Does God Exist?

[Newtonian]

Your link is on themodynamics, not chemistry. I was not posting on the section on thermodynamics. Have you found any errors Thaxton et al made on chemistry?

Much better. I've found a fundamental logic error.

He shows that a 1952 experiment wasn't good enough, and thus declares evolution must be impossible without divine guidance. The problem there is incorrectoy assuming that the Mille experiment was the final word on the matter. It wasn't. The Miller experiment is obsolete. It didn't even use the right atmospheric as a starting point. Thus, Thaxton's supposed debunking is obsolete.

Can you explain why most peer reviewed scientific journals do not give the actual chemical reaction product proportions in MIller's famous experiment?

You tell us. Don't ask me to explain your theories.

I suggest you look at more modern prebiotic chemistry theories. For example, we now know primitive earth contained iron and carbonites that would have neutralized acids, so a formic acid buildup wouldn't have been an issue.

Inaccurate post - try reading my posts more carefully. So, can you link to your theory about carbonites? Did you mean carbonates which were deposited by the geologic carbon cycle?

Definitions of Carbonites here:

Definition of CARBONITE

a blasting explosive varying greatly in formula but containing among its ingredients a carbonaceous substance (as oak bark), a nitrate, and now usually nitroglycerin; a natural coke usually resulting from contact of coal deposits with igneous rock intrusions… See the full definition

www.merriam-webster.com

Or did you mean this definition:

Browse the Glossary - C - WhatIs

searchdatabackup.techtarget.com

Excerpt:

"Carbonite Inc. is an online backup company in Boston. Founded in 2005, Carbonite sells cloud backup to consumers"

Ah yes, life on earth was created after the clouds went back up - See Genesis chapter 1.

OK, I learned a new one! Cloud back up!

Btw - I have a sense of humor!

 

[BreezeWood]

Your link is on themodynamics, not chemistry. I was not posting on the section on thermodynamics. Have you found any errors Thaxton et al made on chemistry?

Much better. I've found a fundamental logic error.

He shows that a 1952 experiment wasn't good enough, and thus declares evolution must be impossible without divine guidance. The problem there is incorrectoy assuming that the Mille experiment was the final word on the matter. It wasn't. The Miller experiment is obsolete. It didn't even use the right atmospheric as a starting point. Thus, Thaxton's supposed debunking is obsolete.

Can you explain why most peer reviewed scientific journals do not give the actual chemical reaction product proportions in MIller's famous experiment?

You tell us. Don't ask me to explain your theories.

I suggest you look at more modern prebiotic chemistry theories. For example, we now know primitive earth contained iron and carbonites that would have neutralized acids, so a formic acid buildup wouldn't have been an issue.

Inaccurate post - try reading my posts more carefully. So, can you link to your theory about carbonites? Did you mean carbonates which were deposited by the geologic carbon cycle?

Definitions of Carbonites here:

Definition of CARBONITE

a blasting explosive varying greatly in formula but containing among its ingredients a carbonaceous substance (as oak bark), a nitrate, and now usually nitroglycerin; a natural coke usually resulting from contact of coal deposits with igneous rock intrusions… See the full definition

www.merriam-webster.com

Or did you mean this definition:

Browse the Glossary - C - WhatIs

searchdatabackup.techtarget.com

Excerpt:

"Carbonite Inc. is an online backup company in Boston. Founded in 2005, Carbonite sells cloud backup to consumers"

Ah yes, life on earth was created after the clouds went back up - See Genesis chapter 1.

OK, I learned a new one! Cloud back up!

Btw - I have a sense of humor!

Btw - I have a sense of humor!

.

7 And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so.

8 And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day.

those waters ...

....

a question earlier in response to your reply the water was from Earth ... the above implying the universe was an ocean and our planet was placed inside a bubble the boundaries being heaven, not much different than the tortoise "shell". seems they thought the blue sky was water.

your disinformation does prove, humor is in the eye of the beholder.

 

[Newtonian]

Your link is on themodynamics, not chemistry. I was not posting on the section on thermodynamics. Have you found any errors Thaxton et al made on chemistry?

Much better. I've found a fundamental logic error.

He shows that a 1952 experiment wasn't good enough, and thus declares evolution must be impossible without divine guidance. The problem there is incorrectoy assuming that the Mille experiment was the final word on the matter. It wasn't. The Miller experiment is obsolete. It didn't even use the right atmospheric as a starting point. Thus, Thaxton's supposed debunking is obsolete.

Can you explain why most peer reviewed scientific journals do not give the actual chemical reaction product proportions in MIller's famous experiment?

You tell us. Don't ask me to explain your theories.

I suggest you look at more modern prebiotic chemistry theories. For example, we now know primitive earth contained iron and carbonites that would have neutralized acids, so a formic acid buildup wouldn't have been an issue.

Inaccurate post - try reading my posts more carefully. So, can you link to your theory about carbonites? Did you mean carbonates which were deposited by the geologic carbon cycle?

Definitions of Carbonites here:

Definition of CARBONITE

a blasting explosive varying greatly in formula but containing among its ingredients a carbonaceous substance (as oak bark), a nitrate, and now usually nitroglycerin; a natural coke usually resulting from contact of coal deposits with igneous rock intrusions… See the full definition

www.merriam-webster.com

Or did you mean this definition:

Browse the Glossary - C - WhatIs

searchdatabackup.techtarget.com

Excerpt:

"Carbonite Inc. is an online backup company in Boston. Founded in 2005, Carbonite sells cloud backup to consumers"

Ah yes, life on earth was created after the clouds went back up - See Genesis chapter 1.

OK, I learned a new one! Cloud back up!

Btw - I have a sense of humor!

Btw - I have a sense of humor!

.

7 And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so.

8 And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day.

those waters ...

....

a question earlier in response to your reply the water was from Earth ... the above implying the universe was an ocean and our planet was placed inside a bubble the boundaries being heaven, not much different than the tortoise "shell". seems they thought the blue sky was water.

your disinformation does prove, humor is in the eye of the beholder.

Weird response. Of course, the universe is not water - where did you get such a belief from?

But it is interesting that chemical evolutionists often refer to how large our universe is and that therefore the unlikely chain of chemical reactions required for protein synthesis becomes likely somewhere at sometime.

The problem is that while our universe has been calculated to have a mass of 10^79 amu (atomic mass units) - this is NOT all a primordial soup favorable for amino acid synthesis. In fact, there isn't even any geological evidence such as 'soup' ever existed on earth!

Most of the universe is made up of stars - clearly no amino acid synthesis can occur within stars.

Oh, and water is actually an enemy of amino acid synthesis from a soup containing HCN as a starter molecule for chemical reaction pathways to amino acids. One of many reactions:

HCN + H2O yields formamide + H2O yields formic acid (HCOOH or CH2O2).

Btw - you quote a Bible translation that I do not prefer - not sure whose post you are quoting from.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Where did I post that the languages were meant to confuse?

Of course you didn't. The bible does it.

Take the Holy Spirit and stick it up your ignorant rear end.

Uh uh, I think I saw a pussy cat...

And now that you have mentioned it, I just noticed that yes indeed, my rear end is not smart at all... and now I am very intrigued... how did you know?

The very sages who say there are 70 nations also say that the Children of Israel are not counted among the nations; I guess that statement never appeared in any of your Links
So I guess we're back to the Jews and 70 nations.

Lets analyze your nonsense.

First you said 70 nations with their 70 languages.

The list of ancient nations formed by the descendants of Shem, Ham and Japheth counts 71 nations.

Then, the amount of ancient languages must be 71 languages.

The Children of Israel will count between those 71 nations because they spoke the language of Eber, hello?

I think you better relax and take it easy.

The more you talk the more deep down your hypothesis is going.

The problem is that I am having a discussion with a Link Debator, which shows how pathetic you are.
You haven't spent even a year studying the subject and you are making a fool of yourself.

Excuse me but the one swearing there were 70 nations it's you, even when according to the LINK those were 71.

I think you are making a fool of yourself showing that you can't add.

You will also take note of the Torah verses that state Moshe and Children of Israel...
Moshe was equal to the entire nation and more than equal to the 70 elders, not simply one of them.

Oh, come on.

Moses was so a common dude for God, that later God never mentioned him anymore. No prophet says that God thru Moses as a leader took the Children of Israel out of Egypt.

After Moses completed his journey he was done for God. Probably for men Moses still is considered a ... a... whatever you want to consider him, but for God Moses always was just a common dude. It had to be that way,because God said he is a jealous god (no competence), so, there it is...

Even for the Children of Israel, they seemed to evade naming their children with the name Moses for several generations, because Moses is not even a Hebrew name. The popularity of the name Moses came back thanks to the Muslim invasion when Muslims started to name their young leaders with the name Musa, and those Musa were victorious, they conquered lands by lots.

By envy or competence, the name Moses started to be used by the descendants of the 12 tribes since the Muslim expansion in Europe.

Then , the website LINK is right mentioning Moses as one more dude between the group of 71. You have no choice to take.

You have to find better Links that give you all the information, not just the ideological information you want.

Definitively you are avoiding to respond the issue with the 71 nations, so your babbling is notorious as your way of escaping with a Lippy the Lion style.

First part is closed.

Time for the next paragraph of your former reply

Let me know when you have an inkling of the shapes of the Hebrew alphabet and how they represent the Yud descending into existence and how that Yud is driven by the free will human to either achieve or thwarts Pristine's intention for mankind.

That sounds deep, specially coming from those ancient dudes.

I didn't know cave men were so great in philosophy.

"the shapes of the Hebrew alphabet"... what shapes?... the Hieroglyphic Hebrew... the Paleo Hebrew, the Aramaic Hebrew or the shapes of the Masoretic Hebrew?... because they are way different, you know... and here is the LINK

https://www.bible.ca/manuscripts/Hebrew-worlds-oldest-alphabet-Four-Scripts-Hieroglyphic-Mosaic-Paleo-Hebrew-Aramaic-Square-Masoretic-Vowelled-modern-Sinai-inscriptions-Gezer-Siloam-tunnel-Silver-scroll-Seals-bulla-Dead-Sea-Scrolls.jpg

View attachment 334969

So, you must be talking of the Hieroglyphic Hebrew. Using that primeval Hebrew the reading was as it follows: "... then God said to first man, pristine creating me heavens earth. And earth a mess. Me said, light! light shine. Me said... etc.

Because it was a primitive language, you know. But, you are right, those letters had a particular shape each one. You see, letters with shape of humans, bird heads, snakes, etc.

So, you also say "they represent the Yud descending into existence". The "yud"... but... which one?

View attachment 334972

The one which resembles the Z of Zorro?

I truly don't think you are talking seriously in this topic.

This is a forum of religion and ethics but you are talking pure mysticism here.

I understand you come from a school where the great rabbis said lots of things, like Gamaliel saying "in the future women will deliver children everyday", and he even pointed the hen as his evidence.

Yup.

Pure mysticism coming from their lazy imaginations, because if he was capable to think that way, then it is a clear indication that hashish was smoked in Palestine in great amounts.

Well, lets continue with the second part.

Start explaining which one of the shapes of the Hebrew alphabet you are talking about. The one forming the path for the Yud to come into existence... the Hierogyphic, the Paleo, the... bah... you know the rest.

I would prefer to discuss the actual history of Judaism vs. atheism...
Atheism has resulted in the mass murder of well over 100 million people globally in the last century, not to mention an untold number of abortions and the acceptance of euthanasia.
If atheism is based on pure logic, you can keep your logic.

You are correct about what I originally posted about there being a total of 70 nations and languages...I did indeed make that mistake while I was in the middle of work.
I believe, based on the history of atheism, that my mistake would result in my execution.
Because in the end, atheists are far from rational...they are irrational and murderous towards those who see life from a different point of view...like yourself.

Atheism has not resulted in murder as your cut and paste slogan claims. That's a nonsense slogan that religious extremists cut and paste frequently.

Your history is wanting.
Then again, I can't remember the last time you actually used a search engine.

What you don't seem to understand is that Stalinism and Maosim were religions. These men were revered as gods. So all you have done is post yet more example of how gross religion is.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

The problem is that while our universe has been calculated to have a mass of 10^79 amu (atomic mass units) - this is NOT all a primordial soup favorable for amino acid synthesis. In fact, there isn't even any geological evidence such as 'soup' ever existed on earth!

Well that's an idiotic post. Are you expecting to find fossils of molecules?

Yes, the conditions were favorable to this on early earth, your lies notwithstanding. Yes, we have evidence of this.

 

[Indeependent]

Where did I post that the languages were meant to confuse?

Of course you didn't. The bible does it.

Take the Holy Spirit and stick it up your ignorant rear end.

Uh uh, I think I saw a pussy cat...

And now that you have mentioned it, I just noticed that yes indeed, my rear end is not smart at all... and now I am very intrigued... how did you know?

The very sages who say there are 70 nations also say that the Children of Israel are not counted among the nations; I guess that statement never appeared in any of your Links
So I guess we're back to the Jews and 70 nations.

Lets analyze your nonsense.

First you said 70 nations with their 70 languages.

The list of ancient nations formed by the descendants of Shem, Ham and Japheth counts 71 nations.

Then, the amount of ancient languages must be 71 languages.

The Children of Israel will count between those 71 nations because they spoke the language of Eber, hello?

I think you better relax and take it easy.

The more you talk the more deep down your hypothesis is going.

The problem is that I am having a discussion with a Link Debator, which shows how pathetic you are.
You haven't spent even a year studying the subject and you are making a fool of yourself.

Excuse me but the one swearing there were 70 nations it's you, even when according to the LINK those were 71.

I think you are making a fool of yourself showing that you can't add.

You will also take note of the Torah verses that state Moshe and Children of Israel...
Moshe was equal to the entire nation and more than equal to the 70 elders, not simply one of them.

Oh, come on.

Moses was so a common dude for God, that later God never mentioned him anymore. No prophet says that God thru Moses as a leader took the Children of Israel out of Egypt.

After Moses completed his journey he was done for God. Probably for men Moses still is considered a ... a... whatever you want to consider him, but for God Moses always was just a common dude. It had to be that way,because God said he is a jealous god (no competence), so, there it is...

Even for the Children of Israel, they seemed to evade naming their children with the name Moses for several generations, because Moses is not even a Hebrew name. The popularity of the name Moses came back thanks to the Muslim invasion when Muslims started to name their young leaders with the name Musa, and those Musa were victorious, they conquered lands by lots.

By envy or competence, the name Moses started to be used by the descendants of the 12 tribes since the Muslim expansion in Europe.

Then , the website LINK is right mentioning Moses as one more dude between the group of 71. You have no choice to take.

You have to find better Links that give you all the information, not just the ideological information you want.

Definitively you are avoiding to respond the issue with the 71 nations, so your babbling is notorious as your way of escaping with a Lippy the Lion style.

First part is closed.

Time for the next paragraph of your former reply

Let me know when you have an inkling of the shapes of the Hebrew alphabet and how they represent the Yud descending into existence and how that Yud is driven by the free will human to either achieve or thwarts Pristine's intention for mankind.

That sounds deep, specially coming from those ancient dudes.

I didn't know cave men were so great in philosophy.

"the shapes of the Hebrew alphabet"... what shapes?... the Hieroglyphic Hebrew... the Paleo Hebrew, the Aramaic Hebrew or the shapes of the Masoretic Hebrew?... because they are way different, you know... and here is the LINK

https://www.bible.ca/manuscripts/Hebrew-worlds-oldest-alphabet-Four-Scripts-Hieroglyphic-Mosaic-Paleo-Hebrew-Aramaic-Square-Masoretic-Vowelled-modern-Sinai-inscriptions-Gezer-Siloam-tunnel-Silver-scroll-Seals-bulla-Dead-Sea-Scrolls.jpg

View attachment 334969

So, you must be talking of the Hieroglyphic Hebrew. Using that primeval Hebrew the reading was as it follows: "... then God said to first man, pristine creating me heavens earth. And earth a mess. Me said, light! light shine. Me said... etc.

Because it was a primitive language, you know. But, you are right, those letters had a particular shape each one. You see, letters with shape of humans, bird heads, snakes, etc.

So, you also say "they represent the Yud descending into existence". The "yud"... but... which one?

View attachment 334972

The one which resembles the Z of Zorro?

I truly don't think you are talking seriously in this topic.

This is a forum of religion and ethics but you are talking pure mysticism here.

I understand you come from a school where the great rabbis said lots of things, like Gamaliel saying "in the future women will deliver children everyday", and he even pointed the hen as his evidence.

Yup.

Pure mysticism coming from their lazy imaginations, because if he was capable to think that way, then it is a clear indication that hashish was smoked in Palestine in great amounts.

Well, lets continue with the second part.

Start explaining which one of the shapes of the Hebrew alphabet you are talking about. The one forming the path for the Yud to come into existence... the Hierogyphic, the Paleo, the... bah... you know the rest.

I would prefer to discuss the actual history of Judaism vs. atheism...
Atheism has resulted in the mass murder of well over 100 million people globally in the last century, not to mention an untold number of abortions and the acceptance of euthanasia.
If atheism is based on pure logic, you can keep your logic.

You are correct about what I originally posted about there being a total of 70 nations and languages...I did indeed make that mistake while I was in the middle of work.
I believe, based on the history of atheism, that my mistake would result in my execution.
Because in the end, atheists are far from rational...they are irrational and murderous towards those who see life from a different point of view...like yourself.

Atheism has not resulted in murder as your cut and paste slogan claims. That's a nonsense slogan that religious extremists cut and paste frequently.

Your history is wanting.
Then again, I can't remember the last time you actually used a search engine.

What you don't seem to understand is that Stalinism and Maosim were religions. These men were revered as gods. So all you have done is post yet more example of how gross religion is.

Everything we are obsessed with is a religion, including science.
The Nazis and Stalin used science to excuse murder.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Everything we are obsessed with is a religion, including science.

No, that's obviously stupid and wrong. And the only reason you religious nuts make this idiotic statement is because you desperately want to put your magical horseshit on the same shelf as evidence based knowledge. And, being completely incapable of elevating your magical horseshit in any way, you feel compelled to try to drag evidence based knowledge down into the shitty muck where your magical horseshit resides.

In a nutshell.

 

[ding]

Everything we are obsessed with is a religion, including science.

No, that's obviously stupid and wrong. And the only reason you religious nuts make this idiotic statement is because you desperately want to put your magical horseshit on the same shelf as evidence based knowledge. And, being completely incapable of elevating your magical horseshit in any way, you feel compelled to try to drag evidence based knowledge down into the shitty muck where your magical horseshit resides.

In a nutshell.

No. He's right. You have elevated science to a religion. Unfortunately for you, you don't know much about science and as near as I can tell you have no background in science. I do. And I have used science and reason to aid in answering the origin questions. Refute it if you can.

At the heart of this debate is whether or not the material world was created by spirit. If the material world were not created by spirit, then everything which has occurred since the beginning of space and time are products of the material world. Everything which is incorporeal proceeded from the corporeal. There is no middle ground. There is no other option. Either the material world was created by spirit or it wasn't. All other options will simplify to one of these two lowest common denominators which are mutually exclusive.

So we need to start from that position and examine the evidence we have at our disposal which is creation itself. Specifically, the laws of nature; physical, biological and moral. And how space and time has evolved. And how we perceive God.

If you perceive God to be some magical fairy tale then everything you see will skew to that result. There won't be one single thing that you will agree with or accept. Whereas if you were trying to objectively analyze the evidence for spirit creating the material world you would listen to the whole argument and not look for trivial things to nitpick.

But since this is my argument we will use my perception of God. Which is there no thing that can describe God because God is no thing. God is not matter and energy like us and God exists outside of our four dimension space time. In fact the premise is that God is no thing. That God is a spirit. A spirit is no thing. Being things we can't possibly relate to being no things. A two dimensional being would have an easier time trying to understand our third dimension than we - a four dimensional being - would in trying to understand a multi-dimensional being outside of our space time. The closest I can come to and later confirm with the physical laws is that God is consciousness. That Mind, rather than emerging as a late outgrowth in the evolution of life, has existed always as the matrix, the source and condition of physical reality - that the stuff of which physical reality is composed is mind-stuff. It is Mind that has composed a physical universe that breeds life, and so eventually evolves creatures that know and create.

So now that a realistic perception of God has been established we need to examine the only evidence at our disposal. It should be obvious that if the material world were not created by spirit that everything that has unfolded in the evolution of space and time would have no intentional purpose. That it is just matter and energy doing what matter and energy do. Conversely, if the material world were created by spirit it should be obvious that the creation of the material world was intentional. After all in my perception of God, God is no thing and the closest thing I can relate to is a mind with no body. Using our own experiences as creators as a proxy, we know that when we create things we create them for a reason and that reason is to serve some purpose. So it would be no great leap of logic to believe that something like a mind with no body would do the same. We also know from our experiences that intelligence tends to create intelligence. We are obsessed with making smart things. So what better thing for a mind with no body to do than create a universe where beings with bodies can create smart things too.

We have good reason to believe that we find ourselves in a universe permeated with life, in which life arises inevitably, given enough time, wherever the conditions exist that make it possible. Yet were any one of a number of the physical properties of our universe otherwise - some of them basic, others seemingly trivial, almost accidental - that life, which seems now to be so prevalent, would become impossible, here or anywhere. It takes no great imagination to conceive of other possible universes, each stable and workable in itself, yet lifeless. How is it that, with so many other apparent options, we are in a universe that possesses just that peculiar nexus of properties that breeds beings that know and create.

The biological laws are such that life is programmed to survive and multiply which is a requisite for intelligence to arise. If the purpose of the universe was to create intelligence then a preference in nature for it had to exist. The Laws of Nature are such that the potential for intelligence to existed the moment space and time were created. One can argue that given the laws of nature and the size of the universe that intelligence arising was inevitable. One can also argue that creating intelligence from nothing defies the Second Law of Entropy. That creating intelligence from nothing increases order within the universe. It actually doesn't because usable energy was lost along the way as a cost of creating order from disorder. But it is nature overriding it's tendency for ever increasing disorder that interests me and raises my suspicions to look deeper and to take seriously the proposition that a mind without a body created the material world so that minds with bodies could create too.

If we examine the physical laws we discover that we live in a logical universe governed by rules, laws and information. Rules laws and information are a signs of intelligence. Intentionality and purpose are signs of intelligence. The definition of reason is a cause, explanation, or justification for an action or event. The definition of purpose is the reason for which something is done or created or for which something exists. The consequence of a logical universe is that every cause has an effect. Which means that everything happens for a reason and serves a purpose. The very nature of our physical laws point to reason and purpose.

All we have done so far is to make a logical argument for spirit creating the material world. Certainly not an argument built of fairy tales that's for sure. So going back to the two possibilities; spirit creating the material world versus everything proceeding from the material, the key distinction is no thing versus thing. So if we assume that everything I have described was just an accidental coincidence of the properties of matter, the logical conclusion is that matter and energy are just doing what matter and energy do which makes sense. The problem is that for matter and energy to do what matter and energy do, there has to be rules in place for matter and energy to obey. The formation of space and time followed rules. Specifically the law of conservation and quantum mechanics. These laws existed before space and time and defined the potential of everything which was possible. These laws are no thing. So we literally have an example of no thing existing before the material world. The creation of space and time from nothing is literally correct. Space and time were created from no thing. Spirit is no thing. No thing created space and time.

If the universe were created through natural process and we are an accidental happenstance of matter and energy doing what matter and energy do, then there should be no expectation for absolute morals. Morals can be anything we want them to be. The problem is that nature does have a preference for an outcome. Societies and people which behave with virtue experience order and harmony. Societies and people which behave without virtue experience disorder and chaos. So we can see from the outcomes that not all behaviors have equal outcomes. That some behaviors have better outcomes and some behaviors have worse outcomes. This is the moral law at work. If the universe was created by spirit for the express purpose of creating beings that know and create we would expect that we would receive feedback on how we behave. The problem is that violating moral laws are not like violating physical laws. When we violate a physical law the consequences are immediate. If you try to defy gravity by jumping off a roof you will fall. Whereas the consequences for violating a moral law are more probabilistic in nature; many times we get away with it.

Morals are effectively standards. For any given thing there exists a standard which is the highest possible standard. This standard exists independent of anything else. It is in effect a universal standard. It exists for a reason. When we deviate from this standard and normalize our deviance from the standard, eventually the reason the standard exists will be discovered. The reason this happens is because error cannot stand. Eventually error will fail and the truth will be discovered. Thus proving that morals cannot be anything we want them to be but are indeed based upon some universal code of common decency that is independent of man.

So the question that naturally begs to be asked is if there is a universal code of common decency that is independent of man how come we all don't behave the same way when it comes to right and wrong? The reason man doesn't behave the same way is because of subjectivity. The difference between being objective and being subjective is bias. Bias is eliminated when there is no preference for an outcome. To eliminate a preference for an outcome one must have no thought of the consequences to one's self. If one does not practice this they will see subjective truth instead of objective truth. Subjective truth leads to moral relativism. Where consequences to self and preferences for an outcome leads to rationalizations of right and wrong.

Man does know right from wrong and when he violates it rather than abandoning the concept of right and wrong he rationalizes he did not violate it. You can see this behavior in almost all quarrels and disagreements. At the heart of every quarrel and disagreement is a belief in a universal right and wrong. So even though each side believes right to be different each side expects the other to believe their side should be universally known and accepted. It is this behavior which tells us there is an expectation for an absolute truth.

If there were never a universal truth that existed man would never have an expectation of fairness to begin with because fairness would have no meaning. The fact that each of us has an expectation of fairness and that we expect everyone else to follow ought to raise our suspicion on the origin of that expectation.

So what proof do you have that God doesn't exist?

 

[BreezeWood]

Your link is on themodynamics, not chemistry. I was not posting on the section on thermodynamics. Have you found any errors Thaxton et al made on chemistry?

Much better. I've found a fundamental logic error.

He shows that a 1952 experiment wasn't good enough, and thus declares evolution must be impossible without divine guidance. The problem there is incorrectoy assuming that the Mille experiment was the final word on the matter. It wasn't. The Miller experiment is obsolete. It didn't even use the right atmospheric as a starting point. Thus, Thaxton's supposed debunking is obsolete.

Can you explain why most peer reviewed scientific journals do not give the actual chemical reaction product proportions in MIller's famous experiment?

You tell us. Don't ask me to explain your theories.

I suggest you look at more modern prebiotic chemistry theories. For example, we now know primitive earth contained iron and carbonites that would have neutralized acids, so a formic acid buildup wouldn't have been an issue.

Inaccurate post - try reading my posts more carefully. So, can you link to your theory about carbonites? Did you mean carbonates which were deposited by the geologic carbon cycle?

Definitions of Carbonites here:

Definition of CARBONITE

a blasting explosive varying greatly in formula but containing among its ingredients a carbonaceous substance (as oak bark), a nitrate, and now usually nitroglycerin; a natural coke usually resulting from contact of coal deposits with igneous rock intrusions… See the full definition

www.merriam-webster.com

Or did you mean this definition:

Browse the Glossary - C - WhatIs

searchdatabackup.techtarget.com

Excerpt:

"Carbonite Inc. is an online backup company in Boston. Founded in 2005, Carbonite sells cloud backup to consumers"

Ah yes, life on earth was created after the clouds went back up - See Genesis chapter 1.

OK, I learned a new one! Cloud back up!

Btw - I have a sense of humor!

Btw - I have a sense of humor!

.

7 And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so.

8 And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day.

those waters ...

....

a question earlier in response to your reply the water was from Earth ... the above implying the universe was an ocean and our planet was placed inside a bubble the boundaries being heaven, not much different than the tortoise "shell". seems they thought the blue sky was water.

your disinformation does prove, humor is in the eye of the beholder.

Weird response. Of course, the universe is not water - where did you get such a belief from?

But it is interesting that chemical evolutionists often refer to how large our universe is and that therefore the unlikely chain of chemical reactions required for protein synthesis becomes likely somewhere at sometime.

The problem is that while our universe has been calculated to have a mass of 10^79 amu (atomic mass units) - this is NOT all a primordial soup favorable for amino acid synthesis. In fact, there isn't even any geological evidence such as 'soup' ever existed on earth!

Most of the universe is made up of stars - clearly no amino acid synthesis can occur within stars.

Oh, and water is actually an enemy of amino acid synthesis from a soup containing HCN as a starter molecule for chemical reaction pathways to amino acids. One of many reactions:

HCN + H2O yields formamide + H2O yields formic acid (HCOOH or CH2O2).

Btw - you quote a Bible translation that I do not prefer - not sure whose post you are quoting from.

Weird response. Of course, the universe is not water - where did you get such a belief from?

.
a response to your lack of one -

1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. 2 Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters.

again, those waters ... its your belief not mine.

primordial Earth.

 

[Aletheia4u]

 

[luchitociencia]

Your link is on themodynamics, not chemistry. I was not posting on the section on thermodynamics. Have you found any errors Thaxton et al made on chemistry?

Much better. I've found a fundamental logic error.

He shows that a 1952 experiment wasn't good enough, and thus declares evolution must be impossible without divine guidance. The problem there is incorrectoy assuming that the Mille experiment was the final word on the matter. It wasn't. The Miller experiment is obsolete. It didn't even use the right atmospheric as a starting point. Thus, Thaxton's supposed debunking is obsolete.

Can you explain why most peer reviewed scientific journals do not give the actual chemical reaction product proportions in MIller's famous experiment?

You tell us. Don't ask me to explain your theories.

I suggest you look at more modern prebiotic chemistry theories. For example, we now know primitive earth contained iron and carbonites that would have neutralized acids, so a formic acid buildup wouldn't have been an issue.

Inaccurate post - try reading my posts more carefully. So, can you link to your theory about carbonites? Did you mean carbonates which were deposited by the geologic carbon cycle?

Definitions of Carbonites here:

Definition of CARBONITE

a blasting explosive varying greatly in formula but containing among its ingredients a carbonaceous substance (as oak bark), a nitrate, and now usually nitroglycerin; a natural coke usually resulting from contact of coal deposits with igneous rock intrusions… See the full definition

www.merriam-webster.com

Or did you mean this definition:

Browse the Glossary - C - WhatIs

searchdatabackup.techtarget.com

Excerpt:

"Carbonite Inc. is an online backup company in Boston. Founded in 2005, Carbonite sells cloud backup to consumers"

Ah yes, life on earth was created after the clouds went back up - See Genesis chapter 1.

OK, I learned a new one! Cloud back up!

Btw - I have a sense of humor!

Btw - I have a sense of humor!

.

7 And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so.

8 And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day.

those waters ...

....

a question earlier in response to your reply the water was from Earth ... the above implying the universe was an ocean and our planet was placed inside a bubble the boundaries being heaven, not much different than the tortoise "shell". seems they thought the blue sky was water.

your disinformation does prove, humor is in the eye of the beholder.

Weird response. Of course, the universe is not water - where did you get such a belief from?

But it is interesting that chemical evolutionists often refer to how large our universe is and that therefore the unlikely chain of chemical reactions required for protein synthesis becomes likely somewhere at sometime.

The problem is that while our universe has been calculated to have a mass of 10^79 amu (atomic mass units) - this is NOT all a primordial soup favorable for amino acid synthesis. In fact, there isn't even any geological evidence such as 'soup' ever existed on earth!

Most of the universe is made up of stars - clearly no amino acid synthesis can occur within stars.

Oh, and water is actually an enemy of amino acid synthesis from a soup containing HCN as a starter molecule for chemical reaction pathways to amino acids. One of many reactions:

HCN + H2O yields formamide + H2O yields formic acid (HCOOH or CH2O2).

Btw - you quote a Bible translation that I do not prefer - not sure whose post you are quoting from.

Weird response. Of course, the universe is not water - where did you get such a belief from?

.
a response to your lack of one -

1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. 2 Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters.

again, those waters ... its your belief not mine.

View attachment 336152

primordial Earth.

Venus is a new planet. Keep watching it for generations, it will become similar to earth.

 

[james bond]

Why do atheists exist?

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Silly anecdotes. I could produce anecdotes claiming all manner of magical nonsense.

 

[Aletheia4u]

Silly anecdotes. I could produce anecdotes claiming all manner of magical nonsense.

Jeremiah 23:32 Indeed, I am against those who prophesy false dreams,” declares the Lord. “They tell them and lead my people astray with their reckless lies, yet I did not send or appoint them. They do not benefit these people in the least,” declares the Lord.

Joel 2:28 “And afterward,
I will pour out my Spirit on all people.
Your sons and daughters will prophesy,
your old men will dream dreams,
your young men will see visions.
29 Even on my servants, both men and women,
I will pour out my Spirit in those days.
30 I will show wonders in the heavens
and on the earth,
blood and fire and billows of smoke.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Silly anecdotes. I could produce anecdotes claiming all manner of magical nonsense.

Jeremiah 23:32 Indeed, I am against those who prophesy false dreams,” declares the Lord. “They tell them and lead my people astray with their reckless lies, yet I did not send or appoint them. They do not benefit these people in the least,” declares the Lord.

Joel 2:28 “And afterward,
I will pour out my Spirit on all people.
Your sons and daughters will prophesy,
your old men will dream dreams,
your young men will see visions.
29 Even on my servants, both men and women,
I will pour out my Spirit in those days.
30 I will show wonders in the heavens
and on the earth,
blood and fire and billows of smoke.

haha, you should go peddle that stuff to naive little kids or to desperate, hungry people (as is your custom). I am not buying.

 

[Hollie]

Why do atheists exist?

To make the world a better place.

 

[james bond]

To make the world a better place.

Haha. Just for yourselves.

 

[BreezeWood]

To make the world a better place.

Haha. Just for yourselves.

Haha. Just for yourselves.

.
no -

not sure the atheist but something better than what the desert bums have to offer.

 

[Avatar4321]

I know that God lives. He hears and answers prayers

 

[Newtonian]

Again, the top 10 amino acids by proportion - only Alanine, Glycine and aspartic acid are in proteins:

Glycine - C₂H₅NO₂ - proportion: 440
Alanine - C3H7NO2 - proportion: 790
alpha-aminobutyric acid - C₄H₉NO₂ - proportion: 270
a(alpha)-Hydroxy-aminobutyric acid - C4H8O3 - proportion: 74
Norvaline - ‎C5H11NO2 - proportion: 61
Sarcosine - C3H7NO2 - proportion: 55
Aspartic acid - C4H7NO4 - proportion: 34
2,4 [alpha/gamma]-diaminobutyric acid- C4H10N2O2 - proportion: 33
alpha[2]-Aminoisobutyric acid - H2N-C(CH3)2-COOH; C₄H₉NO₂ - proportion 30
N-Ethylglycine -C4H9NO2 - proportion: 30

I forgot about alpha-aminobutyric acid (33). It is also not used in proteins. The 20 amino acids used in proteins are:

1. alanine - ala - A
2. arginine - arg - R
3. asparagine - asn - N
4. aspartic acid - asp - D
5. cysteine - cys - C
6. glutamine - gln - Q
7. glutamic acid - glu - E
8. glycine - gly - G
9. histidine - his - H
10. isoleucine - ile - I
11. leucine - leu - L
12. lysine - lys - K
13. methionine - met - M
14. phenylalanine - phe - F
15. proline - pro - P
16. serine - ser - S
17. threonine - thr - T
18. tryptophan - trp - W
19. tyrosine - tyr - Y
20. valine - val - V

I didn't read this the first few times you cut and pasted it.

Could you cut and paste it again?

I didn't cut and paste it - why do you think I did? The format of the list is mine via wordpad - of course, there are many sources that give the list in other formats.