[_ Old Earth _] Evolution - Part 2

[ossiegoldhill]

Evolution

[first post go easy on me please ]My name is Ossie, I'm from London and I'm 16. I consider myself a believer in evolution and an Atheist. Please don't be put off by this, I do not think any less of those who don't believe in this, as even if there is a God or not, humans are intelligent beings that are able to make their own independent decisions.

Let me start by saying that I do not wish to 'convert' you to Athiesm or disprove your faith, to do so would be wrong of me. I would simply like a viewpoint from the other side. I will do my best to not turn this into a 'my view is better than yours just because I say so' thing, and hope that you do the same. Mature discussion only please.

So my question is: Why should people not believe in Darwinian Evolution?

I have deliberately left this a broad question so you may interpret this how you wish. Please back up your responses with detailed evidence.

I look forward to your responses.

Regards,

Ossie

This is a continuation thread, the old thread is [split]48410[/split] by ossiegoldhill Titled Evolution

 

[christian_disable]

Re: Evolution

This is a continuation thread, the old thread is [split]48410[/split]

 

[Barbarian]

Re: Evolution

We both agree life is a miracle of God. What confuses me is whats wrong with God directly creating life?

In Genesis, He says that the Earth and waters brought forth life. Who am I to argue with Him?

It seems to me that's just what happened. But your position is nature produced life?

According to His will.

Isn't nature undirected, unguided, random?

So is a hammer, unless there's a Carpenter wielding it. ;)

Comparatively, concrete is chemically simple, inanimate, whereas life is chemically complex animate, sentient,and contains information,

Concrete is chemically complex. And of course, not all life is animate, and little of it is sentient. And yes, all of creation contains information.

Life, in the biological sense, is chemistry. The life we have, that differentiates us from other living things, is given directly by God.

What I'm getting at is if nature can produce life isn't that naturalism?

If so, God is a naturalist.

 

[Vaccine]

InGenesis, He says that the Earth and waters brought forth life. Who amI to argue with Him?

Genesis 2:1 - “And the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of themâ€
Isn't evolution saying things are still being created?

So is a hammer, unless there's a Carpenter wielding it. ;)

You being the intelligent cause behind the hammer as opposed to nature causing.
You know, that's intelligent design theory right?

And yes, all of creation contains information.

I agree all creation contains information. Intelligence is distinct from information. Even animals have developed forms of communication to expressin formation to each other. None of those form of communication come close to being defined as a language. DNA is a true language. It has an alphabet, sentence structure, spelling, grammar and expresses information. Language is instantly recognizable as the product of intelligence. There is intelligence behind DNA. I believe that “intelligence†is God ;), Crick on the other hand believes it to be aliens.

 

[Barbarian]

InGenesis, He says that the Earth and waters brought forth life. Who amI to argue with Him?

Genesis 2:1 - “And the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them”
Isn't evolution saying things are still being created?

Are you a creature of God? If so, that's your answer.

So is a hammer, unless there's a Carpenter wielding it. ;)

You being the intelligent cause behind the hammer as opposed to nature causing.
You know, that's intelligent design theory right?

No. IDers have tantrums when you suggest that God is great enough to make nature so that it serves His purposes without special intervention.

And yes, all of creation contains information.

I agree all creation contains information. Intelligence is distinct from information. Even animals have developed forms of communication to expressin formation to each other.

Perhaps that soul that God gives each of us directly, has something to do with it.

None of those form of communication come close to being defined as a language.

Chimps have impressive language abilities. So do at least some gorillas. They lack the larynx to talk, but signing is quite easy for them.

DNA is a true language.

No. Technically, it's a cipher. A language is capable of referring to any thing, something DNA cannot do. Also, it does not conform to Zipf's Law, which all known languages do.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zipf's_law

There is intelligence behind DNA. I believe that “intelligence” is God ;), Crick on the other hand believes it to be aliens.

So do IDers.

"It could be space aliens. There are many possibilities."
IDer William Dembski

 

[Vaccine]

God is done creating, meaning he does not write any more DNA. God said be fruitful and multiply. We have his blessing to reproduce (replicate our DNA).

I've always heard computer code referred to as a binary LANGUAGE. If you want to refer to DNA as a cipher, it only makes it even more complex.
Here is an example of DNA decoded, and translated into english:

amoebae however, need instructions such as "if temperature is between 10 and 15 C use enzyme A for 4 weeks, unless oxygen levels are below 0.8 ppm, then use enzyme B for 6 weeks; if temperature is between 15 and 20 C, use enzyme C for kidney formation, and enzyme A for skeletal formation, cook for 3 weeks; if temperatures is between 20 and 25 C, use enzyme A for nervous cell development, enzyme B for digestive system development, and enzyme D for skeletal formation, cook for 2 weeks unless oxygen drops below 0.8 ppm, in which case cook for 3 weeks and substitute enzyme B for enzyme D in the last week for skeletal development; if temperature is above 25 C use enzyme E for one week

It's compared to computer code for a reason. Computer code is full of "If... Then.." loops and so is DNA.

Chimps have language? Can you translate it into english and write it out here?

 

[Barbarian]

God is done creating, meaning he does not write any more DNA. God said be fruitful and multiply. We have his blessing to reproduce (replicate our DNA).

He never wrote any DNA. He says that the earth and waters brought forth living things. So He just used nature to do His will.

I've always heard computer code referred to as a binary LANGUAGE. If you want to refer to DNA as a cipher, it only makes it even more complex.

No. A cipher is simpler than language, for the reasons I explained.

Here is an example of DNA decoded, and translated into english:

amoebae however, need instructions such as "if temperature is between 10 and 15 C use enzyme A for 4 weeks, unless oxygen levels are below 0.8 ppm, then use enzyme B for 6 weeks; if temperature is between 15 and 20 C, use enzyme C for kidney formation, and enzyme A for skeletal formation, cook for 3 weeks; if temperatures is between 20 and 25 C, use enzyme A for nervous cell development, enzyme B for digestive system development, and enzyme D for skeletal formation, cook for 2 weeks unless oxygen drops below 0.8 ppm, in which case cook for 3 weeks and substitute enzyme B for enzyme D in the last week for skeletal development; if temperature is above 25 C use enzyme E for one week

No. That's just someone describing what happens. The real instructions are very different. BTW, amoebae don't have nerves or skeletons.

Chimps have language?

Some have become proficient in American sign language, for example. Others have used symbols. One particularly bright chimp made surprising progress, and then taught other chimps how to sign.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Washoe_(chimpanzee)

 

[Vaccine]

Well thats what I get for cutting and pasting, I missed the Amphibians part.

mammalian DNA for developmental processes only needs instructions along the lines of "bake at 37 C for nine months".

Amphibians and amoebae however, need instructions such as "if temperature is between 10 and 15 C use enzyme A for 4 weeks, unless oxygen levels are below 0.8 ppm, then use enzyme B for 6 weeks; if temperature is between 15 and 20 C, use enzyme C for kidney formation, and enzyme A for skeletal formation, cook for 3 weeks; if temperatures is between 20 and 25 C, use enzyme A for nervous cell development, enzyme B for digestive system development, and enzyme D for skeletal formation, cook for 2 weeks unless oxygen drops below 0.8 ppm, in which case cook for 3 weeks and substitute enzyme B for enzyme D in the last week for skeletal development; if temperature is above 25 C use enzyme E for one week"

My point being, DNA is a digital language in that it has all the aspects of a computer language, instead of 0 or 1, it has A, T, C, G, codon instead of a byte, performs a function "life" instead of a program. It is similar to computer code "if ... than ...". Teaching chimps sign language is nothing like DNA. DNA is something we find in our cells, not a lab. DNA is instructions for building a cell and how to operate it.

 

[Barbarian]

Nope. Just a cipher. It lacks the power and flexibility of a language.

 

[cupid dave]

Re: Evolution

What I'm getting at is if nature can produce life isn't that naturalism?

If so, God is a naturalist.

Why doesn't that make sense to people?

The Jews called Nature "father," because the pagans had already deemed the Queen of heaven to be Mother Nature.

The Jews insisted that "Father Nature" was/is the creative Force behind existence that was almighty and wielded all powers over the living entities that exist.
We see the spirit of Father Nature expressed as the great Shechinah, or that interwoven set of Natural Laws which funnel out the next Frame of Reality into which all living things must tread.
It is that on-going Reality to which all life must bow down or become extinct.
This by definition is the Highest God.

It seems ration and clear today that a singular Reality exists, in spite men argue and differ in regard to how they, personally, perceive that Reality.
It is common knowledge that insanity is defined as living in a fantasy world and denying Reality which one refuses to accept.
What the church has succeeded in accomplishing by opposing Evolution seems to have been the construction of a fantasy of hypotheticals, all inferring and asserting that a super-reality or a super-natural world exists that supersedes and negates the Reality which men can establish empirically, and explain as a Cause and Effect Universe.

 

[cupid dave]

Genesis 2:1 - “And the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them”
Isn't evolution saying things are still being created?

Thank you adding this important certification of Genesis corresponding directly with science.

This is an important point.

What Science has told us is that at the instant of the Big Bang, ALL matter has/had been created.
It would be that matter which would evolve, ultimately, into galaxies and the stars and planets that composed them.
But the transformation from that initial spark of Energy that turned into matter had been finished and accomplished at that first second.

We KNOW that matter is no longer flowing into the Universe, as once thought to be possible, in what was called the Pulsating Universe or the Steady-State Universe.
Here we rad in Genesis that, indeed, as conceived today by scientists, the creation was finished almost in the instant that it had announced its presence in that Big Bang.

 

[Adam]

Re: Evolution

The Jews called Nature "father," because the pagans had already deemed the Queen of heaven to be Mother Nature.

The Jews insisted that "Father Nature" was/is the creative Force behind existence that was almighty and wielded all powers over the living entities that exist.

Well, no. That's not true. Early Judaism was polytheistic with no regard to 'Father Nature" or an Almighty god. The "queen of heaven" of the pagans remark has no support whatsoever.

 

[Adam]

What Science has told us is that at the instant of the Big Bang, ALL matter has/had been created.
.

Again, you are claiming something that is not true. Fermions can be created out of photons, for example. We could go into the intricacies of annihalation and its inverse, but I fear that we are no longer on topic.

 

[cupid dave]

You being the intelligent cause behind the hammer as opposed to nature causing.
You know, that's intelligent design theory right?

Intelligent?
That is a misnomer.
That is a misuse of the word, or a connotation which is inappropriate.

The carpenter is the physical force behind the hammer.

When a rock falls from a cliff and "hammers out" a great hole below, it expresses a force at work.
There is nothing "intelligent" about that rock.

Intelligence is appropriately used to express the idea that the carpenter understands that nails hold things together.
He is envisioning the facts-of-life as they exist and have come into existence.
The carpenter is understanding how the Natural Laws works.

The carpenter is even using those same Natural Laws to his own advantage.
He is intelligent enough to do so because he understands Reality and how it works.

God, on the other hand, is not required to learn or understand how He has used His own Natural Laws in a web of Harmony such that creation has appeared and Reality unfolds, one frame after the next eternally, in precision with those Natural Laws.

 

[Adam]

Let me get this right.

God doesn't understand how He accomplishes His own work, but you do?



That's interesting.

 

[cupid dave]

1) DNA is a true language.
It has an alphabet, sentence structure, spelling, grammar and expresses information.

2) Language is instantly recognizable as the product of intelligence.
There is intelligence behind DNA.

3) I believe that “intelligence” is God

1) True.
In the early '80's, Isaac Asimov wrote one of the first lay science books called "The Genetic Code" which says the same thing.
He broke the entire concept down in to 22 letters/symbols for elements and molecules and compounds that described the whole subject simply and clearly.
I recommend that book even today.

2) Errr...
Language does suggest intelligence.
We us language to communicate.
Mathematics is also a language.

But God has numbered everything, even the hairs on your head.
We create the language to explain this.

It does not logically follow that because we are intelligent and can understand Reality, that there exists an intelligence behind what we are understanding.
It DOES imply Order and Rues and Laws exist which we see as rational, exactly BECAUSE we can relate and understand them.


3) I call God, Reality, the force behind each next frame that unfolds eternally.

 

[Adam]

Issac Asimov was a science fiction writer.

In the early '80's, Isaac Asimov wrote one of the first lay science books called "The Genetic Code" which says the same thing.
He broke the entire concept down in to 22 letters/symbols for elements and molecules and compounds that described the whole subject simply and clearly.
I recommend that book even today.

Sir, why do you always reccommend books that you have failed to read yourself?

First, his book is from the 60s, not the 80s. Most of the book is an introduction to the chemistry of living cells rather than a description of the genetic code and the 22 letters is your blatent addendum. Moreover, the molecular biology in this book is obsolete. As well, it only serves as an setup to the fictional aspect of the book: what the world will be like in 2004 when eugenics allows for a new race of men.

Asimov was largely a science fiction writer.

 

[VirginShallConceive]

Re: Evolution

Early Judaism was polytheistic . . .

 

[Vaccine]

The carpenter is the physical force behind the hammer.

When a rock falls from a cliff and "hammers out" a great hole below, it expresses a force at work.
There is nothing "intelligent" about that rock.

Intelligence is appropriately used to express the idea that the carpenter understands that nails hold things together.
He is envisioning the facts-of-life as they exist and have come into existence.
The carpenter is understanding how the Natural Laws works.

The carpenter is even using those same Natural Laws to his own advantage.
He is intelligent enough to do so because he understands Reality and how it works.

God, on the other hand, is not required to learn or understand how He has used His own Natural Laws in a web of Harmony such that creation has appeared and Reality unfolds, one frame after the next eternally, in precision with those Natural Laws.

Here is an illustration of intelligent design theory, replacing the carpenter with God:
God is the physical force behind the hammer.
God is understanding how the Natural Laws works.
God is even using those same Natural Laws to his own advantage.
God is intelligent enough to do so because he understands Reality and how it works.

Suppose we put a prokaryote (single cell organism) and some sterile, balanced salt solution in a test tube. Then poke a hole in the prokaryote, let everything spill out and the DNA unravel. That will dispense with all the problems of nature being able to produce all the ingredients necessary for life. Now, everything needed to make life is in that test tube. In order to put these microscopic pieces back together into a functioning cell with a cipher, we have these tools to work with: Gravity, heat, lightning, pressure, wind, (rain is out, DNA dissolves in water). I agree with you, when a rock falls from a cliff and hammers out a hole, it expresses a force at work but there is nothing intelligent about it. There is intelligence behind DNA. I believe those tools alone can't assemble DNA. I believe only God, weilding those tools, can make DNA.

 

[Barbarian]

Here is an illustration of intelligent design theory, replacing the carpenter with God:

The Carpenter is God.

God is understanding how the Natural Laws works.

God makes those "laws" work. Every bit of the natural world depends on His will. It's not apart from Him; it's His creation and it works as He wills. It's just consistent so we can live in it.

Suppose we put a prokaryote (single cell organism) and some sterile, balanced salt solution in a test tube. Then poke a hole in the prokaryote, let everything spill out and the DNA unravel. That will dispense with all the problems of nature being able to produce all the ingredients necessary for life.

No, it merely means we can kill things. God says nature produced life, as He intended.

Will you lose your faith if in the future, scientists learn how to make life from those components? If not, isn't this a specious and dangerous argument to present for God?