

that will be torment enough.

 

[babe]

Both of you are wrong.

One Brow: Although Down Syndrome most commonly occurs from non-disjunction of the 21st chromosome (leading to three copies), the actual root of the cause is the over expression of a certain region of genes (known as the Down Syndrome critical region), found on the q arm of the 21st chromosome (21q22.1–q22.3), which spans a few 'critical genes' such as DYRK1 & DSCR3 (which tend to drive the DS phenotype moreso, in a disease with such broad expressivity).

Hence, if this q22 region is translocated onto another chromosome (as can occur via Robertsonian Translocations) then you can still have Down Syndrome even without three copies of chromosome 21.


PearlWatson: duplication does not always lend itself to information loss. Also, your definition of recombination is narrow-scoped, and inaccurate.

repped. One of the best posts in this thread. I even learned something.

 

[MVP]

Because you haven't taken into consideration what happens to unbelievers in the "afterlife."

Since nobody knows for sure why would I be concerned? And how can it be worse than fertilizing the Earth?

 

[PearlWatson]

You obviously ignoring live evidence of evolution being caught - dolphin with rear flippers or whale with atavistic legs. It is enough to look at any whale skeleton to clearly see that it once was land animal as remnants of hind legs are still present.
I thought we are not going to go that road again?

The interpretation, of these things as "atavistic" to fit the Darwin ideology, is often quite silly.

A dolphin with extra flippers is supposed to prove they once had legs? Why not the obvious logic that ancestral Dolphins had more flippers?

A child with extra flesh on their backs, not at the midline and with no tail structure, is supposed to prove we once had a monkey tail? Most of these abnormalities look like an extra penis. There are some of these "tails" near the top of the spine, at the base of the neck, as well. These are nothing more than developmental abnormalities.

A lump with a five inch bone on the side of a 62 foot whale is supposed to be a "leg?" Silliness.

The strips of bone within whales are supposed to have been the pelvic structure for walking on land but they ain't even attached to the vertebral column. They serve a sexual function, and are different in males and females.

You ain't following logic or reason. You are faithfully following a godless myth.