Author claims to have proof of God!

[abyssofdreams]

But nobody believes that DNA just appeared on the scene in its current form, all ready to go. Billions of tiny coincidences, too insignificant to be considered on their own, create the illusion of a (cumulative) coincidence that baffles the mind in its complexity.

I imagine DNA's origins are as humble as our own.

Yes but evolution takes time. The way new science discoveries found out that we developed too fast for what evolution normally would take for us to be the way we are nowadays.

There was an interesting article in New Scientist about this, let me see if I can find a reference online...

 

[abyssofdreams]

You mean with the origins of life on Earth?

If so, what about the origin of the aliens?

I do not think they created but modified us

If you're interested drop me a PM, don't wanna bore everybody with my theory here, hehe^^

 

[Damphire]

Very interesting discussion, I spent quite some time reading. The guy's theory is very simple and interesting BUT there are some very vague points going around, like denying that order can come from chaos.

Anyway I'm agnostic.. my posture is "Maybe IT exists, maybe IT doesn't... but is IT going to pay my rent? .. no? .. then I don't care" XD

 

[SocialNumb]

I would like to read this theory.

Listening to "I Drink Alone" George Thorogood.

 

[iekobrid]

Perry, just answer the question: “Does a computer weigh more with a big programme than the same computer with a small programme.�??


Can you answer this? I’ve asked it about 3 or 4 times.

That depends on how much of the bigger program is porn. We all know everything is heavier when you have to hold it with one hand.

Tru dat.

 

[-Gavin-]

Evolution...

Simple.


If mutations in the genepool arose from a single celled organism and develped from there, it's natural that mutations in the generic code occurred and that the useful ones remained.


Imagine you have a hamburger...

And you add chocolate.

Sucks right. you ditch it and never do it again.

Then you add bacon.
BAM! that stays.

Read your darwin

 

[Aaron Smith]

There are a lot of appealing things about the theory of evolution and a lot of strong, sensible evidence on it's side, but it's far from being rock solid. I understand that a big part of it is that an organism will adapt to it's ever-changing surroundings and over time, new physical features will arise, etc...but what I don't understand is this: how does an organism pass on any kind of adaptations to it's offspring? The genes it passes on to it's offspring are the exact same as they were when it began it's life, so how would it's offspring be in any way more evolved than it's parent was? I know we're talking massive chunks of time here for evolution to take place, but if a parent can only pass on the exact DNA it was born with, then it seems like the theory is pretty weak. Certainly genetic mutations will occur over time, but they are in no way related to adaptation. If anyone has an informative answer, I would welcome it.

 

[-Gavin-]

There are a lot of appealing things about the theory of evolution and a lot of strong, sensible evidence on it's side, but it's far from being rock solid. I understand that a big part of it is that an organism will adapt to it's ever-changing surroundings and over time, new physical features will arise, etc...but what I don't understand is this: how does an organism pass on any kind of adaptations to it's offspring? The genes it passes on to it's offspring are the exact same as they were when it began it's life, so how would it's offspring be in any way more evolved than it's parent was? I know we're talking massive chunks of time here for evolution to take place, but if a parent can only pass on the exact DNA it was born with, then it seems like the theory is pretty weak. Certainly genetic mutations will occur over time, but they are in no way related to adaptation. If anyone has an informative answer, I would welcome it.

Same way you can inherit your "Mother's Eyes" and "Father's Nose" etc.

Mutations occur due to strenghts in characteristics from both parents and the best mutations remain while those with unsuitable/inferior ones die out.

You inherit characteristics from both parents but you don't look like both, do you? You have your own characteristics as well as "hints" of both.

Multiply this over bilions of years.



It all comes back to basic science and darwinism.

 

[abyssofdreams]

I've said it before and I say it again. Evolution of humanity went too fast to be all natural without ANY influence.
I'll post the article later on. Prolly gotta scan it, cause I can't find it online right now.

 

[-Gavin-]

Imagine an anteater... Long snout to eat ants from undrground...
This goes on and on, so the ants discover that the deepe you live, the more likely they are to sruvive.

As a result, the anteaters with longer snouts get the food, survive to breeding age and then pass on their characteristics to their offsrping.

The ones with shorter snouts die out before breeding age due to no food and have nothing to pass on.

In less than 10 generations, you can have a change in appearace where anteaters in a given area may havelonger souts simply cause it has been FORCED to adapt to changes in it's surroundings whereas some in another area may have short snouts due to thin soil and thus an inability for the ants to live so deep underground.

Or, in simpler terms...


There are two amp techs...

One wires with copper wire and a solder iron (Tech 1), the other with a shoelace and a piece of cheese (Tech 2).

Tech 1 receives money as he has adapted to his surroundings (target customer). Tech 2 gets no work done, no money, closes business (dies).


This can happen in the space of one lifetime

Principle remains the same.


The strongest characteristics are passed on.

 

[-Gavin-]

This person is basing his arguments on one weak concept that there are no naturally orrcuring codes and DNA is "Code" due to it's universal interpretation...

Well, for it to be interpreted as anything, humans must interpret it. Code is only Code in the human mind and is a human creation to explain/name a certain thing in the same way a tree is a tree and an essay of godbearingretardification is an essay of godbearingretardification!


And then this brings back to the age old questionn which i bet y left nut he couldn't look me in the eye and give a unflappable solid answer.

If god created everything, who created god?


I'm gonan buy some crayons and write this guy a letter with pictures explaining why he's a bellend.

 

[abyssofdreams]

The main problem is that people polarize too much. It's either black or white. And the definition of God is simply just a matter of perspective.
For me, if I had to define it, I would simply state that God would logically be energy. Energy is not created, it simply is. It always was and will always be.
Everything is energy. Simple as that But that requires abstract thinking which of any theist isn't capable of to a certain extent.

 

[~BURNY~]

Why (religious) people keep seeing religion and science as competiting disciplines is beyond me.

Science is an attempt to explain things around us based on observation.
It doesn't pretend to be the truth. It is about theories, and theories are made to be contradicted,
discussed, refined..etc
It's a trial and error thing really. Darwin theory is NOT a dogma. There's no DarwinISM.

On the other side, religion pretend to be the truth... Based on... eh...Nothing.
You have the claim first, then you need to fill the holes.
First I tell you that Batman exists, then I'm gonna search for evidences of his existence... Wow...
CreationISM is a dogma. Intelligent design is a dogma.

Now we need JBroll around here...

 

[-Gavin-]

There's no DarwinISM.

Dictionary.com begs to differ.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/Darwinism

 

[~BURNY~]

Dictionary.com begs to differ.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/Darwinism

That wasn't my point. But it's ok.
I should say "in my book" but it kind of reminds of a religious perspective.

 

[-Gavin-]

Gotcha, i jumped to conclusions, appologies bro!

 

[-Gavin-]

This thread needs laughter!

 

[abyssofdreams]

Thanks for the video! British humour NEVER fails

 

[LSD-Studio]

Evolution...

Simple.


If mutations in the genepool arose from a single celled organism and develped from there, it's natural that mutations in the generic code occurred and that the useful ones remained.


Imagine you have a hamburger...

And you add chocolate.

Sucks right. you ditch it and never do it again.

Then you add bacon.
BAM! that stays.

Read your darwin

haha, aren't you the guy that combined nutella and sausage?

 

[-Gavin-]

haha, aren't you the guy that combined nutella and sausage?

And it stuck around as the best thing ever