What is the real reason christians join scientific forums?

[Diogenes' Dog]

Plants seem to grow from "nothing."

The ingredients are there. It just takes random chance to grow. I have tried to grow three apple trees in the past few weeks. Nothing. And I am using some top-notch soil and enough water. Nothing. It just takes time and "luck."

I finally got a sprout.. very small.. but it was there. Then it died in a day. Wtf? God must have killed it. He doesn't want me to enjoy apples.

Maybe it's environment (temp., humidity, light, nutrient balance, pathogens etc.) is not right for it? Investigating that could open the door to a whole new discovery.

Presumably the conditions were right 3.5 billion years ago for the first self replicating molecules to be formed on the early earth. How, why and what molecules were formed is just another bit of the mystery.

 

[wsionynw]

from nothing? randomly, by accident?

Are you suggesting that evolution is random and accidental?

 

[Theoryofrelativity]

Are you suggesting that evolution is random and accidental?

it is not , it was not designed to be. If however it were without design then it would simply not exist at all.

How did evolution become so incredibly non accidental? Given no designer?

Computers do not create themselves, even though once programmed they can perform certain functions autonomously.

 

[Theoryofrelativity]

Plants seem to grow from "nothing."

The ingredients are there. It just takes random chance to grow. I have tried to grow three apple trees in the past few weeks. Nothing. And I am using some top-notch soil and enough water. Nothing. It just takes time and "luck."

I finally got a sprout.. very small.. but it was there. Then it died in a day. Wtf? God must have killed it. He doesn't want me to enjoy apples.

luck Absane?

Don't you mean 'probability'

Seeming to grow from nothing? You are not anticipating their growth from nothing. you have accomodated the requirements for growth to take place:A seed, soil, sunlight, water, atmosphere and your devoted loving attention, or perhaps that is what you are lacking? Have you tried singing to them?

NOTHING Ab grows in a completely sterile environment, note all the conditons required for your tree to grow.

Meanwhile I note you like to plan ahead, do you know how long it takes to grow and apple tree and enjoy apples!!

 

[Sarkus]

It's more than that - it's the aknowledgement that life is a mystery, of which we can only elucidate some parts using e.g. science. Moreover, the task is infinite as every answer we find seems to raise more questions.

So, for theists, God is the name given to this eternal mystery at the heart of everything... the fact that the construction of the universe is so elegant and greater than our best minds can understand.

Why do christians join scientific forums? - Because science and religion are both interested in the mystery. They should be complementary, not exclusive.

But whereas science seeks to uncover mysteries and learn, religion seeks to cover any gaps with "God did it".

If the two are complementary - then a given mystery will have either an answer from science, or "God did it".

What then of all the "God did it" mysteries that science subsequently solves?

This sort of suggests that religion was wrong in those instances?

I know I'm being simplistic in this - but religion and science are NOT complementary in the discovery of truth.
However, I do think religion can be complementary to science in one's personal / psychological well-being - i.e. for those that need it.

 

[Sarkus]

“ Originally Posted by wsionynw
Are you suggesting that evolution is random and accidental? ”

it is not , it was not designed to be. If however it were without design then it would simply not exist at all.

How did evolution become so incredibly non accidental? Given no designer?

Computers do not create themselves, even though once programmed they can perform certain functions autonomously.

You seem to not understand what evolution is.

Evolution was not "designed".
Evolution is an emergent process in any changing environment.
Things that can not survive the change in environment perish.
Those that can survive continue on.

Evolution does not EXIST.
A process does not EXIST.
A process, such as evolution, is merely a word to describe the success and failure of changes.

Evolutionary process also don't necessarily lead to BETTER things - just things that can survive the current environment - because if they couldn't survive they would perish.

 

[stretched]

ToR
"How did consciousness manifest from nothing? When did humans become conscnious, were we ever not conscious creatures? Where from nothing did it come?"

* Does consciousness evolve? If yes, then there need be no outside factor for manifestation. Its simply part of the package.

 

[Ophiolite]

no intelligent design theory is on the up, you are on the down.

I was with you all the way until you posted this nonsense and destroyed a sound, logical, supported argument.

 

[Theoryofrelativity]

You seem to not understand what evolution is.

Evolution was not "designed".
Evolution is an emergent process in any changing environment.
Things that can not survive the change in environment perish.
Those that can survive continue on.

Evolution does not EXIST.
A process does not EXIST.
A process, such as evolution, is merely a word to describe the success and failure of changes.

Evolutionary process also don't necessarily lead to BETTER things - just things that can survive the current environment - because if they couldn't survive they would perish.

A few simple questions for an expert on evolution such as yourself

How did the first life forms to appear, do so with an ability to replicate themselves?

Or did they not, did first life just die and then new life would keep springing up from 'nothing' (nothing being the 'soup')

With out replication how did the evolutionary process occur?

How was the information about genetically unconnected life forms 'shared' to ensure the improved adaptability/survival of the next?

WHY WAS adaptability and survival important, why did the evolutionary process NEED to occur at all? Why didn't life from the soup just arise and die, arise and die, arise and die? Why and HOW did it desire to survive and mechanisms evolve accordingly?

How did we ever get from living without replication to living with the ability to replicate?

Why haven't we observed life springing up from'nothing yet?
(nothing being the 'soup' of course)

How did the first life form appear with the ability to pass knowedge of it's envirnment' to it's progeny?

As evolution is a process that takes a VERY long time , how did the first life forms survive in the absense of the features required for its survival?

I will start new thread as I am interested to learn the answers to these simple questions.

 

[Theoryofrelativity]

I was with you all the way until you posted this nonsense and destroyed a sound, logical, supported argument.

we all have our off days

 

[spuriousmonkey]

How did the first life forms to appear, do so with an ability to replicate themselves?

Life per definition replicates. Otherwise it is not life, oh mighty IQ of 155.

Or did they not, did first life just die and then new life would keep springing up from 'nothing' (nothing being the 'soup')

You clearly cannot substitute an IQ of 155 for actual reading up on a subject.

With out replication how did the evolutionary process occur?

Clearly the IQ of 155 prevents you from seeing the trees in the forest. There is no evolution without replication. Indeed by asking the wrong question you can make your own points valid. The intrisinc value of your own points however will appraoch zero.

How was the information about genetically unconnected life forms 'shared' to ensure the improved adaptability/survival of the next?

It wasn't. Otherwise they would be connected. You cannot subsitite an IQ of 155 for actually reading up on a topic. We are not in ancient greece anymore.

WHY WAS adaptability and survival important, why did the evolutionary process NEED to occur at all? Why didn't life from the soup just arise and die, arise and die, arise and die? Why and HOW did it desire to survive and mechanisms evolve accordingly?

Once again a collection of silly questions. There is no desire in evolution. Evolution is a process.

How did we ever get from living without replication to living with the ability to replicate?

We never did. False questions cannot be answered oh might IQ of 155.

Why haven't we observed life springing up from'nothing yet?
(nothing being the 'soup' of course)

Because there is efficient life everywhere.

How did the first life form appear with the ability to pass knowedge of it's envirnment' to it's progeny?

Who knows? It doesn't diminish the value of evolution.

As evolution is a process that takes a VERY long time , how did the first life forms survive in the absense of the features required for its survival?

Once again it seems that an IQ of 155 is not a substitute for actual reading up on a topic. Evolution occurs with every replication round. The overall direction in a population during each replication round can be zero. However, in the beginning there was so much room for improvement that it can easily be imagined that the first evolution was fast untill more stable forms appeared.

I will start new thread as I am interested to learn the answers to these simple questions.

Don't bother. Just read http://www.talkorigins.org/ first.

You fail utterly in basic knowledge. Maybe it is a smart move (one that even an IQ of 155 should be able to see) to first read up on the basics before criticising a well established theory.

Otherwise this is nothing more than an exercise in silliness.

 

[Theoryofrelativity]

Spurious all you demosntrate is YOUR lack of knowledge, I am seeking answers, you blatantly have none. Asking questions is how you learn, you beleive you know it all, thus YOU will not learn.

meanwhile I do value evolution, I am in awe of it, I merely want to know why the process began at all. And how first life forms came equipped already with survival mechanisms.

You can't answer it, you just accept that you should not question that which you cannot answer. Kind of a 'religious' attitude don't you think?

 

[Sarkus]

I will start new thread as I am interested to learn the answers to these simple questions.

Seen new thread - have answered in there.

 

[spuriousmonkey]

Spurious all you demosntrate is YOUR lack of knowledge, I am seeking answers, you blatantly have none. Asking questions is how you learn, you beleive you know it all, thus YOU will not learn.

Asking the right questions is how you learn.

 

[geeser]

oh mighty IQ of 155.

you've missed the decimal point it's IQ 15.5
anybody who needs to state their IQ, does'nt have it that high.
it's like me saying, I'm brain surgeon, and my IQ is 245 and Quite clearly I'm lying, but you would have no way of knowing, would you.

dont believe everything people post, take it with a pinch of salt.

 

[Theoryofrelativity]

you've missed the decimal point it's IQ 15.5
anybody who needs to state their IQ, does'nt have it that high.
it's like me saying, I'm brain surgeon, and my IQ is 245 and Quite clearly I'm lying, but you would have no way of knowing, would you.

dont believe everything people post, take it with a pinch of salt.

except I proved it

it was only mentioned as someone questioned my intelligence no other reason than that. After mentioning it, the doubt arose, so evidence was provided.
It was mentioned again as part of a 'jest' post.

You promote your shortcomings well and your jealousy. Anyone that even refers to it is thus else why do so?

Oh and tell your little character analysis re 'anyone who mentions IQ' to the entire group of mensa members. I think you'll find they swap figures a fair bit.

 

[spuriousmonkey]

except I proved it

The only point you proved is that people with an IQ of 155 are on average arrogant, unable to absorb general knowledge, and unable to make a coherent argument without mixing in a mental cherry bomb that flushes away their argument.

We need another volunteer with an IQ of 155 to see if we can correct this image we got so far of 155s.

 

[Theoryofrelativity]

The only point you proved is that people with an IQ of 155 are on average arrogant, unable to absorb general knowledge, and unable to make a coherent argument without mixing in a mental cherry bomb that flushes away their argument.

We need another volunteer with an IQ of 155 to see if we can correct this image we got so far of 155s.

I also said that child birth had allowed a certain amount brain rot to set in, I also dismissed IQ testing an effective means of testing intelligence,

re the arrogance, well that's just my online persona. It's generally funny, but less so when required to answer to insults.

let's examine your online persona, inuslts, Ad hom, occassional snippet of info but not much really. Fun when feeling funny...

 

[Satyr]

*************
M*W: I asked this question when we were living at the refugee camp. This ended up being the most responded to question on that religion forum, so I'm asking folks here, what is the real reason christians join scientific forums? It can't possibly be to become informed, because they obviously don't want to know anything other than what they already believe. Perhaps it could indicate a flicker of doubt for some? Or is it truthfully just to try and convert the rest of us? That's my guess.

To pretend that their hopes and dreams and fear-based assumptions are rational and not emotional reactions to the unknown and the uncertain.

 

[Ophiolite]

dont believe everything people post, take it with a pinch of salt.

I don't believe you.