A path to faith with science

[natureisawesome]

Legalize the green said :

I'm curious, doesn't it sound like natureisawesome is suggesting that all of us that disagee with him are going to hell? That seems as if he is judging us, where the bible clearly states that only God can judge us..

I haven't judgeed you at all. If that's what you mean by judge, the bible does not define it that way. Let's say you see somebody wearing something you don't like and so then you go up and punch him in the face. That's judging. That's what Jesus said we shouldn't do. We not to repay evil for evil or carry out punishment on anyone. If you don't beleive me, I suggest you download esword and study in in the greek. I assure you, we are all allowed an opinion and to make discernments about others and to speak out against wrong. Trying to save you is actually the opposite of judging. I recognise mans fallen state and I'm not trying to lead him to punishment or judgement, but to free you from judgement. If that's what judging means , that is how you defined it then we all must live in ignorance. i don't see anywhere in the bible where it says I have to do that.

why is it that "christians" are always trying to save us heathens when, assuming we are decent people, our souls arn't exactly stained with the blood of the innocents. I have always figured that if God is really going to send all the jews, muslims, buddhists, hindus, taoists, scientists, ect to hell, then he isn't the kind of diety I want in my life.

Everyone believes what they are doing is "right". Everyone has thier own set of rules they like to follow. But God has his own rules. If you break the law by one rule, your're guilty of breaking the law period. These are not just crimes against man neccessarily but against God. Mankind is not full of love. It's full of evil, and everyone points the finger at someone else while they all fall into a pit together. Sinning against God is sinning against an almighty eternal perfect and holy God. He doesn't want anyone to go to hell, but he said he won't strive with man forever, and when it comes down to it, the punishment he's given warning of is the one that rightly fits. No other punishment would be enough. That's how awesome and holy he is, and when people gasp at how cruel he could be by sending people to hell they are willingly ignorant of his divine nature. God won't just let it go, there needs to be a process of redemption. Just because you do some nice things or belive in "love" whatever that means to you (it certainly seems to mean different things to different people) that won't save you. neither will being a buddhism or pagan or muslim.I wish you understood how badly God does want to accept everyone, but he can't because he won't allow evil in his presence. Indeed by his very natuire, it is good for love to hate evil. I'll stop there.

[natureisawesome]

Wow some size of a post there, wish I had time to get involved in this one. You are talking about entropy and stuff, that kind of scientific rhetoric can force me into an excited state. I might print that out and read it on the train to work tomorrow, if it's less than 10 pages....

You're welcome to join in staurm. I think most people can read the whole thing in less than an hour. defenitely a lot less than I took to type it.

[Hardcore Newbie]

Everyone believes what they are doing is "right". Everyone has thier own set of rules they like to follow. But God has his own rules. If you break the law by one rule, your're guilty of breaking the law period. These are not just crimes against man neccessarily but against God. Mankind is not full of love. It's full of evil, and everyone points the finger at someone else while they all fall into a pit together. Sinning against God is sinning against an almighty eternal perfect and holy God. He doesn't want anyone to go to hell, but he said he won't strive with man forever, and when it comes down to it, the punishment he's given warning of is the one that rightly fits. No other punishment would be enough. That's how awesome and holy he is, and when people gasp at how cruel he could be by sending people to hell they are willingly ignorant of his divine nature. God won't just let it go, there needs to be a process of redemption. Just because you do some nice things or belive in "love" whatever that means to you (it certainly seems to mean different things to different people) that won't save you. neither will being a buddhism or pagan or muslim.I wish you understood how badly God does want to accept everyone, but he can't because he won't allow evil in his presence. Indeed by his very natuire, it is good for love to hate evil. I'll stop there.

God must have a very warped sense of "love". You'd think for someone (or something) that loves us so much, he'd make his alleged presence easier for stupid ol' me to see.

[natureisawesome]

delta 9 uk said:

LOL Of course there are no known exceptions to the second law, I didn't mention any did I?

I'm saying life IS NOT a exception. You aren't even arguing with me FFS

When you argue that anything plain and clear that thermodynamics poses no challange for inorganic matter to form into complex organic information bearing structures that can reproduce (Dna) then you are argueing for another exception to the second law.

Life is an exception, this was already adressed in the original post:

How does life delay a fundamental law of the universe? It doesn't actually.

You and your environment decay at a certain rate. But since you are alive you can eat part of your environment. As a result that piece of food is decayed very rapidly, and you remain less degraded.

How does life channel the energy found in food into the specific
functions of maintaining it's delicate and intricate structures? A major part of any living cell is it's blueprint, it's DNA. These blueprints are designs for the cellular machinery which is designed so it can acquire energy from food, carry on the functions of life, and duplicate itself over and over again. It works because it makes a path of less resistance making probable what would otherwise be impossible.

The degradation of information bearing systems such as DNA and the 2nd law are related. The link to how the 2nd law applies to energy and information is found in thermodynamic probability, a field pioneered by Ludwig Boltzmann in 1896 and confirmed by Max Plank in 1912. Modern statistical thermodynamics is used to clearly show that information is subject to the same degrading force that constantly increases the amount of entropy in our universe.

The second "exception" to the 2nd law of thermodynamics is the only way to make progress up the escalator. Things can only be more organized by intention. Intelligence and the ability to apply force are required to assemble a computer for instance, or a submarine, or a watch.

You are basically saying:
The second law of thermodynamics says that everything tends toward disorder, making evolutionary development impossible.


The second law of thermodynamics says no such thing.It says that heat will not spontaneously flow from a colder body to a warmer one or, equivalently, that total entropy (a measure of useful energy) in a closed system will not decrease.

Whichi s really just another way of saying the same thing. The heat cannot move to the warmer one, because that would require a decrease in entropy. Yes, when it comes to information, all things tend toward disorder.

This does not prevent increasing order because

* the earth is not a closed system; sunlight (with low entropy) shines on it and heat (with higher entropy) radiates off. This flow of energy, and the change in entropy that accompanies it, can and will power local decreases in entropy on earth.

It doesn't matter whether it's a closed sytstem or an open system or an isolated system entropy applies to all of them. There are no exceptions just as I've told you several times. It doesn't " power local decreases in entropy". That's not true. complex machinery in the form of life is required to harness that energy and put it to use for the necessary processes for life. Processes in living things are totally unlike any process we find in the natural chemical interactions we find in nature, or anything like the occurances in elements in molecules that are intrinsic to the chemistry and phsics of that substance. It's not following the natural processes of inorganic material but following upon a totally different path.

I already adressed this is in my previous post # 17. :

Raw energy cannot generate the specified complex information in living things. Undirected energy just speeds up destruction. Just standing out in the sun wonâ??t make you more complexâ??the human body lacks the mechanisms to harness raw solar energy. If you stood in the sun too long, you would get skin cancer, because the sunâ??s undirected energy will cause mutations. (Mutations are copying errors in the genes that nearly always lose information). Similarly, undirected energy flow through an alleged primordial soup will break down the complex molecules of life faster than they are formed.

* entropy is not the same as disorder. Sometimes the two correspond, but sometimes order increases as entropy increases. Entropy can even be used to produce order, such as in the sorting of molecules by size.

I've already addressed this in my previous post as well Excuse me for posting it again but you're not getting it and it's too tiring to explain in on my own over and over again :

Rensberger also fails to distinguish between order and complexity. Crystals are ordered; life is complex. To illustrate: a periodic (repeating) signal, e.g. ABABABABABAB, is an example of order. However, it carries little information: only â??ABâ??, and â??print 6 timesâ??.

A crystal is analogous to that sequence; it is a regular, repeating network of atoms. Like that sequence, a crystal contains little information: the co-ordinates of a few atoms (i.e. those which make up the unit cell), and instructions â??more of the sameâ?? x times. If a crystal is broken, smaller but otherwise identical crystals result. Conversely, breaking proteins, DNA or living structures results in destruction, because the information in them is greater than in their parts.

A crystal forms because this regular arrangement, determined by directional forces in the atoms, has the lowest energy. Thus the maximum amount of heat is released into the surroundings, so the overall entropy is increased.

Random signals, e.g. WEKJHDF BK LKGJUES KIYFV NBUY, are not ordered, but complex. But a random signal contains no useful information. A non-random aperiodic (non-repeating) signalâ??specified complexityâ??e.g. â??I love youâ??, may carry useful information. However, it would be useless unless the receiver of the information understood the English language convention. The amorous thoughts have no relationship to that letter sequence apart from the agreed language convention. The language convention is imposed onto the letter sequence.

Proteins and DNA are also non-random aperiodic sequences. The sequences are not caused by the properties of the constituent amino acids and nucleotides themselves. This is a huge contrast to crystal structures, which are caused by the properties of their constituents. The sequences of DNA and proteins must be imposed from outside by some intelligent process. Proteins are coded in DNA, and the DNA code comes from pre-existing codes, not by random processes.

Many scientific experiments show that when their building blocks are simply mixed and chemically combined, a random sequence results. To make a protein, scientists need to add one unit at a time, and each unit requires a number of chemical steps to ensure that the wrong type of reaction doesnâ??t occur. The same goes for preparing a DNA strand in a correct sequence. See Q&A: Origin of Life.

The evolutionary origin-of-life expert Leslie Orgel confirmed that there are three distinct concepts: order, randomness and specified complexity:

Living things are distinguished by their specified complexity. Crystals such as granite fail to qualify as living because they lack complexity; mixtures of random polymers fail to qualify because they lack specificity. [L. Orgel, The Origins of Life, John Wiley, NY, 1973, p. 189]

You see? Life requires not only order but complexity as well, and this can only come from intelligence able to direct force. Proteions in dna are non-random. You should look into information science. A good book to read on it is :

In the Beginning Was Information - Answers Bookstore

* even in a closed system, pockets of lower entropy can form if they are offset by increased entropy elsewhere in the system.

This was answered already too! You're just not paying attention. Remember the ice example:

When ice freezes, it releases heat energy into the environment. This causes an entropy increase in the surroundings. If the temperature is low enough, this entropy increase is greater than the loss of entropy in forming the crystal. But the formation of proteins and nucleic acids from amino acids and nucleotides not only lowers their entropy, but it removes heat energy (and entropy) from their surroundings. Thus ordinary amino acids and nucleotides will not spontaneously form proteins and nucleic acids at any temperature.

In short, order from disorder happens on earth all the time.

I wasn't explicit enough. As It mentioned in the original post the kind of order, that is regularity in something like a crystal is the opposite of complexity.

The only processes necessary for evolution to occur are reproduction, heritable variation, and selection.

That's rubbish. Not only do mutations not cause an increase in genetic information in an already formed organism (and even if they did the nimber of mutations causing losses of information and randomness and destruction of information from radiation are so much more it would work against it) but that doesn't even touch upon the processes needed to form the organism from inorganic molecules in the first place.

All of these are seen to happen all the time, so, obviously, no physical laws are preventing them. In fact, connections between evolution and entropy have been studied in depth, and never to the detriment of evolution.

At first I felt like laughing, and then I felt began to feel very sad for you. Yes these processes : reproduction, heritable variation, and selection do indeed occur. These are natural proccesses part of natural reproduction and minor changes (microevolution) from genentic information and variability already present in dna. Oh it is indeed to the detriment of evolution. If a mutation makes things worse, how can it make things better? It's making things worse and better? You we do pass on copying errors (mutations) to our offspring in nature, and I'm not sorry to tell you that this isn't making the human race better. In fact it's making us worse. Many diseases are caused by this and physical abnormalities in humans and other animals. Radiation doesn't make things better. They've been hitting bugs with it for around a hundred years, and all they get is deformaties and variation within it's own kind. THAT's IT! Nothing else, no new wings when the isect had no information for wings, no change of hairs into feathers, no recorded credible increase of genetic information has ever been recorded. 2nd law is in extreme detriment to evolution.

Several scientists have proposed that evolution and the origin of life is driven by entropy .

They're idiots and they should find new jobs. We arn't missing any information to make a conclusion on this. The conclusion has already been made and all the information neccessary to make it is already lying on the table.

Several scientists have proposed that evolution and the origin of life is driven by entropy .

Randomization cannot prodice complexity. It can't. I know these kind of ideas are very typical of evolution though. For instance the current theory of the big bag proposed that all of the matter in the universe sprung out of "zero dimension" with "infinite heat". Zero dimension huh. Last I checked there zero was another term for nothing. So the universe orginated from the nonexistent dimension. It's just full of this type of stuff complwexity from randomness, life from nolife life from processes that we know to create corruption.

I would post more. but its you who are mis-representing facts and we can't be arguing over something you don't accept as the same version of reality.

You indeed live in a different world.

[natureisawesome]

H.b. said:

Odd. The very tactic used by many to "prove" that God exists (it's nopt possible to disprove), is the same tactic we're now being asked not to use because it would be "unrealistic".

I don't understand what you're referring to. can you please elaborate.

Also, If one believes that everything is an illusion, evidence doesn't really matter, as it would be an illusion also. This is what happens when someone has a view of the world and tries to make the evidence fit.

An illusion is in the eyes of a beholder, but nomatter what you think of, you are the beholder. This confirms somethings existence
(you) because the existence of your thoughts, and the existence reuqired to think of them is undeniable. You just can't get any deeper then that. If you choose to deny that you exist, then you live in hipocricy. The same perception and mind we use to recognise our own existence is also the same mind we use to recognise everything else in this world. Nothing points to the contrary, and there is no "alternative thought system" or other level or dimension of existence or knoledge to turn to to challange your perception of the universe. Even if there was, this is no way would negate the existence of what we observe now in our own dimension. This is the ultimate axiom and nothing stands against it. You cannot deny yourself.

The existence of a god or God does not disprove evolution. You just think it does, or you want it to be so. God could easily have created a system for evolution if it pleased.

You're right he could have. But the natural laws and the universe would be very different place than we know now. There is also a different kind of evidence I turn to within me called my conscience, which is also held firm by my recognition of God's nature shown through the things he has created that a world where the existence of life is dependant upon death and corruption and neccessarily includes the suffering of the weak and perservation of the storng is not a world created by a God of love. This is in fact exactly the type of scenario Jesus hated and preaches against in the bible. The God of the bible has mercy on the weak and hates those that take advantage of those weaker or less smart then them for personal gain. But selfishness is a theme required for darwinian evolution.

And the fact that you disallow pantheism, who's to say that the universe itself isn't supernatural? Why is that not a possibility? A supernatural universe would be able to do whatever the hell it wanted.

Is the universe natural or supernatural? A natural universe cannot be supernatural. They cannot exist in the same place. Atoms are natural, physical things. If there are supernatural forces that affect the natural world, they must therefore be outside the natural universe.

The natural universe is running down, and the fact it's losing complexity tell us it must have started with a higher degree of complexity to begin with. Since the natural universe is not able to decrese entropy on it's own, something outside of the natural universe must have done this, something with intelligence and the ability to direct force.

I've recently converted to Pastafarianism being crossed with Last-Thursdayism. According to the evidence I've gathered, I am right, and you are wrong. You'll probably try to convince me that I'm looking at the evidence wrong.

Your use of "scripture" was nice too, but we all know that true scripture can only be originally written with (or in) Pasta, and since your "scriptures" were originally written on scrolls. then they must obviously be false.

Please forgive me but I don't know what you're saying man. It just sounds like total insanity.

[Hardcore Newbie]

I don't understand what you're referring to. can you please elaborate.

I'm referring to what most believers use as their defensive mechanism. As long as you can't disprove something, they feel it's ok to believe in it. God can not be disproven.

An illusion is in the eyes of a beholder, but nomatter what you think of, you are the beholder. This confirms somethings existence
(you) because the existence of your thoughts, and the existence reuqired to think of them is undeniable. You just can't get any deeper then that. If you choose to deny that you exist, then you live in hipocricy. The same perception and mind we use to recognise our own existence is also the same mind we use to recognise everything else in this world. Nothing points to the contrary, and there is no "alternative thought system" or other level or dimension of existence or knoledge to turn to to challange your perception of the universe. Even if there was, this is no way would negate the existence of what we observe now in our own dimension. This is the ultimate axiom and nothing stands against it. You cannot deny yourself.

And if I was supernatural?

You're right he could have. But the natural laws and the universe would be very different place than we know now. There is also a different kind of evidence I turn to within me called my conscience, which is also held firm by my recognition of God's nature shown through the things he has created that a world where the existence of life is dependant upon death and corruption and neccessarily includes the suffering of the weak and perservation of the storng is not a world created by a God of love. This is in fact exactly the type of scenario Jesus hated and preaches against in the bible. The God of the bible has mercy on the weak and hates those that take advantage of those weaker or less smart then them for personal gain. But selfishness is a theme required for darwinian evolution.

Really? I have a conscience as well. I don't see how a conscience means that God exists, or is evidence of anything divine.

Is the universe natural or supernatural? A natural universe cannot be supernatural. They cannot exist in the same place. Atoms are natural, physical things. If there are supernatural forces that affect the natural world, they must therefore be outside the natural universe.

What's your definition of "natural"? I'm suggesting that the world we perceive today and the way we perceive it are wrong. It has to be. Most perceptions that man has made over time have been false. By super natural, I mean things that we don't understand about the universe. If someone claims to know everything in the universe, show me them so I can laugh.

And maybe the universe isn't natural? There are things about the world we live in that we don't know, that may defy our assumptions.

The natural universe is running down, and the fact it's losing complexity tell us it must have started with a higher degree of complexity to begin with. Since the natural universe is not able to decrese entropy on it's own, something outside of the natural universe must have done this, something with intelligence and the ability to direct force.

...assuming that these laws are correct, assuming the universe is natural.

Please forgive me but I don't know what you're saying man. It just sounds like total insanity.

Yeah that was kinda supposed'ta sorta be a bit wonky.

I've stated that I am a converted Pastafarian (believer in the Flying Spaghetti Monster) and a Last Thursdayist (the idea that the world was created last Thursday, but with the appearance of age: people's memories, history books, fossils, light already on the way from distant stars, and so forth). I'm suggesting that the world was created Last Thursday (always capitalized) by the Flying Spaghetti Monster.

I noticed that you tried to use holy books that haven't been written in or with Pasta. So I don't know why you're trying to use them as proof. That's all I was saying. If you want to use scripture, find a plate of spaghetti and just start eating. If you see a message, then you might be able to convince me.

I'm also wondering, since you seem like a smart guy, how you came to be deceived by Xianity, and why do you deny that the Flying Spaghetti Monster exists?

[LegalizeTheGreen]

Rofl at the Flying Spaghetti Monster, that is logic worthy of a fanatical christian!
A+ Newbie!

It is always sad to see a Christian attempting to tread water in the "Science Pool", and even more so when they think they are doing the backstroke while they drown.

It also truely disapoints me when someone tries to "save me" because while perhaps not the best christian, I have no doubt that God loves me, in whatever form he takes (be it Allah, God, Yaweh, Buddha, Zeus, ect). I have no doubt that being Omnibenevolent, God loves me inspite of my failings as a human, just as he forgives Natureisaewsome for being overzealous, "holier than thou" and judgemental to a fault.

the fact that someone is interpreting what God says, feels, and thinks reeks of arogance and IMHO should never be taken seriously, especially when used to try to "convert the heathens." Perhaps instead of blindly following what men say God wants, you should think about how a God that is perfect, loving, and kind can condem the vast majority of humankind for the simple aspect of not being christisan, because the God I believe in is understanding enough to forgive, and welcomes all good people into whatever heaven there is, and be it Jesus, nirvana, or 70 virgins that are waiting, will welcome with open arms all decent people, regardless of their faith.

shame on all "holier than thou christians", what makes you think you know God any more then anyone else? God is divine, how can you possibly comprehend anything God wants?

[jaGerbom]

omg that is too much reading for me. ill just put out my opinion and say that i believe that there is some sort of god responsible for our existence. But i dont believe any of the religions in this world have much truth behind them at all. That being said, i think the bible is just a plaguerized book based on astrology.




Debate.

[natureisawesome]

jagerbom said:

That being said, i think the bible is just a plaguerized book based on astrology.

I'm interested to hear how you came to this conclusion.

[LegalizeTheGreen]

well, it is pretty obvious that alot of the bible was streamlined to be more acceptable to the pagans (astrology refrence) such as the changing of Christmas to the Pagan holiday date, and while not only obvious, it is documented as well. Hell, Voodoo is a combination of african religions and christianity, in order to at least partially convert the "heathens".

Christianity has even gone as far as taking polytheistic religions and comparing the saints to the lesser Gods in order to make the religion more accesible and easier to assimilate into.

I don't blame the religion though, I blame the insane people that were so desperate to convert the unbelievers that they would go as far as to "adapt" their religion and make it more appealing. This is why christians arn't usually taken seriously when they talk about the bible being 100% true.