Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
GoCardinals, what you did is basically confirm my original observation - people, theists and atheists alike, use different standards of evidence.
I shall not derail this discussion into criticism of your definitions, as I feel it's being taken care of in the other thread.
One thing I will ask is that you do not edit my posts to a degree where they are completely unrecognizable and can be badly misinterpreted. Either don't quote the whole post, quote it in its entirety, or respond to specific statements. It's a small thing to ask but it would mean a lot to me. Thanks, GoC.
I think I lost you. What exactly are we trying to answer here?
I asked for a couple of examples in post #117 . Lets not derail from our discussion, and resume it from there.
"design" is the key word. I am not derailing as much as i redirecting away from two positions, counter claims if you will, that really have no observational support. That being "a thing made us" and "the universe did not design us."
"hemostasis". Its a word that describes what we are seeing and the fact that we so many constants falling out of observations. I don't know of a better descriptor. I applied oscars shaver to it a million times.
You don't design you blood cells but the simple fact is that your living did create them. I say the same thing for what we see on earth. There is no omni thingie. Yeah, religion can be dangerous, but that doesn't mean I have to change the most reasonable conclusions that fit what we see better than any other notion. That notion is homeostasis.
I haven't heard one counter argument by atheist that would lead me to denying it is more rational.
"design" is the key word. I am not derailing as much as i redirecting away from two positions, counter claims if you will, that really have no observational support. That being "a thing made us" and "the universe did not design us."
"hemostasis". Its a word that describes what we are seeing and the fact that we so many constants falling out of observations. I don't know of a better descriptor. I applied oscars shaver to it a million times.
You don't design you blood cells but the simple fact is that your living did create them. I say the same thing for what we see on earth. There is no omni thingie. Yeah, religion can be dangerous, but that doesn't mean I have to change the most reasonable conclusions that fit what we see better than any other notion. That notion is homeostasis.
I haven't heard one counter argument by atheist that would lead me to denying it is more rational.
perhaps you are saying "Homeostasis" instead of hemostasis?
"Homeostasis is the state of steady internal conditions maintained by living things. This dynamic state of equilibrium is the condition of optimal functioning for the organism and includes many variables, such as body temperature and fluid balance, being kept within certain pre-set limits."
"Homeostasis. The tendency of an organism or cell to regulate its internal conditions, such as the chemical composition of its body fluids, so as to maintain health and functioning, regardless of outside conditions."
"Homeostasis: the tendency toward a relatively stable equilibrium between interdependent elements, especially as maintained by physiological processes."
which one is the closest meaning that suits your narrative, and we will talk about it?
perhaps you are saying "Homeostasis" instead of hemostasis?
"Homeostasis is the state of steady internal conditions maintained by living things. This dynamic state of equilibrium is the condition of optimal functioning for the organism and includes many variables, such as body temperature and fluid balance, being kept within certain pre-set limits."
"Homeostasis. The tendency of an organism or cell to regulate its internal conditions, such as the chemical composition of its body fluids, so as to maintain health and functioning, regardless of outside conditions."
"Homeostasis: the tendency toward a relatively stable equilibrium between interdependent elements, especially as maintained by physiological processes."
which one is the closest meaning that suits your narrative, and we will talk about it?
any of them, they all apply.
my middle ground, based on the periodic table, is that the universe is in a state of dynamic equilibrium. The "universe" is just to big right now. So I chucked it down to a more manageable size, out to 50AU from the sun.
So to see what that means, I calculated a complexity vs volume ratio in a common cell and compared that to the biosphere's ratio. The calculation matches better with life than any other non living thing I know. I used the LHC as the most complex non living thing I know. ok, now measurement. we need a measurement that any person can do for themselves. well, you know what I mean, those that have a mind to.
I have been asking trained people for the better part of 20 years about what I just gave you. In person, no one ever said I was wrong.
do you see the difference in your faith and my faith?
My faith does not require me to answer to "anti-religion" dogma.
Trust me, I ask plenty of questions that are never sufficiently answered. But I have chosen to stay out of certain areas.
But that's not what you were moaning about in the other post: "I don't understand why certain question are only posed to Theists. They are valid questions which could just as easily have been asked of Atheists in some modified fashion."
There are a few of us waiting to see if you get an answer to this. A real, cogent answer.
Yes I would love to know what experiments and tests have been proposed so that evidence of this intelligent design can be shown and measured?
An outdated experiment was conducted in 1953; however more recent evidence suggests that Earth's original atmosphere might have had a composition different from the gas used in the Miller experiment, but prebiotic experiments continue to produce racemic mixtures of simple to complex compounds under varying conditions.
Naturally occurring chemical evolution and the origin of life is difficult to replicate in a lab with respect to how life came into existence on earth.
Amino acids have properties that make it them the building blocks of life. A new measurement of chemical evolution suggests that amino acids filled the early universe some nine billion years before life emerged.
Since humans have only been around for about 200,000 years...I wonder why this supposed intelligent designer waited so long to design life on this tiny blue marble?
It would be fascinating to see what other lifeforms exist on other planets in the Goldilocks zones located in the 2 trillion galaxies in the observable universe.
On November 4, 2013, astronomers reported, based on Kepler data, that there could be as many as 40 billion Earth-sized planets orbiting in the habitable zones of Sun-like stars and red dwarfs in the Milky Way.
I think if people truly understood Astrobiology, and Astrophysics...the notion of an intelligent designer would become obsolete along with all of the"god of the gaps" assumptions that have already been refuted.
Yes I would love to know what experiments and tests have been proposed so that evidence of this intelligent design can be shown and measured?
Gosh, this brings back some memories...
During the 2005 Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District trial (day 6), a question was posed to Dr Paul Nelson, who is currently a Fellow of the Discovery Institute. I quote from transcript:
Quote:
The question was, Is intelligent design just a critique of evolutionary theory or does it offer more? Does it offer something that human kind needs to know? This is his answer. Quote, It offers more, but demonstrating that is going to be a long-term challenge. Science in the key of design, if you will, is a melody that we are going to have to teach others to hear and play.
First, of course, we have to master it ourselves. Easily, the biggest challenge facing the ID community is to develop a full-fledged theory of biological design. We don't have such a theory right now, and that's a real problem. Without a theory, it's very hard to know where to direct your research focus.
Right now, we've got a bag of powerful intuitions and a handful of notions such as irreducible complexity and specified complexity, but as yet, no general theory of biological design, end quote.
That was in 2005. And though it's still early 2019, the news of this new theory and research continues to evade us.
Yes I would love to know what experiments and tests have been proposed so that evidence of this intelligent design can be shown and measured?
An outdated experiment was conducted in 1953; however more recent evidence suggests that Earth's original atmosphere might have had a composition different from the gas used in the Miller experiment, but prebiotic experiments continue to produce racemic mixtures of simple to complex compounds under varying conditions.
Naturally occurring chemical evolution and the origin of life is difficult to replicate in a lab with respect to how life came into existence on earth.
Amino acids have properties that make it them the building blocks of life. A new measurement of chemical evolution suggests that amino acids filled the early universe some nine billion years before life emerged.
Since humans have only been around for about 200,000 years...I wonder why this supposed intelligent designer waited so long to design life on this tiny blue marble?
It would be fascinating to see what other lifeforms exist on other planets in the Goldilocks zones located in the 2 trillion galaxies in the observable universe.
On November 4, 2013, astronomers reported, based on Kepler data, that there could be as many as 40 billion Earth-sized planets orbiting in the habitable zones of Sun-like stars and red dwarfs in the Milky Way.
I think if people truly understood Astrobiology, and Astrophysics...the notion of an intelligent designer would become obsolete along with all of the"god of the gaps" assumptions that have already been refuted.
Of course then there are those that think Astrology and Astronomy, as well as Alchemy and Chemistry are equally valid.
You probably are aware that self-replicating RNA has been created in the lab. Is it life? No, but it certainly is a precursor to life. It will be interesting where that will lead to.
Of course then there are those that think Astrology and Astronomy, as well as Alchemy and Chemistry are equally valid.
You probably are aware that self-replicating RNA has been created in the lab. Is it life? No, but it certainly is a precursor to life. It will be interesting where that will lead to.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
