Precision in Nature: Evidence of God or Accidents?

Alter2Ego

Member
Apr 13, 2012
99
9
6
Los Angeles, CA
ALTER2EGO -to- EVERYONE:

AGRUMENT #1 FOR AN INTELLIGENT CREATOR:

For the average person, precision indicates that an intelligent person guided the outcome. According to Webster's New World College Dictionary, the word "precision" is defined as follows:


"the quality of being precise; exactness, accuracy"


The reverse of precision is an accident aka a spontaneous event that happen by chance with no one guiding the outcome. Webster’s New Collegiate Dictionary defines an accident as:

"a nonessential event that happens by chance and has undesirable or unfortunate results"


Scientific evidence shows there is extreme precision in everything around us in the natural world. This precision renders the evolution theory and the Big Bang theory mere fiction, for precision leaves no room for error or for accidental events. Take, for example, the first discovered 60 elements on the Periodic Table of the Elements of planet earth. Some of these 60 elements are gases and are therefore invisible to the human eye. The atoms--from which the Earth's elements are made--are specifically related to one another. In turn, the elements--e.g. arsenic, bismuth, chromium, gold, krypton--reflect a distinct, natural numeral order based upon the structure of their atoms. This is a proven LAW.

The precision in the order of the elements made it possible for scientists such as Mendeleyev, Ramsey, Moseley, and Bohr to theorize the existence of unknown elements and their characteristics. These elements were later discovered, just as predicted. Because of the distinct numerical order of the elements, the word LAW is applied to the Periodic Table of the Elements. (Sources: (1) The McGraw-Hill Encyclopedia of Science & Technology, (2) "Periodic Law," from Encyclopædia Britannica, Vol. VII, p. 878, copyright 1978, (3) The Hutchinson Dictionary of Scientific Biography


SIDE NOTE: Laws found in nature, as defined by Webster's New World Dictionary, are:


"a sequence of events that have been observed to occur with UNVARYING UNIFORMITY under the same conditions."


QUESTIONS FOR DISCUSSION:
1.
Were it not for the precise relationship among the first 60 discovered elements on the Periodic Table, would scientists have been able to accurately predict the existence of forms of matter that at the time were unknown?

2. Could the precise law within the first 60 discovered elements (on the Periodic Table) have resulted by chance aka spontaneously aka by accident? Or is this evidence for the existence an intelligent Designer/God who guided the outcome?

3. Evolution relies upon things happening by chance aka at random. If evolution were a fact, how does it account for the Periodic Table of the Elements of planet earth in which the first 60 discovered elements are so precise, and so interrelated with one another, that it has been assigned the word "LAW"?
 
Last edited:
ALTER2EGO -to- EVERYONE:

AGRUMENT #1 FOR AN INTELLIGENT CREATOR:

For the average person, precision indicates that an intelligent person guided the outcome. According to Webster's New World College Dictionary, the word "precision" is defined as follows:


"the quality of being precise; exactness, accuracy"


The reverse of precision is an accident aka a spontaneous event that happen by chance with no one guiding the outcome. Webster’s New Collegiate Dictionary defines an accident as:

"a nonessential event that happens by chance and has undesirable or unfortunate results"


Scientific evidence shows there is extreme precision in everything around us in the natural world. This precision renders the evolution theory mere fiction, for precision leaves no room for error or for accidental events. Take, for example, the first discovered 60 elements on the Periodic Table of the Elements of planet earth. Some of these 60 elements are gases and are therefore invisible to the human eye. The atoms--from which the Earth's elements are made--are specifically related to one another. In turn, the elements--e.g. arsenic, bismuth, chromium, gold, krypton--reflect a distinct, natural numeral order based upon the structure of their atoms. This is a proven LAW.

The precision in the order of the elements made it possible for scientists such as Mendeleyev, Ramsey, Moseley, and Bohr to theorize the existence of unknown elements and their characteristics. These elements were later discovered, just as predicted. Because of the distinct numerical order of the elements, the word LAW is applied to the Periodic Table of the Elements. (Sources: (1) The McGraw-Hill Encyclopedia of Science & Technology, (2) "Periodic Law," from Encyclopædia Britannica, Vol. VII, p. 878, copyright 1978, (3) The Hutchinson Dictionary of Scientific Biography


SIDE NOTE: Laws found in nature, as defined by Webster's New World Dictionary, are:


"a sequence of events that have been observed to occur with UNVARYING UNIFORMITY under the same conditions."


QUESTIONS FOR DISCUSSION:
1.
Were it not for the precise relationship among the first 60 discovered elements on the Periodic Table, would scientists have been able to accurately predict the existence of forms of matter that at the time were unknown?

2. Could the precise law within the first 60 discovered elements (on the Periodic Table) have resulted by chance aka spontaneously aka by accident? Or is this evidence for the existence an intelligent Designer/God who guided the outcome?

3. Evolution relies upon things happening by chance aka at random. If evolution were a fact, how does it account for the Periodic Table of the Elements of planet earth in which the first 60 discovered elements are so precise, and so interrelated with one another, that it has been assigned the word "LAW"?

The period table is well explained by chemistry and quantum physics.

And its hardly surprising we live on a planet suitable for life.
 
ALTER2EGO -to- EVERYONE:

AGRUMENT #1 FOR AN INTELLIGENT CREATOR:

For the average person, precision indicates that an intelligent person guided the outcome. According to Webster's New World College Dictionary, the word "precision" is defined as follows:


"the quality of being precise; exactness, accuracy"


The reverse of precision is an accident aka a spontaneous event that happen by chance with no one guiding the outcome. Webster’s New Collegiate Dictionary defines an accident as:

"a nonessential event that happens by chance and has undesirable or unfortunate results"


Scientific evidence shows there is extreme precision in everything around us in the natural world. This precision renders the evolution theory mere fiction, for precision leaves no room for error or for accidental events. Take, for example, the first discovered 60 elements on the Periodic Table of the Elements of planet earth. Some of these 60 elements are gases and are therefore invisible to the human eye. The atoms--from which the Earth's elements are made--are specifically related to one another. In turn, the elements--e.g. arsenic, bismuth, chromium, gold, krypton--reflect a distinct, natural numeral order based upon the structure of their atoms. This is a proven LAW.

The precision in the order of the elements made it possible for scientists such as Mendeleyev, Ramsey, Moseley, and Bohr to theorize the existence of unknown elements and their characteristics. These elements were later discovered, just as predicted. Because of the distinct numerical order of the elements, the word LAW is applied to the Periodic Table of the Elements. (Sources: (1) The McGraw-Hill Encyclopedia of Science & Technology, (2) "Periodic Law," from Encyclopædia Britannica, Vol. VII, p. 878, copyright 1978, (3) The Hutchinson Dictionary of Scientific Biography


SIDE NOTE: Laws found in nature, as defined by Webster's New World Dictionary, are:


"a sequence of events that have been observed to occur with UNVARYING UNIFORMITY under the same conditions."


QUESTIONS FOR DISCUSSION:
1.
Were it not for the precise relationship among the first 60 discovered elements on the Periodic Table, would scientists have been able to accurately predict the existence of forms of matter that at the time were unknown?

2. Could the precise law within the first 60 discovered elements (on the Periodic Table) have resulted by chance aka spontaneously aka by accident? Or is this evidence for the existence an intelligent Designer/God who guided the outcome?

3. Evolution relies upon things happening by chance aka at random. If evolution were a fact, how does it account for the Periodic Table of the Elements of planet earth in which the first 60 discovered elements are so precise, and so interrelated with one another, that it has been assigned the word "LAW"?

I recommend the Harper's article, by a physicist and a professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, that is highly supportive of your position:

In part:
"On one thing most physicists agree: If the amount of dark energy in our universe were only a little bit different than what it actually is, then life could never have emerged. A little more and the universe would accelerate so rapidly that the matter in the young cosmos could never pull itself together to form stars and thence form the complex atoms made in stars. And, going into negative values of dark energy, a little less and the universe would decelerate so rapidly that it would recollapse before there was time to form even the simplest atoms. Here we have a clear example of fine-tuning: out of all the possible amounts of dark energy that our universe might have, the actual amount lies in the tiny sliver of the range that allows life. There is little argument on this point. It does not depend on assumptions about whether we need liquid water for life or oxygen or particular biochemistries. As before, one is compelled to ask the question: Why does such fine-tuning occur? "


The accidental universe: Science's crisis of faith
By Alan P. Lightman
The accidental universe: Science's crisis of faith?By Alan P. Lightman (Harper's Magazine)
 
ALTER2EGO -to- EVERYONE:

AGRUMENT #1 FOR AN INTELLIGENT CREATOR:

For the average person, precision indicates that an intelligent person guided the outcome. According to Webster's New World College Dictionary, the word "precision" is defined as follows:


"the quality of being precise; exactness, accuracy"


The reverse of precision is an accident aka a spontaneous event that happen by chance with no one guiding the outcome. Webster’s New Collegiate Dictionary defines an accident as:

"a nonessential event that happens by chance and has undesirable or unfortunate results"


Scientific evidence shows there is extreme precision in everything around us in the natural world. This precision renders the evolution theory mere fiction, for precision leaves no room for error or for accidental events. Take, for example, the first discovered 60 elements on the Periodic Table of the Elements of planet earth. Some of these 60 elements are gases and are therefore invisible to the human eye. The atoms--from which the Earth's elements are made--are specifically related to one another. In turn, the elements--e.g. arsenic, bismuth, chromium, gold, krypton--reflect a distinct, natural numeral order based upon the structure of their atoms. This is a proven LAW.

The precision in the order of the elements made it possible for scientists such as Mendeleyev, Ramsey, Moseley, and Bohr to theorize the existence of unknown elements and their characteristics. These elements were later discovered, just as predicted. Because of the distinct numerical order of the elements, the word LAW is applied to the Periodic Table of the Elements. (Sources: (1) The McGraw-Hill Encyclopedia of Science & Technology, (2) "Periodic Law," from Encyclopædia Britannica, Vol. VII, p. 878, copyright 1978, (3) The Hutchinson Dictionary of Scientific Biography


SIDE NOTE: Laws found in nature, as defined by Webster's New World Dictionary, are:


"a sequence of events that have been observed to occur with UNVARYING UNIFORMITY under the same conditions."


QUESTIONS FOR DISCUSSION:
1.
Were it not for the precise relationship among the first 60 discovered elements on the Periodic Table, would scientists have been able to accurately predict the existence of forms of matter that at the time were unknown?

2. Could the precise law within the first 60 discovered elements (on the Periodic Table) have resulted by chance aka spontaneously aka by accident? Or is this evidence for the existence an intelligent Designer/God who guided the outcome?

3. Evolution relies upon things happening by chance aka at random. If evolution were a fact, how does it account for the Periodic Table of the Elements of planet earth in which the first 60 discovered elements are so precise, and so interrelated with one another, that it has been assigned the word "LAW"?



As a child I saw the articulated skeletons of dinosaurs and was absolutely fascinated. As i matured, it occurred to me that there is a remarkable similarity in all vertebrate skeletons.

If i were an intelligent creator, I'd have changed it up a little. You know, like trucks and cars. maybe the really big animals have 4 hind legs and some of the birds have 4 legs and two wings.

The incredible consistency is, to me, proof that the various species evolved. Also consistency is the mark of mindlessness not the mark of creativity. Why do species reproduce the next generation very similarly to the previous? Why is there not a regularity of mutation consistent with a great and creative mind?

If there is a precise regularity that can be traced to a precise mechanism, that argues against a creative intelligence working on things with interest.

It's the difference between the Mona Lisa and the Model T.
 
ALTER2EGO -to- EVERYONE:

AGRUMENT #1 FOR AN INTELLIGENT CREATOR:

For the average person, precision indicates that an intelligent person guided the outcome. According to Webster's New World College Dictionary, the word "precision" is defined as follows:


"the quality of being precise; exactness, accuracy"


The reverse of precision is an accident aka a spontaneous event that happen by chance with no one guiding the outcome. Webster’s New Collegiate Dictionary defines an accident as:

"a nonessential event that happens by chance and has undesirable or unfortunate results"


Scientific evidence shows there is extreme precision in everything around us in the natural world. This precision renders the evolution theory mere fiction, for precision leaves no room for error or for accidental events. Take, for example, the first discovered 60 elements on the Periodic Table of the Elements of planet earth. Some of these 60 elements are gases and are therefore invisible to the human eye. The atoms--from which the Earth's elements are made--are specifically related to one another. In turn, the elements--e.g. arsenic, bismuth, chromium, gold, krypton--reflect a distinct, natural numeral order based upon the structure of their atoms. This is a proven LAW.

The precision in the order of the elements made it possible for scientists such as Mendeleyev, Ramsey, Moseley, and Bohr to theorize the existence of unknown elements and their characteristics. These elements were later discovered, just as predicted. Because of the distinct numerical order of the elements, the word LAW is applied to the Periodic Table of the Elements. (Sources: (1) The McGraw-Hill Encyclopedia of Science & Technology, (2) "Periodic Law," from Encyclopædia Britannica, Vol. VII, p. 878, copyright 1978, (3) The Hutchinson Dictionary of Scientific Biography


SIDE NOTE: Laws found in nature, as defined by Webster's New World Dictionary, are:


"a sequence of events that have been observed to occur with UNVARYING UNIFORMITY under the same conditions."


QUESTIONS FOR DISCUSSION:
1.
Were it not for the precise relationship among the first 60 discovered elements on the Periodic Table, would scientists have been able to accurately predict the existence of forms of matter that at the time were unknown?

2. Could the precise law within the first 60 discovered elements (on the Periodic Table) have resulted by chance aka spontaneously aka by accident? Or is this evidence for the existence an intelligent Designer/God who guided the outcome?

3. Evolution relies upon things happening by chance aka at random. If evolution were a fact, how does it account for the Periodic Table of the Elements of planet earth in which the first 60 discovered elements are so precise, and so interrelated with one another, that it has been assigned the word "LAW"?



As a child I saw the articulated skeletons of dinosaurs and was absolutely fascinated. As i matured, it occurred to me that there is a remarkable similarity in all vertebrate skeletons.

If i were an intelligent creator, I'd have changed it up a little. You know, like trucks and cars. maybe the really big animals have 4 hind legs and some of the birds have 4 legs and two wings.

The incredible consistency is, to me, proof that the various species evolved. Also consistency is the mark of mindlessness not the mark of creativity. Why do species reproduce the next generation very similarly to the previous? Why is there not a regularity of mutation consistent with a great and creative mind?

If there is a precise regularity that can be traced to a precise mechanism, that argues against a creative intelligence working on things with interest.

It's the difference between the Mona Lisa and the Model T.

"If i were an intelligent creator, I'd have changed it up a little."

Here's a little change that might have escaped your perusal.....

Sir John Maddox, editor emeritus of the foremost journal of science, Nature, wrote in a classic Time magazine essay, “How the brain manages to think is a conundrum with a millennial time scale. All animals have brains so as to be able to move about. Signals from the senses- eyes, ears, nostrils, or skin, as the case may be- send messages to the spinal cord, which moves the limbs appropriately. But thinking involves the consideration of alternative responses, many of which have not been experienced but have been merely imagined. The faculty of being conscious of what is going on in the head is an extra puzzle.” (“Thinking,” March 29, 1999, p. 206)
 
ALTER2EGO -to- EVERYONE:

AGRUMENT #1 FOR AN INTELLIGENT CREATOR:

For the average person, precision indicates that an intelligent person guided the outcome. According to Webster's New World College Dictionary, the word "precision" is defined as follows:


"the quality of being precise; exactness, accuracy"


The reverse of precision is an accident aka a spontaneous event that happen by chance with no one guiding the outcome. Webster’s New Collegiate Dictionary defines an accident as:

"a nonessential event that happens by chance and has undesirable or unfortunate results"


Scientific evidence shows there is extreme precision in everything around us in the natural world. This precision renders the evolution theory mere fiction, for precision leaves no room for error or for accidental events. Take, for example, the first discovered 60 elements on the Periodic Table of the Elements of planet earth. Some of these 60 elements are gases and are therefore invisible to the human eye. The atoms--from which the Earth's elements are made--are specifically related to one another. In turn, the elements--e.g. arsenic, bismuth, chromium, gold, krypton--reflect a distinct, natural numeral order based upon the structure of their atoms. This is a proven LAW.

The precision in the order of the elements made it possible for scientists such as Mendeleyev, Ramsey, Moseley, and Bohr to theorize the existence of unknown elements and their characteristics. These elements were later discovered, just as predicted. Because of the distinct numerical order of the elements, the word LAW is applied to the Periodic Table of the Elements. (Sources: (1) The McGraw-Hill Encyclopedia of Science & Technology, (2) "Periodic Law," from Encyclopædia Britannica, Vol. VII, p. 878, copyright 1978, (3) The Hutchinson Dictionary of Scientific Biography


SIDE NOTE: Laws found in nature, as defined by Webster's New World Dictionary, are:


"a sequence of events that have been observed to occur with UNVARYING UNIFORMITY under the same conditions."


QUESTIONS FOR DISCUSSION:
1.
Were it not for the precise relationship among the first 60 discovered elements on the Periodic Table, would scientists have been able to accurately predict the existence of forms of matter that at the time were unknown?

2. Could the precise law within the first 60 discovered elements (on the Periodic Table) have resulted by chance aka spontaneously aka by accident? Or is this evidence for the existence an intelligent Designer/God who guided the outcome?

3. Evolution relies upon things happening by chance aka at random. If evolution were a fact, how does it account for the Periodic Table of the Elements of planet earth in which the first 60 discovered elements are so precise, and so interrelated with one another, that it has been assigned the word "LAW"?

I recommend the Harper's article, by a physicist and a professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, that is highly supportive of your position:

In part:
"On one thing most physicists agree: If the amount of dark energy in our universe were only a little bit different than what it actually is, then life could never have emerged. A little more and the universe would accelerate so rapidly that the matter in the young cosmos could never pull itself together to form stars and thence form the complex atoms made in stars. And, going into negative values of dark energy, a little less and the universe would decelerate so rapidly that it would recollapse before there was time to form even the simplest atoms. Here we have a clear example of fine-tuning: out of all the possible amounts of dark energy that our universe might have, the actual amount lies in the tiny sliver of the range that allows life. There is little argument on this point. It does not depend on assumptions about whether we need liquid water for life or oxygen or particular biochemistries. As before, one is compelled to ask the question: Why does such fine-tuning occur? "


The accidental universe: Science's crisis of faith
By Alan P. Lightman
The accidental universe: Science's crisis of faith?By Alan P. Lightman (Harper's Magazine)


A: Multiverse
 
As a child I saw the articulated skeletons of dinosaurs and was absolutely fascinated. As i matured, it occurred to me that there is a remarkable similarity in all vertebrate skeletons.

If i were an intelligent creator, I'd have changed it up a little. You know, like trucks and cars. maybe the really big animals have 4 hind legs and some of the birds have 4 legs and two wings.

The incredible consistency is, to me, proof that the various species evolved. Also consistency is the mark of mindlessness not the mark of creativity. Why do species reproduce the next generation very similarly to the previous? Why is there not a regularity of mutation consistent with a great and creative mind?

If there is a precise regularity that can be traced to a precise mechanism, that argues against a creative intelligence working on things with interest.

It's the difference between the Mona Lisa and the Model T.

ALTER2EGO -to- CODE1211:

If the animals evolved, as you claim, where's the evidence of this? The pro-evolution scientists have all admitted that the fossils (bones of long dead animals) is full of nothing but gaps. Gaps indicate there are no bones to connect one type of animal family/species with an entirely different type.
 
ALTER2EGO -to- EVERYONE:

AGRUMENT #1 FOR AN INTELLIGENT CREATOR:

For the average person, precision indicates that an intelligent person guided the outcome. According to Webster's New World College Dictionary, the word "precision" is defined as follows:


"the quality of being precise; exactness, accuracy"


The reverse of precision is an accident aka a spontaneous event that happen by chance with no one guiding the outcome. Webster’s New Collegiate Dictionary defines an accident as:

"a nonessential event that happens by chance and has undesirable or unfortunate results"


Scientific evidence shows there is extreme precision in everything around us in the natural world. This precision renders the evolution theory mere fiction, for precision leaves no room for error or for accidental events. Take, for example, the first discovered 60 elements on the Periodic Table of the Elements of planet earth. Some of these 60 elements are gases and are therefore invisible to the human eye. The atoms--from which the Earth's elements are made--are specifically related to one another. In turn, the elements--e.g. arsenic, bismuth, chromium, gold, krypton--reflect a distinct, natural numeral order based upon the structure of their atoms. This is a proven LAW.

The precision in the order of the elements made it possible for scientists such as Mendeleyev, Ramsey, Moseley, and Bohr to theorize the existence of unknown elements and their characteristics. These elements were later discovered, just as predicted. Because of the distinct numerical order of the elements, the word LAW is applied to the Periodic Table of the Elements. (Sources: (1) The McGraw-Hill Encyclopedia of Science & Technology, (2) "Periodic Law," from Encyclopædia Britannica, Vol. VII, p. 878, copyright 1978, (3) The Hutchinson Dictionary of Scientific Biography


SIDE NOTE: Laws found in nature, as defined by Webster's New World Dictionary, are:


"a sequence of events that have been observed to occur with UNVARYING UNIFORMITY under the same conditions."


QUESTIONS FOR DISCUSSION:
1.
Were it not for the precise relationship among the first 60 discovered elements on the Periodic Table, would scientists have been able to accurately predict the existence of forms of matter that at the time were unknown?

2. Could the precise law within the first 60 discovered elements (on the Periodic Table) have resulted by chance aka spontaneously aka by accident? Or is this evidence for the existence an intelligent Designer/God who guided the outcome?

3. Evolution relies upon things happening by chance aka at random. If evolution were a fact, how does it account for the Periodic Table of the Elements of planet earth in which the first 60 discovered elements are so precise, and so interrelated with one another, that it has been assigned the word "LAW"?



As a child I saw the articulated skeletons of dinosaurs and was absolutely fascinated. As i matured, it occurred to me that there is a remarkable similarity in all vertebrate skeletons.

If i were an intelligent creator, I'd have changed it up a little. You know, like trucks and cars. maybe the really big animals have 4 hind legs and some of the birds have 4 legs and two wings.

The incredible consistency is, to me, proof that the various species evolved. Also consistency is the mark of mindlessness not the mark of creativity. Why do species reproduce the next generation very similarly to the previous? Why is there not a regularity of mutation consistent with a great and creative mind?

If there is a precise regularity that can be traced to a precise mechanism, that argues against a creative intelligence working on things with interest.

It's the difference between the Mona Lisa and the Model T.

"If i were an intelligent creator, I'd have changed it up a little."

Here's a little change that might have escaped your perusal.....

Sir John Maddox, editor emeritus of the foremost journal of science, Nature, wrote in a classic Time magazine essay, “How the brain manages to think is a conundrum with a millennial time scale. All animals have brains so as to be able to move about. Signals from the senses- eyes, ears, nostrils, or skin, as the case may be- send messages to the spinal cord, which moves the limbs appropriately. But thinking involves the consideration of alternative responses, many of which have not been experienced but have been merely imagined. The faculty of being conscious of what is going on in the head is an extra puzzle.” (“Thinking,” March 29, 1999, p. 206)



As you know, I have great respect for you, but I'm having trouble "connecting the dots" from what I said to what you said.
 
Last edited:
ALTER2EGO -to- EVERYONE:

AGRUMENT #1 FOR AN INTELLIGENT CREATOR:

For the average person, precision indicates that an intelligent person guided the outcome. According to Webster's New World College Dictionary, the word "precision" is defined as follows:


"the quality of being precise; exactness, accuracy"


The reverse of precision is an accident aka a spontaneous event that happen by chance with no one guiding the outcome. Webster’s New Collegiate Dictionary defines an accident as:

"a nonessential event that happens by chance and has undesirable or unfortunate results"


Scientific evidence shows there is extreme precision in everything around us in the natural world. This precision renders the evolution theory mere fiction, for precision leaves no room for error or for accidental events. Take, for example, the first discovered 60 elements on the Periodic Table of the Elements of planet earth. Some of these 60 elements are gases and are therefore invisible to the human eye. The atoms--from which the Earth's elements are made--are specifically related to one another. In turn, the elements--e.g. arsenic, bismuth, chromium, gold, krypton--reflect a distinct, natural numeral order based upon the structure of their atoms. This is a proven LAW.

The precision in the order of the elements made it possible for scientists such as Mendeleyev, Ramsey, Moseley, and Bohr to theorize the existence of unknown elements and their characteristics. These elements were later discovered, just as predicted. Because of the distinct numerical order of the elements, the word LAW is applied to the Periodic Table of the Elements. (Sources: (1) The McGraw-Hill Encyclopedia of Science & Technology, (2) "Periodic Law," from Encyclopædia Britannica, Vol. VII, p. 878, copyright 1978, (3) The Hutchinson Dictionary of Scientific Biography


SIDE NOTE: Laws found in nature, as defined by Webster's New World Dictionary, are:


"a sequence of events that have been observed to occur with UNVARYING UNIFORMITY under the same conditions."


QUESTIONS FOR DISCUSSION:
1.
Were it not for the precise relationship among the first 60 discovered elements on the Periodic Table, would scientists have been able to accurately predict the existence of forms of matter that at the time were unknown?

2. Could the precise law within the first 60 discovered elements (on the Periodic Table) have resulted by chance aka spontaneously aka by accident? Or is this evidence for the existence an intelligent Designer/God who guided the outcome?

3. Evolution relies upon things happening by chance aka at random. If evolution were a fact, how does it account for the Periodic Table of the Elements of planet earth in which the first 60 discovered elements are so precise, and so interrelated with one another, that it has been assigned the word "LAW"?

I recommend the Harper's article, by a physicist and a professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, that is highly supportive of your position:

In part:
"On one thing most physicists agree: If the amount of dark energy in our universe were only a little bit different than what it actually is, then life could never have emerged. A little more and the universe would accelerate so rapidly that the matter in the young cosmos could never pull itself together to form stars and thence form the complex atoms made in stars. And, going into negative values of dark energy, a little less and the universe would decelerate so rapidly that it would recollapse before there was time to form even the simplest atoms. Here we have a clear example of fine-tuning: out of all the possible amounts of dark energy that our universe might have, the actual amount lies in the tiny sliver of the range that allows life. There is little argument on this point. It does not depend on assumptions about whether we need liquid water for life or oxygen or particular biochemistries. As before, one is compelled to ask the question: Why does such fine-tuning occur? "


The accidental universe: Science's crisis of faith
By Alan P. Lightman
The accidental universe: Science's crisis of faith?By Alan P. Lightman (Harper's Magazine)


A: Multiverse

Thank's for falling into a little trap I set.....

I suspect that you don't understand what the "multiverse concept" implies: all of the 'facts' of science are no longer 'facts.'


The concept was made up by dolts who were afraid of what the 'fine-tuned universe' implies.

And accepted by other dolts.

Shoe fit?


From chapter seven of Berlinski's "The Devil's Delusion,"...

"Dawkins, among others, has embraced the ‘multiverse,’ [the Landscape] idea, that there could be an infinite number of universes, each with some permutation of the natural laws of physics, vastly different from ours. Why, then, scruple at the Deity? After all, the theologian need only apply to a single God and a single universe. Dawkins must appeal to infinitely many universes crammed with laws of nature wriggling indiscreetly and fundamental physical parameters changing as one travels the cosmos. And- the entire gargantuan structure scientifically unobservable and devoid of any connection to expericnce.

Now, get this: Dawkins actually writes, “The key difference between the radically extravagant God hypothesis and the apparently extravagant multiverse hypothesis, is one of statistical improbability.”


Didn't understand what a mistake it was to write "A: Multiverse" did ya'?


What say you?
 
As a child I saw the articulated skeletons of dinosaurs and was absolutely fascinated. As i matured, it occurred to me that there is a remarkable similarity in all vertebrate skeletons.

If i were an intelligent creator, I'd have changed it up a little. You know, like trucks and cars. maybe the really big animals have 4 hind legs and some of the birds have 4 legs and two wings.

The incredible consistency is, to me, proof that the various species evolved. Also consistency is the mark of mindlessness not the mark of creativity. Why do species reproduce the next generation very similarly to the previous? Why is there not a regularity of mutation consistent with a great and creative mind?

If there is a precise regularity that can be traced to a precise mechanism, that argues against a creative intelligence working on things with interest.

It's the difference between the Mona Lisa and the Model T.

"If i were an intelligent creator, I'd have changed it up a little."

Here's a little change that might have escaped your perusal.....

Sir John Maddox, editor emeritus of the foremost journal of science, Nature, wrote in a classic Time magazine essay, “How the brain manages to think is a conundrum with a millennial time scale. All animals have brains so as to be able to move about. Signals from the senses- eyes, ears, nostrils, or skin, as the case may be- send messages to the spinal cord, which moves the limbs appropriately. But thinking involves the consideration of alternative responses, many of which have not been experienced but have been merely imagined. The faculty of being conscious of what is going on in the head is an extra puzzle.” (“Thinking,” March 29, 1999, p. 206)



As you know, I have great respect for you, but I'm hang trouble "connecting the dots" from what I said to what you said.

I appreciate that code....hope I wasn't too harsh.

My point is the thinking that humans are capable of in found nowhere else in the biosphere.

1. "Man is virtually defined by creativity—in manufacturing, art, literature, music, humor, and virtually every other field of activity.

2. Only man has the ability to create pictures in the mind and then manipulate materials from the earth to bring into reality what was imagined. Imagination ignites creativity and gives the human mind its uniqueness. It is imagination that opens the door for us to meditate on our origins and our destiny.

3. …humans are the only creatures on Earth that are truly creative. Don’t be fooled by discussions of spiders’ webs or song thrush nests. Man is the only being that can imagine and then bring into existence what he imagines, whether architecture, art, literature, mechanical inventions, music or sculpture. Creativity is a highly advanced mental process that involves dreaming or imagination, development and innovation. Let’s be honest: No other creature—ape, chimp, bird, dog or dolphin—can create.

The Mystery of Human Creativity Explained - theTrumpet.com by the Philadelphia Church of God


I don't know if you've seen the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel...but when you do, look closely at the shape of the 'cloud' on which God rests as he reached out to Adam....
...it is the shape of a cerebrum
It is the give of thought that makes us different.
 
As a child I saw the articulated skeletons of dinosaurs and was absolutely fascinated. As i matured, it occurred to me that there is a remarkable similarity in all vertebrate skeletons.

If i were an intelligent creator, I'd have changed it up a little. You know, like trucks and cars. maybe the really big animals have 4 hind legs and some of the birds have 4 legs and two wings.

The incredible consistency is, to me, proof that the various species evolved. Also consistency is the mark of mindlessness not the mark of creativity. Why do species reproduce the next generation very similarly to the previous? Why is there not a regularity of mutation consistent with a great and creative mind?

If there is a precise regularity that can be traced to a precise mechanism, that argues against a creative intelligence working on things with interest.

It's the difference between the Mona Lisa and the Model T.

ALTER2EGO -to- CODE1211:

If the animals evolved, as you claim, where's the evidence of this? The pro-evolution scientists have all admitted that the fossils (bones of long dead animals) is full of nothing but gaps. Gaps indicate there are no bones to connect one type of animal family/species with an entirely different type.




You reference to this admission relates to the Scientific certainty level which is far beyond the normal standard of human understanding. If you have seen the TV series, "Bones", you have seen skeletal remains of the various victims on the Dr.'s table as she divines the cause of death.

If you were to lay the bones of chimps, gorillas, squirrels, cats, dogs and all the animals with spines on the table in the same way and this goes all the way back to the dinosaurs, you can find pretty much the same set of bones in each of these animals with few departures.

Why are there none with two spines? Why are there alway four appendages? What's the deal with seven holes in the skull? Why not four eyes or two mouths or four nostrils?

I am not arguing against the existence of God. I'm just observing the world around me as He gave me the sense and the senses to do and concluding that He is not as interested in the development of the species as the philosophers who explain His existence (isn't that just a tad patronizing) to the Great Unwashed.

As far as the evidence of Evolution, it is all around us and the mechanisms for it are being exposed and are being used on a daily basis as Corn is being made into hybrids and thoroughbreds are being raised to run races and dogs are being bred to win shows or hunt ducks.

If you have ever looked at a baby and said he has his mother's nose, you are witnessing evolution.

Because of all of this evidence, empirical and relayed, it is really incumbent on the ID folks to justify your position with something better than "it's because I read it" in a book documenting stories from the Stone Age.

Again this is not an attack on your religion or your beliefs. You are welcome to them, but converting me to your understanding of things will require a bit more logic.
 
Last edited:
ALTER2EGO -to- CODE1211:

If the animals evolved, as you claim, where's the evidence of this? The pro-evolution scientists have all admitted that the fossils (bones of long dead animals) is full of nothing but gaps. Gaps indicate there are no bones to connect one type of animal family/species with an entirely different type.
Your Masters masters come by here now and again and do some DNA altering, when necessary. Guess what's next on that list ? Hint: seven billion.:eusa_shhh:
 
As a child I saw the articulated skeletons of dinosaurs and was absolutely fascinated. As i matured, it occurred to me that there is a remarkable similarity in all vertebrate skeletons.

If i were an intelligent creator, I'd have changed it up a little. You know, like trucks and cars. maybe the really big animals have 4 hind legs and some of the birds have 4 legs and two wings.

The incredible consistency is, to me, proof that the various species evolved. Also consistency is the mark of mindlessness not the mark of creativity. Why do species reproduce the next generation very similarly to the previous? Why is there not a regularity of mutation consistent with a great and creative mind?

If there is a precise regularity that can be traced to a precise mechanism, that argues against a creative intelligence working on things with interest.

It's the difference between the Mona Lisa and the Model T.

ALTER2EGO -to- CODE1211:

If the animals evolved, as you claim, where's the evidence of this? The pro-evolution scientists have all admitted that the fossils (bones of long dead animals) is full of nothing but gaps. Gaps indicate there are no bones to connect one type of animal family/species with an entirely different type.




You reference to this admission relates to the Scientific certainty level which is far beyond the normal standard of human understanding. If you have seen the TV series, "Bones", you have seen skeletal remains of the various victims on the Dr.'s table as she divines the cause of death.

If you were to lay the bones of chimps, gorillas, squirrels, cats, dogs and all the animals with spines on the table in the same way and this goes all the way back to the dinosaurs, you can find pretty much the same set of bones in each of these animals with few departures.

Why are there none with two spines? Why are there alway four appendages? What's the deal with seven holes in the skull? Why not four eyes or two mouths or four nostrils?

I am not arguing against the existence of God. I'm just observing the world around me as He game me the sense and the senses to do and concluding that He is not as interested in the development of the species as the philosophers who explain His existence (isn't that just a tad patronizing) to the Great Unwashed.

As far as the evidence of Evolution, it is all around us and the mechanisms for it are being exposed and are being used on a daily basis as Corn is being made into hybrids and thoroughbreds are being raised to run races and dogs are being bred to win shows or hunt ducks.

If you have ever looked at a baby and said he has his mother's nose, you are witnessing evolution.

Because of all of this evidence, empirical and relayed, it is really incumbent on the ID folks to justify your position with something better than "it's because I read it" in a book documenting stories from the Stone Age.

Again this is not an attack on your religion or your beliefs. You are welcome to them, but converting me to your understanding of things will require a bit more logic.

There are no laboratory demonstrations of speciation, millions of fruit flies coming and going while never once suggesting that they were destined to appear as anything other than fruit flies.

More than six thousand years of breeding and artificial selection, barnyard and backyard, have never induced a chicken to lay a square egg or persuade a pig to develop wheels on ball bearing.

"In a research survey published in 2001, the evolutionary biologist Joel Kingsolver reported that in sample sizes of more than one thousand individuals, there was virtually no correlation between specific biological traits and either reproductive success or survival. “Important issues about selection,” he remarked with some understatement, “remain unresolved.”

Of these important issues, I would mention prominently the question of whether natural selection exists at all. Computer simulations of Darwinian evolution fail when they are honest and succeed only when they are not. Thomas Ray has for years been conducting computer experiments in an artificial environment that he has designated Tierra. . . . Sandra Blakeslee, writing for the New York Times, reported the results under the headline “Computer ‘Life Form’ Mutates in an Evolution Experiment: Natural Selection Is Found at Work in a Digital World.”

So, this is natural selection at work? Blakeslee observes, with solemn incomprehension, “the creatures mutated but showed only modest increases in complexity.” Which is to say, they showed nothing of interest at all. This is natural selection at work, but it is hardly work that has worked to intended effect.

What these computer experiments do reveal is a principle far more penetrating than any that Darwin ever offered:
There is a sucker born every minute."

The above from Berlinski's "Devil's Delusion," p. 189-190
 
"If i were an intelligent creator, I'd have changed it up a little."

Here's a little change that might have escaped your perusal.....

Sir John Maddox, editor emeritus of the foremost journal of science, Nature, wrote in a classic Time magazine essay, “How the brain manages to think is a conundrum with a millennial time scale. All animals have brains so as to be able to move about. Signals from the senses- eyes, ears, nostrils, or skin, as the case may be- send messages to the spinal cord, which moves the limbs appropriately. But thinking involves the consideration of alternative responses, many of which have not been experienced but have been merely imagined. The faculty of being conscious of what is going on in the head is an extra puzzle.” (“Thinking,” March 29, 1999, p. 206)



As you know, I have great respect for you, but I'm hang trouble "connecting the dots" from what I said to what you said.

I appreciate that code....hope I wasn't too harsh.

My point is the thinking that humans are capable of in found nowhere else in the biosphere.

1. "Man is virtually defined by creativity—in manufacturing, art, literature, music, humor, and virtually every other field of activity.

2. Only man has the ability to create pictures in the mind and then manipulate materials from the earth to bring into reality what was imagined. Imagination ignites creativity and gives the human mind its uniqueness. It is imagination that opens the door for us to meditate on our origins and our destiny.

3. …humans are the only creatures on Earth that are truly creative. Don’t be fooled by discussions of spiders’ webs or song thrush nests. Man is the only being that can imagine and then bring into existence what he imagines, whether architecture, art, literature, mechanical inventions, music or sculpture. Creativity is a highly advanced mental process that involves dreaming or imagination, development and innovation. Let’s be honest: No other creature—ape, chimp, bird, dog or dolphin—can create.

The Mystery of Human Creativity Explained - theTrumpet.com by the Philadelphia Church of God


I don't know if you've seen the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel...but when you do, look closely at the shape of the 'cloud' on which God rests as he reached out to Adam....
...it is the shape of a cerebrum
It is the give of thought that makes us different.



Okay. There are at least four concepts that we have included here:

Evolution
Intelligent Design
Human creativity and
Exclusive ownership on Earth of creativity among animals.

I don't see how the existence of the frontal lobes on our brains excludes the possibility of evolution.

Man's creativity neither endorses nor denies the possibility of either evolution or intelligent design.

Human creativity is awesome in its accomplishment and impressive in its daily application, but again this neither endorses nor denies either evolution or ID.

Other animals do create and use things. There is a monkey/gorilla kind of a thing that uses a stick to reach into an ant hill, extract ants and eat them. That stick is a tool. Certainly not a wrench or a saw, but a tool nonetheless. If you've seen a dog asleep huffing and moving its legs, that's a dream it's having. That is abstract thought and that is higher thinking.

Pets can be happy, scared, sad or worried. Again, this is easily discounted as not human thought, but, really, it's thought about on the level of a 2 or 3 year old human.

I'm not anticipating the beagle that can paint the Sistine Chapel Ceiling, but do not see this as proof of intelligent design.

Indeed, if intelligent Design requires proof, doesn't that pretty much undermine the whole concept of Faith?

"If you would know God, be not, therefore, a solver of riddles." -Gibran
 
"If i were an intelligent creator, I'd have changed it up a little."

Here's a little change that might have escaped your perusal.....

Sir John Maddox, editor emeritus of the foremost journal of science, Nature, wrote in a classic Time magazine essay, “How the brain manages to think is a conundrum with a millennial time scale. All animals have brains so as to be able to move about. Signals from the senses- eyes, ears, nostrils, or skin, as the case may be- send messages to the spinal cord, which moves the limbs appropriately. But thinking involves the consideration of alternative responses, many of which have not been experienced but have been merely imagined. The faculty of being conscious of what is going on in the head is an extra puzzle.” (“Thinking,” March 29, 1999, p. 206)



As you know, I have great respect for you, but I'm hang trouble "connecting the dots" from what I said to what you said.

I appreciate that code....hope I wasn't too harsh.

My point is the thinking that humans are capable of in found nowhere else in the biosphere.

1. "Man is virtually defined by creativity—in manufacturing, art, literature, music, humor, and virtually every other field of activity.

2. Only man has the ability to create pictures in the mind and then manipulate materials from the earth to bring into reality what was imagined. Imagination ignites creativity and gives the human mind its uniqueness. It is imagination that opens the door for us to meditate on our origins and our destiny.

3. …humans are the only creatures on Earth that are truly creative. Don’t be fooled by discussions of spiders’ webs or song thrush nests. Man is the only being that can imagine and then bring into existence what he imagines, whether architecture, art, literature, mechanical inventions, music or sculpture. Creativity is a highly advanced mental process that involves dreaming or imagination, development and innovation. Let’s be honest: No other creature—ape, chimp, bird, dog or dolphin—can create.

The Mystery of Human Creativity Explained - theTrumpet.com by the Philadelphia Church of God


I don't know if you've seen the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel...but when you do, look closely at the shape of the 'cloud' on which God rests as he reached out to Adam....
...it is the shape of a cerebrum
It is the give of thought that makes us different.

To say this is demonstrates the arrogance of humanity, unless of course, you have experiential knowledge of what it is like to walk in the footprints of and/or swim in the skin of ALL other species.

This is NOT our planet - unless by 'our' you mean ALL known life.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/religion-and-ethics/209414-a-good-reason-to-save-the-whales.html
 
Last edited:
ALTER2EGO -to- CODE1211:

If the animals evolved, as you claim, where's the evidence of this? The pro-evolution scientists have all admitted that the fossils (bones of long dead animals) is full of nothing but gaps. Gaps indicate there are no bones to connect one type of animal family/species with an entirely different type.




You reference to this admission relates to the Scientific certainty level which is far beyond the normal standard of human understanding. If you have seen the TV series, "Bones", you have seen skeletal remains of the various victims on the Dr.'s table as she divines the cause of death.

If you were to lay the bones of chimps, gorillas, squirrels, cats, dogs and all the animals with spines on the table in the same way and this goes all the way back to the dinosaurs, you can find pretty much the same set of bones in each of these animals with few departures.

Why are there none with two spines? Why are there alway four appendages? What's the deal with seven holes in the skull? Why not four eyes or two mouths or four nostrils?

I am not arguing against the existence of God. I'm just observing the world around me as He game me the sense and the senses to do and concluding that He is not as interested in the development of the species as the philosophers who explain His existence (isn't that just a tad patronizing) to the Great Unwashed.

As far as the evidence of Evolution, it is all around us and the mechanisms for it are being exposed and are being used on a daily basis as Corn is being made into hybrids and thoroughbreds are being raised to run races and dogs are being bred to win shows or hunt ducks.

If you have ever looked at a baby and said he has his mother's nose, you are witnessing evolution.

Because of all of this evidence, empirical and relayed, it is really incumbent on the ID folks to justify your position with something better than "it's because I read it" in a book documenting stories from the Stone Age.

Again this is not an attack on your religion or your beliefs. You are welcome to them, but converting me to your understanding of things will require a bit more logic.

There are no laboratory demonstrations of speciation, millions of fruit flies coming and going while never once suggesting that they were destined to appear as anything other than fruit flies.

More than six thousand years of breeding and artificial selection, barnyard and backyard, have never induced a chicken to lay a square egg or persuade a pig to develop wheels on ball bearing.

"In a research survey published in 2001, the evolutionary biologist Joel Kingsolver reported that in sample sizes of more than one thousand individuals, there was virtually no correlation between specific biological traits and either reproductive success or survival. “Important issues about selection,” he remarked with some understatement, “remain unresolved.”

Of these important issues, I would mention prominently the question of whether natural selection exists at all. Computer simulations of Darwinian evolution fail when they are honest and succeed only when they are not. Thomas Ray has for years been conducting computer experiments in an artificial environment that he has designated Tierra. . . . Sandra Blakeslee, writing for the New York Times, reported the results under the headline “Computer ‘Life Form’ Mutates in an Evolution Experiment: Natural Selection Is Found at Work in a Digital World.”

So, this is natural selection at work? Blakeslee observes, with solemn incomprehension, “the creatures mutated but showed only modest increases in complexity.” Which is to say, they showed nothing of interest at all. This is natural selection at work, but it is hardly work that has worked to intended effect.

What these computer experiments do reveal is a principle far more penetrating than any that Darwin ever offered:
There is a sucker born every minute."

The above from Berlinski's "Devil's Delusion," p. 189-190




And yet, as a species, we are taller than we used to be. There are far more breeds of dogs today then there were in the days of Henry VIII. Corn has been developed that grows better with less water.

The Tyrannosaurus Rex has essentially the same bones that I do. Also the same as a chicken or a pig. We all also have brains of various sizes, brain buckets to keep them in, rib cages that protect lungs, blood that's pretty much like sea water, nutrition intakes and waste egress sphincters that all work about the same way and eyes, ears nose and mouth.

This is startling consistency across millions of years of ups and downs, climate changes, land mass moves and an atmosphere that has changed from one that could not support human life to the one we have today.

All of the life on earth shares one trait that is the signature of life and that is DNA. A single sell animal has DNA. There are about 10 trillion cells in a human being and every single cell used to construct us has DNA. A bit redundant for intelligent design, no?

If life evolved from single cell creatures, this redundancy would make sense. If not, then what's this all about? Either Evolution or a divine Creator could have guided this process or a divine Creator could have just built it like a really neat clock, wound it up and walked away.

Simply citing the existence of what is does not define what created it.
 
If the animals evolved, as you claim, where's the evidence of this? The pro-evolution scientists have all admitted that the fossils (bones of long dead animals) is full of nothing but gaps. Gaps indicate there are no bones to connect one type of animal family/species with an entirely different type.

Gaps aren't proof of anything, except that not all fossils have been, will be or can be found. You're also mixing up several lines of inquiry. Is this about evolution, ID or the origin of the universe?
 
You reference to this admission relates to the Scientific certainty level which is far beyond the normal standard of human understanding. If you have seen the TV series, "Bones", you have seen skeletal remains of the various victims on the Dr.'s table as she divines the cause of death.

If you were to lay the bones of chimps, gorillas, squirrels, cats, dogs and all the animals with spines on the table in the same way and this goes all the way back to the dinosaurs, you can find pretty much the same set of bones in each of these animals with few departures.

Why are there none with two spines? Why are there alway four appendages? What's the deal with seven holes in the skull? Why not four eyes or two mouths or four nostrils?

I am not arguing against the existence of God. I'm just observing the world around me as He game me the sense and the senses to do and concluding that He is not as interested in the development of the species as the philosophers who explain His existence (isn't that just a tad patronizing) to the Great Unwashed.

As far as the evidence of Evolution, it is all around us and the mechanisms for it are being exposed and are being used on a daily basis as Corn is being made into hybrids and thoroughbreds are being raised to run races and dogs are being bred to win shows or hunt ducks.

If you have ever looked at a baby and said he has his mother's nose, you are witnessing evolution.

Because of all of this evidence, empirical and relayed, it is really incumbent on the ID folks to justify your position with something better than "it's because I read it" in a book documenting stories from the Stone Age.

Again this is not an attack on your religion or your beliefs. You are welcome to them, but converting me to your understanding of things will require a bit more logic.

There are no laboratory demonstrations of speciation, millions of fruit flies coming and going while never once suggesting that they were destined to appear as anything other than fruit flies.

More than six thousand years of breeding and artificial selection, barnyard and backyard, have never induced a chicken to lay a square egg or persuade a pig to develop wheels on ball bearing.

"In a research survey published in 2001, the evolutionary biologist Joel Kingsolver reported that in sample sizes of more than one thousand individuals, there was virtually no correlation between specific biological traits and either reproductive success or survival. “Important issues about selection,” he remarked with some understatement, “remain unresolved.”

Of these important issues, I would mention prominently the question of whether natural selection exists at all. Computer simulations of Darwinian evolution fail when they are honest and succeed only when they are not. Thomas Ray has for years been conducting computer experiments in an artificial environment that he has designated Tierra. . . . Sandra Blakeslee, writing for the New York Times, reported the results under the headline “Computer ‘Life Form’ Mutates in an Evolution Experiment: Natural Selection Is Found at Work in a Digital World.”

So, this is natural selection at work? Blakeslee observes, with solemn incomprehension, “the creatures mutated but showed only modest increases in complexity.” Which is to say, they showed nothing of interest at all. This is natural selection at work, but it is hardly work that has worked to intended effect.

What these computer experiments do reveal is a principle far more penetrating than any that Darwin ever offered:
There is a sucker born every minute."

The above from Berlinski's "Devil's Delusion," p. 189-190




And yet, as a species, we are taller than we used to be. There are far more breeds of dogs today then there were in the days of Henry VIII. Corn has been developed that grows better with less water.

The Tyrannosaurus Rex has essentially the same bones that I do. Also the same as a chicken or a pig. We all also have brains of various sizes, brain buckets to keep them in, rib cages that protect lungs, blood that's pretty much like sea water, nutrition intakes and waste egress sphincters that all work about the same way and eyes, ears nose and mouth.

This is startling consistency across millions of years of ups and downs, climate changes, land mass moves and an atmosphere that has changed from one that could not support human life to the one we have today.

All of the life on earth shares one trait that is the signature of life and that is DNA. A single sell animal has DNA. There are about 10 trillion cells in a human being and every single cell used to construct us has DNA. A bit redundant for intelligent design, no?

If life evolved from single cell creatures, this redundancy would make sense. If not, then what's this all about? Either Evolution or a divine Creator could have guided this process or a divine Creator could have just built it like a really neat clock, wound it up and walked away.

Simply citing the existence of what is does not define what created it.

1. "...as a species,..."

Not different species.....That is what is required for the theory of evolution.


2. "Simply citing the existence of what is does not define what created it."

I'm not ready to do that, simply point out that, while there is very limited empirical evidence for the theory of evolution, it requires faith as much as theology does.

On the other hand, the is a great deal of evidence that secular philosophies require a disbelief in religion, and the theory of evolution is a very successful strategy.


3. "All of the life on earth shares one trait that is the signature of life and that is DNA. A single sell animal has DNA....this redundancy would make sense."

This is no more proof of the theory of evolution, than that a Creator produced all based on a similar plan.

You are demanding that the plan be of a particular form, i.e., each individual organism be totally different from all the others.
Why?
Is there some religious text or doctrine which states so?
Religious folks don't dictate what God should do....merely suggest what God can do.

4. My point in all of these and similar threads, is that each of us may choose to believe as one wishes....just don't deny that faith is the basis for both schools of thought.

a. A common example is string theory...
"String theory is an active research framework in particle physics that attempts to reconcile quantum mechanics and general relativity. It is a contender for a theory of everything (TOE), a self-contained mathematical model that describes all fundamental forces and forms of matter."
String theory - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

At one time it was the Holy Grail of physics...excuse the reference....today most who understand it admit that it is all hypothetical calculations not testable....only exists as a bunch of equations with no testable predictions. If science is based on experiment, observation, and empirical knowledge, then it isn’t science.

Faith.

b. Did you note a previous post that suggested a 'multiverse'?
Same thing.

c. The latest hope of the secular scientific community is called the 'God Particle.'
A 40 year search for another way to attack religion.
You should look into it....you'll find it interesting.


Belief in God? Belief in science as your religion?
Your choice.
 
If the animals evolved, as you claim, where's the evidence of this? The pro-evolution scientists have all admitted that the fossils (bones of long dead animals) is full of nothing but gaps. Gaps indicate there are no bones to connect one type of animal family/species with an entirely different type.

Gaps aren't proof of anything, except that not all fossils have been, will be or can be found. You're also mixing up several lines of inquiry. Is this about evolution, ID or the origin of the universe?

1. The fossil record can be used to justify just about any position. There are long eras in which nothing happens: no indicia of ‘evolution.’ Then, suddenly…observable changes! Now get this: a detailed and continuous record of transition between species is missing. Those neat sedimentary layers never revealing precisely the phenomena that Darwin proposed to explain.

a. David B. Kitts, evolutionist and paleontologist,: "Despite the bright promise that paleontology provides a means of 'seeing' evolution, it has presented some nasty difficulties for evolutionists the most notorious of which is the presence of 'gaps' in the fossil record. Evolution requires intermediate forms between species and paleontology does not provide them." (“Evolution, 28:467)

b. "We are now about 120 years after Darwin and the knowledge of the fossil record has been greatly expanded. We now have a quarter of a million fossil species but the situation hasn't changed much -- ironically, we have even fewer examples of evolutionary transition than we had in Darwin's time. By this I mean that some of the classic cases of Darwinian change in the fossil record such as the evolution of the horse in North America, have had to be discarded or modified as a result of more detailed information." (Field Museum of Natural History Bulletin, Chicago, 50:22-29)
 
Precision in nature is evidenced by the Divine Proportion. In math, it's the Golden Ratio, endlessly repeated in the positioning of flowers, fish, shells, and people. Not only is the Golden Ratio repeated with absolute precision in nature, but human beings come preprogrammed to recognize the Golden Ratio as beautiful. There is nothing random in nature. Even someone convinced of random evolution has got to find this curious.

On the other hand, while there are gaps in the evolution of some animals, this does not happen with birds who have the exact same skeletal construction as their dinosaur ancestors. The scale patterns evidenced by fossilized dinosaurs are repeated in the feather patterns of our flight birds.

In the movie Jurassic Park, the models used for the raptors were modern day Cassowaries who have the same construction and movement as the raptors. Incidentally, the Cassowaries used are owned by a doctor who maintains an animal preserve in Florida.
 

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top