Abiogenesis, evolution and morality

Abiogenesis, evolution and morality

Spirituality

Cookies help us deliver our Services. By using our Services or clicking I agree, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Infidel

Joined
24 Apr 10
Moves
15242
20 Apr 16

Originally posted by sonship
Concerning false gods, fake gods, fictional gods, idols -

Does counterfeit money prove that real money does not exist ?

Knobs is still thinking on it. or busy.
You asked that question in response to my question concerning the probability of a godlike creature creating the universe and life.

Do you think this is a valid point you are making?

If so, you've clearly not understood what I was saying. Presumably because you never attempted to really think about my question for more than 2 seconds.

Infidel

Joined
24 Apr 10
Moves
15242
20 Apr 16
1 edit

Also, are you going to address twhitehead's point concerning probabilities seemingly being pulled out of thin air?

If you found the video interesting as you say, did you bother to delve deeper into these probability figures?

R
Standard memberRemoved

Joined
03 Jan 13
Moves
13080
20 Apr 16
1 edit

Originally posted by Great King Rat
You asked that question in response to my question concerning the probability of a godlike creature creating the universe and life.

Do you think this is a valid point you are making?

If so, you've clearly not understood what I was saying. Presumably because you never attempted to really think about my question for more than 2 seconds.
I will go back and look at your question for a full 60 seconds.

And what is the probability of a god-like creature creating the universe and all life, Sonship?


Zero.

Any "creature" god-like or not god-like has to be a part of the creation.
The phrase "god-like creature" was your invention and not mine.

The probability of a creature of any kind, creating the universe, IMO, is zero.
The idea is self refuting.

Cape Town

Joined
14 Apr 05
Moves
52945
20 Apr 16
1 edit

Originally posted by sonship
The very first thing that the video states is a question.

"What is the probability of a simple cell evolving by undirected natural processess?"

It is not the second thing stated. It is the first thing.
Regardless of the title of the video, which titles are sometime short, advertizement, or even sometimes misleading, the question asked is the first thing spoken by the speaker.

The Ad of course does not count.
Seriously now, what are you on about? You aren't posting while drunk are you?

I found it not a waste of time and would re-recommend it immediately.
Despite the fact that he hasn't got a clue what he's talking about?

Infidel

Joined
24 Apr 10
Moves
15242
20 Apr 16

Originally posted by sonship
I will go back and look at your question for a full 60 seconds.

And what is the probability of a god-like creature creating the universe and all life, Sonship?


Zero.

Any "creature" god-like or not god-like has to be a part of the creation.
The phrase [b]"god-like creature"
was your invention and not mine.

The probability of a creature of any kind, creating the universe, IMO, is zero.
The idea is self refuting.[/b]
The fact that you focus on that is rather telling, I should say.

R
Standard memberRemoved

Joined
03 Jan 13
Moves
13080
20 Apr 16
1 edit

And what is the probability of a god-like creature creating the universe and all life, Sonship?


This is like the question - "What is the probability that I can only write three words of English ?"

It is self refuting to say anything except no probability. .

This is like "What is the probability that a bachelor is on his second marriage?"

There is no probability that a "god-like creature" created the universe and life, IMO (which I respect by the way).

R
Standard memberRemoved

Joined
03 Jan 13
Moves
13080
20 Apr 16

Originally posted by Great King Rat
The fact that you focus on that is rather telling, I should say.
What's it tell ?

s
Fast and Curious

slatington, pa, usa

Joined
28 Dec 04
Moves
53223
20 Apr 16

R
Standard memberRemoved

Joined
03 Jan 13
Moves
13080
20 Apr 16
2 edits

The fact that you focus on that is rather telling, I should say.


And what pre-tell sneaky thing does it tell if it is So "telling" ?

Is there some deep dark secret that is exposed because I said there is no probability that a "god-like creature" created the universe and life?

What grand under the table devious scheme is exposed by my focusing my answer this way?

Infidel

Joined
24 Apr 10
Moves
15242
20 Apr 16

Originally posted by sonship
And what is the probability of a god-like creature creating the universe and all life, Sonship?


This is like the question - "What is the probability that I can only write [b]three
words of English ?"

It is self refuting to say anything except no probability. .

This is like "What is the probability that a bachelor is on h ...[text shortened]... lity that a "god-like creature" created the universe and life, IMO (which I respect by the way).[/b]
Your idea of a god is a "God-like creature". Since there are many different ideas of what encompasses "a god", and I have no set idea about "god" it is only right for me to speak in general terms. It is still perfectly well possible for you to answer the question.

But apparently you feel better of playing these silly word games.

Which is fine by me, my workday is almost done.

Resident of Planet X

The Ghost Chamber

Joined
14 Mar 15
Moves
28732
20 Apr 16

Originally posted by sonship
Concerning false gods, fake gods, fictional gods, idols -

Does counterfeit money prove that real money does not exist ?

Knobs is still thinking on it. or busy.
No, counterfeit money does not prove that real money does not exist. However, the existence of real money does still need to be evidenced.

All gods are fake until you evidence otherwise, something you are yet to do to my satisfaction.

Walk your Faith

USA

Joined
24 May 04
Moves
157820
20 Apr 16

Originally posted by Fetchmyjunk
Assuming life arose from non-life with no supernatural intervention, and according to the survival of the fittest principal, why have humans created the concept of right and wrong? And why do people feel guilty if they have done something wrong?
If it came from non life who cares?

w

Joined
02 Jan 06
Moves
12857
20 Apr 16
1 edit

Originally posted by KellyJay
If it came from non life who cares?
I think the argument is, we care only if morality benefits us.

If it does not benefit us, then to hell with morality.

R
Standard memberRemoved

Joined
03 Jan 13
Moves
13080
20 Apr 16
3 edits

Your idea of a god is a "God-like creature".


No. I do believe in the incarnation of God in human history as Jesus Christ the Son of God. That I believe.

But a God transcending time, space, matter, motion, and all physical reality calling into being the universe ? That is God. That is not a "god-like creature".


Since there are many different ideas of what encompasses "a god", and I have no set idea about "god" it is only right for me to speak in general terms.


The only attribute that is needed is - God of existence apart from the universe and powerful enough to bring it into being.

I don't think "Too many concepts about gods" is a major problem to the issue of a ultimate Cause.

Which do you think I should believe ?

1.) Everything came into existence with no cause.

2.) Everything came into existence with a cause.

I think #2 is how I will go.

Now you or someone said, in essence " Well, you just WANT to believe that." Not always.


It is still perfectly well possible for you to answer the question.


The universe and life are here. They have not ALWAYS been here as best we know.
Did they come about without a cause ?
You go ahead and believe that if you wish.

The universe and life are here.
That they are here, I think, means God transcending the universe willed or decided that they would exist.

If you press me on how that could be, I will probably say I cannot explain that.
Does it crush your ego to admit that you are limited ?

It does not devastate my sense of value or self worth or ego to admit that my mind has limitations. So, I believe God is the answer to the bringing into existence the universe and life with its fine calibrations and intricate design.

This does not forbid that any inquisitive person spend their days exploring the mechanics of how things work in the universe or in life.


But apparently you feel better of playing these silly word games.

Which is fine by me, my workday is almost done.


If you think it is a "word game" that I wrote that a CREATURE of ANY kind is ultimately responsible for the existence of the universe OF creatures and life, is nonsense, then that's your problem, not mine.

If saving face on this question seems to allude you, maybe you better go back to the drawing board and come with some other argument.

R
Standard memberRemoved

Joined
03 Jan 13
Moves
13080
20 Apr 16
1 edit

No, counterfeit money does not prove that real money does not exist.


Thankyou. So idols, fake gods, phony gods. imaginary gods, fictional gods, and there have been some dooseys, do not prove the nonexistence of God.

However, the existence of real money does still need to be evidenced.


Misread this comment. Read it a second time and got it.



All gods are fake until you evidence otherwise, something you are yet to do to my satisfaction.


Evidence is not persuasion.
Someone can decide that he will not accept any evidence that will persuade him.

"Whatever you propose as evidence, I will show at least some possible alternative explanation."

Sure, you can do that and argue "There is no evidence of a Creator of eternal power as your New Testament said."

You can say indefinitely - "You have not yet forced me to believe in God."