Indeed. Your point?

Thank you, B L Zeebub!

Thus, science does not negate a "God".

Yet, you have asserted that science does in fact do as such.

Here is whats going on in this thread.
Mr DanishDynamite is baiting the religious
people on a fact of proving the existence of GOD.
While at the same time he can't disprove it,
nor will he give proof of the non existence of
God.

So lets pause to reflect on just what does people
like DanishDynamite really believe in.

Once upon a time in a galaxy that did not exist
there was nothingness no space, no time
no matter, and not even a sound.

then for no good reason there appeared a goo
or a cloud of crap, that again for no good
reason it just exploded into what we now call
the universe.

Now mind you at this time there is just matter
strung all over the place, and there was no
consciousness to be seen anywhere.

Yet one day a few molecules got bored and said
lets stick together(no pun intended) and create
some code, after all, we have a lot of time on
our hands anyways.

first they stuck together to make a simple cell
now mind you, a simple cell maybe simple
compared to other more complex cells but
the simple cell has ALL scientist baffled as
to just how complex they are, and they did
this without thought.

now stop and think about this for a minute.
a lot of evolutionist say "if given enough time
this action would take place"

so it's like saying if I made a large box to hold
a 1000 peace puzzle and made the box shake
that if given enough time, all the peaces would
fall together making the puzzle.
Not in your wildest dreams.

anyway on with the story. these cells then
started to get together to form even more
complex cell structures, all without a brain to
think out how to improve it's self. and some how
all these cells were communicating together
to build more and more complex creatures
all the way up to man himself.

Now mind you, that man is a machine, a bio
machine, and very complex at that, more
complex then a wheel, and if evolution is right,
then the time it took to make such a complex
machine as man then other thing less complex
should have been made already, like the wheel
or the car or there should be some planet
somewhere, where the right chemicals just got
together to make volcanoes that gush out
chocolate pudding, or one with oceans of
Pepsi cola or coke a cola, your choice.

after all those are just chemicals and they
could have just happened to have just got
mixed together. gee this is exciting of a
thought. LMAO

But the hardest thing for me to understand is
the fact that a creature, you just pick any
creature in time at any stage, one day said
screw this, I am tired of being me, I want to
evolve into something new on this day he
made his change, not only did he do this
he had to of talked some other creature into
doing the same on the same day, because they
needed both male and female, they even
thought out the details of all the reproductive
parts to work together all on the same day mind
you.

Now this story gets even deeper because this
action is supposed to have happened 1000's of
times, we just can't find all the remains to show
each step, just a few, just look at the ones
they have, look at the one they say is before
the other, there is a big difference, which means
that if there is nothing to be found in between
these, then it means one day they did a horrible
transformation like we seen on the incredible
hulk, I bet that hurt too. and they did it in pairs
male and female. well this has got me real
worried, because every time I get a cramp
I get scared that I may turn into who knows
what?

But then there is DNA in this mix too, which
I don't yet understand how it got made.

Now mind you, that I am a computer engineer
and programmer, so I understand full well about
code, and DNA is just that, a code.

So lets look at it this way, the alphabet is a
hieroglyphics and it is really meaning less unless
a consciousness knows it's meaning, those
Greeks were very smart huh?

yet the alphabet can be used for many languages
and so this can make it even more complex of
a code, because it has to be known what language
it is for, and there are rules for that too.

well just like that, DNA has meaning a code
that just happened by a lot of molecules that
some how got together and shared it's meaning
because they all seem to know the code.

so from the big bang to DNA it just happened
the most complex code man has ever seen
made and invented by no one, designed
by no thought at all, by molecules that no
nothing at all. I am going to have to swallow
a big Azz bottle of faith on this one people.

anyways, there it is in a nut shell of what people
like DanishDynamite want you to swallow.
it's the biggest faith pill ever invented and
you have to swallow it without water.



......

__________________
The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not.
Thomas Jefferson

If you think the problem of evolution is difficult, think for a moment about ID.
ID depends on this bizarre (and entirely subjective) idea that life appears designed... because it's so PERFECT.
Riiiiight.

Just off the top of my head I can name several imperfections about human anatomy that would make the "designer" a complete incompetent:
Male nipples
The appendix
Wisdom teeth
Backs that start to wear out from walking erect
Babies that are born helpless and stay that way for a long time because if they were any more developed their heads would not fit through the birth canal.
Cancer cells
Genetic defects
Food cravings that are only fitting for days of scarcity and without processed food (you'd think the "designer" would have thought ahead a bit).
An inability to associate more than 200 people as being a direct part of your in-group, creating a constant need for either war or government (or usually both).
Limitations to the psychological ability to process data
The fact that our brains are inefficient extra material lumped on top of a mouse brain (which itself is a bunch of crap lumped on top of a reptile brain)

And there's the ever-present dilemma: Why was life designed with the need to destroy life in order to preserve itself?

None of this stuff points to any kind of an intelligent designer.
Designed products tend to be more functional for their purposes. They tend not to contain useless parts (male nipples, appendixes) for one thing.

At least evolution makes sense. And the only reason it's so hard for some people to believe is because they assume that the current status of life and "creation" is somehow better or more interesting than what would exist if any of the variables were shifted in some way... something that only makes sense in the bias of living human beings... utterly subjective and COMPLETELY untestable.

__________________
"It's never over... BOY!"
The Tall Man, Phantasm III

Your arrogance is astounding.

I'll give you a jar, I'll remove the air inside of it and it will be similar to the vacuum of space. The occasional quantum fluctuation here and there, but essentially nothing in it.

Now make a leaf from this. Just a simple leaf. Nothing too complicated.

Why? Why would I create a leaf?
That's part of my point. What purpose does a leaf have? Why is it so great? Why would it be created by something other than accident?

You call me arrogant. At least I'm willing to admit that maybe in the grand scheme of things, we humans and even life itself are not so great. Why? Because we are the ones who created the concept of "great".

Now why is a leaf anymore astounding, from the perspective of a non-anthropomorhpic stance beyond life, than the phenomena on lifeless planets, the phenomena in the "voids" of space, etc?
It only seems important because of our bias as living humans. If that isn't arrogance, I don't know what is! We create a god in our own image, then give him credit for everything around us!



And getting back to something earlier that made no sense to me whatsoever: DNA being a problem for evolution...
It doesn't appear that way here:
http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=...ting-evolution

__________________
"It's never over... BOY!"
The Tall Man, Phantasm III

You have, in my opinion, was it called "hedonic adaptation".

You don't think a new born child is anything special, or a mountain range or an ocean or the vast evening sky...you're bored with it...

"big deal"
"life is cheap"
"we're nothing special"
"it all just happened"

This is why the Atheistic point of view is something I detest.

Java,
your link explains DNA and it's ability to encode
and shift, that's after the fact that it exists, in other words,
it describes a codes behavior not how it got made.

Which also explains your question about it's defects
we find, so to say that it is perfect is not true, but
that a man made from this process successfully is
perfect in design, not that man is perfect.

I have studied codes of all kinds, I have even sat and
made a few up, it is something I am good at doing
because it's a concept, and after all it's meaningless.

If I took S.O.S in mores code would be ... --- ... but
without intelligents it's meaningless I could also
code mores code in a physical way with a rope
by tieing knots, knot,knot,knot double knot, double knot,double knot
knot,knot,knot the rope would look silly and be meaning less
unless a consciousness knows it's meaning or concept.
molecule just coded this on their own without thought?
it just happened? why can't I swallow that?

Now I am not being silly here, I have been working in computer
sciences all my life, I have worked on algorithms for such
things as encryption's, squeezing, and alot of other concepts
that would boggle the mind. even in the Field of replacing
binary to a more efficient use, because binary is not efficient
as we hoped it to be, it has it's limits, and DNA is one field I
am amazed at, because it's structure is more efficient.

So I am being as realistic as I can when I say I can't really
except evolution on the grounds that DNA coding began
from nothing without intelligent design.



....

__________________
The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not.
Thomas Jefferson

Wrong.
I do.
But I recognize this notion for what it is... My own bias as a human being, my subjective interpretation of the world.

That's where you guys get the "athiest perspective" wrong. Just because we realize we're monkey-offspring doesn't mean we think it's all without value.
Most athiests are humanists. Is there any logical rationale to humanism at the core? No, not any more than there is religion. But as humans we enjoy being human, we enjoy other people being happy, we despise suffering and cruelty, we think babies and kittens are cute, we find nature beautiful, we marvel at the wonders of life, and we have a stake in the continuance of human society...
That's how it is. We don't need to makebelieve that this is so because of some benevolent force in the universe. Maybe in the grand scheme of things, we are useless and miniscule. But the reality is still that we are human and therefore we have the emotions and desires and needs, and even morals, that come natural (for most anyway) as part of being human.

The understanding of nature is secondary. It's for fun... and maybe for the purpose that it, unlike blind faith, will allow us the knowledge to keep humans going, to allow people more the luxury of being moral, and to allow more babies to enjoy the wonders of existence for longer.

Why is it so important to you that there be meaning behind it all? Frankly I can enjoy life, be kind to other humans, root for humanity's survival, and find reason to live without feeling that there has to be some big guy in the sky behind it all.
Life is enjoyable whether I'm a descendent of accidental protoplasm in an accidental universe or the creation of some eccentric celestrial designer.

__________________
"It's never over... BOY!"
The Tall Man, Phantasm III