Scientific evidence for a creator.

[Magnificat]

Each cell in our bodies contains thousands of gene regulatory networks. These networks are responsible the regulation of gene expression, among other things, required for life to exist. They are all part of a meta network in which they pass information to where it is needed. They use logical operators, as well as databases to perform their functions. This network is so complex that scientists have barely scratched the surface in understanding them. If any part of this vast Network was missing or damaged, the cell would not operate as it should, causing disease or even death. There is no scientific explanation as to how or why this network exists. It is impossible for evolution to be the answer since every component must be in place at the same instant in order to function. You cannot have a partial network. The only way it could possibly exist is if it was created all at the same time. Prove me wrong.

Dear Magnificat
This doesn't rule out the model that the Universe was always self-existent, and has always been in place. And changes developed within the structure and laws already existing.

God can either be interpreted to be a SOURCE or a CREATOR of all things.

Or God can be equated with the entire UNIVERSE or CREATION including the laws within it, where it is impersonal and all encompassing, self-existent and self-defining.

Either way, the concept of God's laws/truth or
UNIVERSAL laws/truth collective remain the same under
BOTH constructs or models of looking at the world.

This does NOT require believing in a PERSONIFIED being,
entity or source like an "author or creator of life".

God can be LIFE itself, or NATURE, if taken to be self-existent
and eternal, with no beginning or no end, just BEING.

The universe cannot be eternally self existent. It's a scientific impossibility. It had a beginning. It could not have created itself, so someone must have created it.

 

[Magnificat]

Still waiting for someone to prove me wrong. Perhaps you could begin by providing one of the many gene regulatory networks we could live without. If you could do this, you might be on the right track to proving me wrong.

There are organisms with very simple systems. Ours are much more complex, but that does not mean all life forms are so complex.

It doesn't matter how complex it is. A partial network cannot function. Therefore it is impossible for it to have evolved.

 

[rightwinger]

Still waiting for someone to prove me wrong. Perhaps you could begin by providing one of the many gene regulatory networks we could live without. If you could do this, you might be on the right track to proving me wrong.

There are organisms with very simple systems. Ours are much more complex, but that does not mean all life forms are so complex.

It doesn't matter how complex it is. A partial network cannot function. Therefore it is impossible for it to have evolved.

Really

Who says a partial network cannot function?
How does it function in less complex creatures?
How does it function in the womb?

 

[Magnificat]

Each cell in our bodies contains thousands of gene regulatory networks. These networks are responsible the regulation of gene expression, among other things, required for life to exist. They are all part of a meta network in which they pass information to where it is needed. They use logical operators, as well as databases to perform their functions. This network is so complex that scientists have barely scratched the surface in understanding them. If any part of this vast Network was missing or damaged, the cell would not operate as it should, causing disease or even death. There is no scientific explanation as to how or why this network exists. It is impossible for evolution to be the answer since every component must be in place at the same instant in order to function. You cannot have a partial network. The only way it could possibly exist is if it was created all at the same time. Prove me wrong.

This fails as an appeal to ignorance fallacy.

That a question has yet to be resolved through science and research doesn’t mean ‘god’ is the answer.

It's not a fallacy. Something that complex cannot evolve over time. These grn's are responsible for life. How could they evolve unless they were part of a living organism? It's a catch-22. It's like trying to run a computer without an OS. Life cannot exist without gene regulatory networks. Yet those same networks would require a living host in order to evolve. Think about that.

 

[rightwinger]

Each cell in our bodies contains thousands of gene regulatory networks. These networks are responsible the regulation of gene expression, among other things, required for life to exist. They are all part of a meta network in which they pass information to where it is needed. They use logical operators, as well as databases to perform their functions. This network is so complex that scientists have barely scratched the surface in understanding them. If any part of this vast Network was missing or damaged, the cell would not operate as it should, causing disease or even death. There is no scientific explanation as to how or why this network exists. It is impossible for evolution to be the answer since every component must be in place at the same instant in order to function. You cannot have a partial network. The only way it could possibly exist is if it was created all at the same time. Prove me wrong.

This fails as an appeal to ignorance fallacy.

That a question has yet to be resolved through science and research doesn’t mean ‘god’ is the answer.

It's not a fallacy. Something that complex cannot evolve over time. These grn's are responsible for life. How could they evolve unless they were part of a living organism? It's a catch-22. It's like trying to run a computer without an OS. Life cannot exist without gene regulatory networks. Yet those same networks would require a living host in order to evolve. Think about that.

Who says it can’t evolve over time?

Do simple organisms have gene regulatory networks?
Are they identical to humans?

 

[there4eyeM]

Each cell in our bodies contains thousands of gene regulatory networks. These networks are responsible the regulation of gene expression, among other things, required for life to exist. They are all part of a meta network in which they pass information to where it is needed. They use logical operators, as well as databases to perform their functions. This network is so complex that scientists have barely scratched the surface in understanding them. If any part of this vast Network was missing or damaged, the cell would not operate as it should, causing disease or even death. There is no scientific explanation as to how or why this network exists. It is impossible for evolution to be the answer since every component must be in place at the same instant in order to function. You cannot have a partial network. The only way it could possibly exist is if it was created all at the same time. Prove me wrong.

This all only proves that the system exists. How it came to exist is speculation on the part of only partially informed persons.
Anyone who has seriously considered the immensity and complexity of the entire universe cannot but wonder how we humble humans can be so pretentious as to insist on an interpretation of what is behind it all.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Lol! Specious?

Yes, specious. Scientists are not the least bothered by this argument, and you can easily find layman's explanations for why it is a specious bit of nonsense.

A good start is understanding the principle of selection and its results. Systems that don't work dont persist. Thats what selection does. Life is fine tuned to its surroundings, not the other way around.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

The universe cannot be eternally self existent. It's a scientific impossibility.

Wrong. That's a creationist canard. It most certainly is not an impossibility.

 

[Magnificat]

Lol! Specious?

Yes, specious. Scientists are not the least bothered by this argument, and you can easily find layman's explanations for why it is a specious bit of nonsense.

A good start is understanding the principle of selection and its results. Systems that don't work dont persist. Thats what selection does. Life is fine tuned to its surroundings, not the other way around.

Lol! You just supported my argument. You said that systems that don't work don't persist. A partial gene regulatory network won't work. Yet There they are.

 

[Third Party]

The meta network evolves as creatures become more complex

Prove it.

Evolution is a FACT
God is a THEORY

What if God evolved-would he then be a fact?

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

A partial gene regulatory network won't work.

"Partial"? You are making stuff up. And all that matters is that genetic information is passed.

 

[Magnificat]

The universe cannot be eternally self existent. It's a scientific impossibility.

Wrong. That's a creationist canard. It most certainly is not an impossibility.

No. It isn't. If the universe stretches back into infinity, then all of the energy would be gone since there is not an infinite supply of energy. Also, if there was an infinite number of yesterdays, tomorrow would never get here. The universe had a beginning. Only a fool would believe otherwise.

 

[Magnificat]

A partial gene regulatory network won't work.

"Partial"? You are making stuff up. And all that matters is that genetic information is passed.

Not at all. Look at a diagram of the simplest grn known to exist. That would be the one for E. coli. (above) Show me what part you can remove and still have it work.

 

[rightwinger]

The meta network evolves as creatures become more complex

Prove it.

Evolution is a FACT
God is a THEORY

What if God evolved-would he then be a fact?

Good concept

 

[rightwinger]

View attachment 263426

A partial gene regulatory network won't work.

"Partial"? You are making stuff up. And all that matters is that genetic information is passed.

Not at all. Look at a diagram of the simplest grn known to exist. That would be the one for E. coli. Show me what part you can remove and still have it work.

When are you going to provide proof of a creator

 

[Hollie]

Each cell in our bodies contains thousands of gene regulatory networks. These networks are responsible the regulation of gene expression, among other things, required for life to exist. They are all part of a meta network in which they pass information to where it is needed. They use logical operators, as well as databases to perform their functions. This network is so complex that scientists have barely scratched the surface in understanding them. If any part of this vast Network was missing or damaged, the cell would not operate as it should, causing disease or even death. There is no scientific explanation as to how or why this network exists. It is impossible for evolution to be the answer since every component must be in place at the same instant in order to function. You cannot have a partial network. The only way it could possibly exist is if it was created all at the same time. Prove me wrong.

This is just a reiteration of the old canard, the specious, worthless argument to "irreducible complexity".

Lol! Specious? Can a car run without an engine? Nice try. I'll give a participation award for that one. Lolololol

What does a car engine have to do with specious claims to supernaturalism?

 

[Hollie]

View attachment 263426

A partial gene regulatory network won't work.

"Partial"? You are making stuff up. And all that matters is that genetic information is passed.

Not at all. Look at a diagram of the simplest grn known to exist. That would be the one for E. coli. (above) Show me what part you can remove and still have it work.

Removing parts would render the above not E. coli.

Nothing about E. coli suggests proofs for your gods or anyone else's gods.

I'm tingling with anticipation for scientific evidence of a creator. Any one will do. How much longer?

Oh. You cut and pasted the image from the Christian fundamentalist site Biologos, right?

 

[WinterBorn]

Still waiting for someone to prove me wrong. Perhaps you could begin by providing one of the many gene regulatory networks we could live without. If you could do this, you might be on the right track to proving me wrong.

There are organisms with very simple systems. Ours are much more complex, but that does not mean all life forms are so complex.

It doesn't matter how complex it is. A partial network cannot function. Therefore it is impossible for it to have evolved.

Well that will be your little secret.

Things that you say would not work, since it is a "partial" network, function just fine is some very simple cells. Many parts or organelles that a more complex cell cannot function without, are not present in a simpler cell. Compare a prokaryote cell and a eukaryote cell. And viruses are even simpler.

This is much like that old argument that the eye was proof of a creator, since it had to spring into being as a complete unit in order to function. And just as wrong.

 

[WinterBorn]

The universe cannot be eternally self existent. It's a scientific impossibility.

Wrong. That's a creationist canard. It most certainly is not an impossibility.

No. It isn't. If the universe stretches back into infinity, then all of the energy would be gone since there is not an infinite supply of energy. Also, if there was an infinite number of yesterdays, tomorrow would never get here. The universe had a beginning. Only a fool would believe otherwise.

Energy is not lost. It merely changes form. Yes, the universe stretches back to infinity.

One theory I have read is that the Big Bang is a recurring event. The explosion comes from the matter and energy being pulled to the center until it reaches a critical mass. Then the entire universe is propelled outward. Once the energy pushing it out is expended, it begins a slow gravitational pull back towards the center (the point of greatest mass). Then the process starts again.

 

[rightwinger]

View attachment 263426

A partial gene regulatory network won't work.

"Partial"? You are making stuff up. And all that matters is that genetic information is passed.

Not at all. Look at a diagram of the simplest grn known to exist. That would be the one for E. coli. (above) Show me what part you can remove and still have it work.

So you admit that grn gets more complex...

ÉVOLUTION