Mud from rivers into the oceans

[universalchiro]

Perhaps you can cite the scientific experiment which has created life out of nothingness. Perhaps you can cite any scientific data which would make life possible. Any? Just one.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miller%E2% ... experiment

I think an experiment in a glass bottle that produces all of the naturally occurring amino acids certainly proves it's possible (in the sense that it's not impossible) to create life from originally inorganic materials.

Be careful Metsfanmax, you are unwittingly utilizing evidence purporting intelligent design.

[chang50]

Perhaps you can cite the scientific experiment which has created life out of nothingness. Perhaps you can cite any scientific data which would make life possible. Any? Just one.

Why?Unlike you I've never made any claims about abiogenesis,it's a mystery to me.On the contrary it is you who has made a quite extraordinary scientific claim,with judging by your refusal to answer my question,nothing to back it up.Show us the SCIENTIFIC (not metaphysical) evidence or withdraw the claim...

[_sabotage_]

Chang, I have the evidence. I am writing this and you are reading it, or had been and without God this is impossible.

The better we understand science, the more clear it is that that were any of the rules governing the universe tweaked even a a trillionth of a trillionth, life would not be possible. If the universe acted to bring these laws about, why would that not be considered our reason for existence and given the credit of God?

[betiko]

oh shit, another fundamentalist thread! hide your kids, hide your wives!

[khazalid]

paley's watchmaker analogy was discredited several lifetimes ago.

it has a lot to recommend it, granted, but the argument is ultimately flawed, and there is no way you can reasonably state that science does anything remotely like you contend it does.

and your argument, i feel obliged to point out, is essentially paleyan.

[chang50]

Chang, I have the evidence. I am writing this and you are reading it, or had been and without God this is impossible.

The better we understand science, the more clear it is that that were any of the rules governing the universe tweaked even a a trillionth of a trillionth, life would not be possible. If the universe acted to bring these laws about, why would that not be considered our reason for existence and given the credit of God?

I understand that is what you believe and you are obviously entitled to believe as you choose,BUT this is emphatically not a scientific claim as you stated.The universe does indeed appear to us to be fine-tuned,no argument from me there.The problem comes with the gigantic leap you make from that in giving the reason as 'god',however you define it.You simply cannot get there using the scientific method.You can philosophise as theologians have done for centuries employing metaphysical arguments but that is not science..

[crispybits]

There is also no comparison by which you can decide that this apparent "fine tuning" is the result of design.

It's a rainy day here. I could go out and examine puddles until I found one exactly the same shape as the US (minus the outliers like Hawaii obviously). Statistically I might well be out there for a while, but eventually I'd find it. Does that mean the puddle was created by an American rain god or Native American rain dance? We don't know how many universes exist beyond our own, and how fine tuned all of them are for this or other forms of complex pattern building in forms of matter/energy/whatnot. Looking at this single universe does not allow us to hypothesise about any form of greater reality in the way you are attempting.

[hotfire]

perhaps u failed to read that land for the state of mississippi is actually old river deposit from the river of mississippi...is that part of the 4500 year old sample or does the 4500 year old sample not contain that portion of deposit?

[chang50]

There is also no comparison by which you can decide that this apparent "fine tuning" is the result of design.

It's a rainy day here. I could go out and examine puddles until I found one exactly the same shape as the US (minus the outliers like Hawaii obviously). Statistically I might well be out there for a while, but eventually I'd find it. Does that mean the puddle was created by an American rain god or Native American rain dance? We don't know how many universes exist beyond our own, and how fine tuned all of them are for this or other forms of complex pattern building in forms of matter/energy/whatnot. Looking at this single universe does not allow us to hypothesise about any form of greater reality in the way you are attempting.

Indeed,it's no more absurd,or unscientific,to posit the multiverse hypothesis as compared to the god hypothesis.Both are unamenable to the scientific method as we presently understand it.

[universalchiro]

perhaps u failed to read that land for the state of mississippi is actually old river deposit from the river of mississippi...is that part of the 4500 year old sample or does the 4500 year old sample not contain that portion of deposit?

Valid question: I hear you, it's understood that the banks of the Mississippi has portions of increase from the Mississippi River sediment deposits, and it is plausible that the Mississippi exited out of Mississippi in the past, but the satellite images show there is still not enough sediment to establish an old age in geological terms.

The estimated age with the amount of deposit and rate of deposit is approximately 4,500 years. Indicating the continents formed not so long ago. Hope that helps.

[betiko]

perhaps u failed to read that land for the state of mississippi is actually old river deposit from the river of mississippi...is that part of the 4500 year old sample or does the 4500 year old sample not contain that portion of deposit?

Valid question: I hear you, it's understood that the banks of the Mississippi has portions of increase from the Mississippi River sediment deposits, and it is plausible that the Mississippi exited out of Mississippi in the past, but the satellite images show there is still not enough sediment to establish an old age in geological terms.

The estimated age with the amount of deposit and rate of deposit is approximately 4,500 years. Indicating the continents formed not so long ago. Hope that helps.

Let s assume you are right and rivers like the mississippi, the nile or the rhein are only 4500 yo (rolf!!). How do you jump from this to "continents formed not so long ago"? If those rivers weren t there then the continents never existed?? How far back can can we go regarding egyptian artefacts found around the nile? And we are just talking about the egyptians.

I feel sorry for all these people still living in medieval ages...

[BigBallinStalin]

perhaps u failed to read that land for the state of mississippi is actually old river deposit from the river of mississippi...is that part of the 4500 year old sample or does the 4500 year old sample not contain that portion of deposit?

Valid question: I hear you, it's understood that the banks of the Mississippi has portions of increase from the Mississippi River sediment deposits, and it is plausible that the Mississippi exited out of Mississippi in the past, but the satellite images show there is still not enough sediment to establish an old age in geological terms.

The estimated age with the amount of deposit and rate of deposit is approximately 4,500 years. Indicating the continents formed not so long ago. Hope that helps.

Let s assume you are right and rivers like the mississippi, the nile or the rhein are only 4500 yo (rolf!!). How do you jump from this to "continents formed not so long ago"? If those rivers weren t there then the continents never existed?? How far back can can we go regarding egyptian artefacts found around the nile? And we are just talking about the egyptians.

I feel sorry for all these people still living in medieval ages...

Well, his position makes sense if you believe that all anthropologists and archeologists around the world are involved in a mass conspiracy. They're all fabricating 'evidence' with their radiocarbon dating and tree-rings measurements!

[khazalid]

as far as i can see, that has not been implied anywhere. the premise seems to be closer to catastrophism than conspiracy theory

[BigBallinStalin]

as far as i can see, that has not been implied anywhere. the premise seems to be closer to catastrophism than conspiracy theory

We'll wait a bit. Previous users have dealt with such arguments by the fundies, who then rely on some conspiracy theory to discard the contradictory evidence, or they ignore it (which brings us this thread, unsurprisingly). I'm placing bets on the conspiracy theory.

[mrswdk]

Given his track record in this thread, my money's on ignore.

[mrswdk]

Ha, no way. This chiro dude has the third highest score on the site. The magic inside his mind must be potent.

[_sabotage_]

There is also no comparison by which you can decide that this apparent "fine tuning" is the result of design.

It's a rainy day here. I could go out and examine puddles until I found one exactly the same shape as the US (minus the outliers like Hawaii obviously). Statistically I might well be out there for a while, but eventually I'd find it. Does that mean the puddle was created by an American rain god or Native American rain dance? We don't know how many universes exist beyond our own, and how fine tuned all of them are for this or other forms of complex pattern building in forms of matter/energy/whatnot. Looking at this single universe does not allow us to hypothesise about any form of greater reality in the way you are attempting.

Or I could simply dig a puddle in that shape and save you some looking time. We know that rain generates puddles. What is generating multiple universes? Is it a universe factory where nothingness suddenly springs forth into a universe with its unique laws and we just happen to be in the trillion trillionths of possibilities that could form life?

You take that leap into that nothingness all you like, but please do not suggest that it is less absurd than using the evidence we have to draw a straightforward conclusion. Hey guys, there is a trillion trillions of a chance that if you jump, you won't die, but if you live you will die anyway. Don't talk that nonsense to my kid and I won't try to save yours from hell, deal?

Enjoy being alive for no reason except that there is a random universe generator that is in no way God and that will suck your life into nothingness. Great science that ignores the most obvious explanation and grabs at biased straws. Now declare a scientific victory over God, wow we have managed to smear our creator! Nice pat on the back, just required finding a trillion trillionths of a chance and people believe us!

[betiko]

Enjoy thinking your life means something in the plans of your invisible friend.
Enjoy thinking that our form of life/ecosystem is the only one viable in a universe infinitely big, which is probably not the only existing universe.
Seems like some people have too much ego to accept their specie is meaningless.

[crispybits]

Or I could simply dig a puddle in that shape and save you some looking time. We know that rain generates puddles. What is generating multiple universes? Is it a universe factory where nothingness suddenly springs forth into a universe with its unique laws and we just happen to be in the trillion trillionths of possibilities that could form life?

You take that leap into that nothingness all you like, but please do not suggest that it is less absurd than using the evidence we have to draw a straightforward conclusion. Hey guys, there is a trillion trillions of a chance that if you jump, you won't die, but if you live you will die anyway. Don't talk that nonsense to my kid and I won't try to save yours from hell, deal?

Enjoy being alive for no reason except that there is a random universe generator that is in no way God and that will suck your life into nothingness. Great science that ignores the most obvious explanation and grabs at biased straws. Now declare a scientific victory over God, wow we have managed to smear our creator! Nice pat on the back, just required finding a trillion trillionths of a chance and people believe us!

Leap into nothingness? Where do you get that from? Ah of course I criticised your proof for God and therefore you assume I'm claiming a proof of no God. I'm not. I'm claiming that your proof of God sucks, and if you want to continue to claim to have proof you'd better come up with something better.

I also didn't suggest anything is more or less absurd than anything else. I pointed out that you can't say "this universe is fine tuned --> God" because there are other reasons why this universe might end up fine tuned (if it even is so, if I calculated the percentage of the planetary surface just in our solar system that is hospitable to human (special?) life then there would be a lot of 0s after the decimal point and before the 1 at the end). One possibility is that this is one of many univeses, and statistically if you make enough random number generated universes at least one will end up having the right combination of constants to allow complex matter patterns and life. Another possibility is that we're inside a massive alien science experiment, and those aliens are technologically advanced enough to create a universe, and know which constants will yield more interesting (i.e. complex pattern forming) results. These are just two alternatives to God, I could carry on with more if you like?

Besides, there is fine tuning, but it is that these forms of matter and life are fine tuned to the universe, and the universe is not fine tuned to us at all (except in hindsight). If I designed a new operating system for computers, would the creator of the little notepad or solitaire programme that runs on it ever claim that the reason I built the OS in a certain way was to allow their programme, special above all other programmes, to run efficently? Or would they say they had written some code which runs really well through my OS? To claim the universe is built a certain way so as to allow your existence, whether you mean it this way or not, is stupendously arrogant.

[BigBallinStalin]

Maybe it's not that it's arrogant, but instead it's satisfying. Many people don't like facing the "I don't know" prospect, so inserting a "god did it" explanation corrects that felt uneasiness.


Neil Tyson has a nice lecture which applies this explanation to some of history's greatest scientists and mathematicians:

[Lootifer]

oh shit, another fundamentalist thread! hide your kids, hide your wives!

[moderator-hat]

Keep it clean people, keep it clean. (not just @ betiko here...)

[/moderator-hat]

[crispybits]

Maybe it's not that it's arrogant, but instead it's satisfying. Many people don't like facing the "I don't know" prospect, so inserting a "god did it" explanation corrects that felt uneasiness.

Neil Tyson has a nice lecture which applies this explanation to some of history's greatest scientists and mathematicians:

See that's one thing I don't understand. I know there's things I don't know, and that's a good feeling, because it means that there's still new and interesting things I can learn about. I'd hate to be in the position where I think I have the answer to everything because that would mean I could never grow (intellectually/spiritually/whateverly) and had reached my limits. There lies real hopelessness in my books.

I've seen that lecture before, still interesting stuff if I remember it rightly. It explains the phenomena without attempting to justify it (and if memory serves he actually fairly strongly criticises that mindset in the end for much the same reasons as above, but that might be subtext that I took from it due to confirmation bias, not sure)

[betiko]

Maybe it's not that it's arrogant, but instead it's satisfying. Many people don't like facing the "I don't know" prospect, so inserting a "god did it" explanation corrects that felt uneasiness.


Neil Tyson has a nice lecture which applies this explanation to some of history's greatest scientists and mathematicians:

Great lecture! Love the parallel between 21st century america and 12th century bagdad.
Everything he explains there is very interresting and witty.

[_sabotage_]

Or I could simply dig a puddle in that shape and save you some looking time. We know that rain generates puddles. What is generating multiple universes? Is it a universe factory where nothingness suddenly springs forth into a universe with its unique laws and we just happen to be in the trillion trillionths of possibilities that could form life?

You take that leap into that nothingness all you like, but please do not suggest that it is less absurd than using the evidence we have to draw a straightforward conclusion. Hey guys, there is a trillion trillions of a chance that if you jump, you won't die, but if you live you will die anyway. Don't talk that nonsense to my kid and I won't try to save yours from hell, deal?

Enjoy being alive for no reason except that there is a random universe generator that is in no way God and that will suck your life into nothingness. Great science that ignores the most obvious explanation and grabs at biased straws. Now declare a scientific victory over God, wow we have managed to smear our creator! Nice pat on the back, just required finding a trillion trillionths of a chance and people believe us!

Leap into nothingness? Where do you get that from? Ah of course I criticised your proof for God and therefore you assume I'm claiming a proof of no God. I'm not. I'm claiming that your proof of God sucks, and if you want to continue to claim to have proof you'd better come up with something better.

I also didn't suggest anything is more or less absurd than anything else. I pointed out that you can't say "this universe is fine tuned --> God" because there are other reasons why this universe might end up fine tuned (if it even is so, if I calculated the percentage of the planetary surface just in our solar system that is hospitable to human (special?) life then there would be a lot of 0s after the decimal point and before the 1 at the end). One possibility is that this is one of many univeses, and statistically if you make enough random number generated universes at least one will end up having the right combination of constants to allow complex matter patterns and life. Another possibility is that we're inside a massive alien science experiment, and those aliens are technologically advanced enough to create a universe, and know which constants will yield more interesting (i.e. complex pattern forming) results. These are just two alternatives to God, I could carry on with more if you like?

Besides, there is fine tuning, but it is that these forms of matter and life are fine tuned to the universe, and the universe is not fine tuned to us at all (except in hindsight). If I designed a new operating system for computers, would the creator of the little notepad or solitaire programme that runs on it ever claim that the reason I built the OS in a certain way was to allow their programme, special above all other programmes, to run efficently? Or would they say they had written some code which runs really well through my OS? To claim the universe is built a certain way so as to allow your existence, whether you mean it this way or not, is stupendously arrogant.

Your criticism to my proof of God, ie there could be multiple universes or there are aliens creating universes, does not disprove anything. It does not adhere to the scientific method as the only evidence that supports this is the lack of possibility that we exist without intelligent design. Those universes or aliens require a beginning, just as God requires a beginning.

Please do calculate the planetary surface in our solar system which is hospitable for life. Something to chew on while you do: if each electron in our universe represented a chance that life exists, they do not add up to that chance. Perhaps I should rephrase, your stance is absurd.

My stance is arrogant, and I will apologize to the first alien I meet. On the other hand, until then, I will arrogantly praise God as our creator and then will see what evidence the alien has that supports or contradicts this. If you feel that the environment isn't fitted to us, then I would recommend changing your environment.

[AndyDufresne]

This topic needs some Star Trek wisdom. At first, I wasn't sure what form that wisdom should take. Then I came across this.




--Andy