Quote (death_knight @ Mar 15 2023 06:52am)
1) I define faith as a person's reasons and capacity to do anything without assurance or proof.
2) You seemed to ignore my posts about creation and abiogenesis because I went into detail about my position on this. To rephrase, abiogenesis is widely supported by research. However, there is still much research to be done so the theory is incomplete as learning about this depends on our current technology. Our technology could change tomorrow and what science "knows" is regularly upended. The fact remains that abiogenesis is an extremely complex topic. I barely understand it and it in the foundation of my biology coursework. It will take me several years of learning chemistry to have a grasp on it. For example, the principle behind the 'lipid bilayer' of cells. While it is easy to comprehend at first glance, the mechismns as to what fats and water don't mix is extremely complex. It is then understandable why people reject abiogenesis... it requires a deep knowledge as well as staying up to date on the current findings.
3) Believing in God is Boolean: Either you do or you don't and you can have infinite reasons for either. I don't like the word believe because of context. I prefer to use the word perceive because what we perceive doesn't always correspond to reality. So I perceive God doesn't exist because I have never detected him and it's as simple as that. The only evidence I have is some very old books and the testimony of others which is nothing compared to the mountain of biological evidence that I have studied.
1. well? i would consider that definition false. faith is just another word for trust. its really that simple. the stuff people make up after the fact is just gaslighting.
2. i didnt ignore them I answered them.
Quote (TiStuff @ 9 Mar 2023 01:29)
life (living systems) are the most complex and interdependent systems known to man light years ahead of anything man has ever made.
(interdependent means all systems have to me in place at the same time or the system crashes. we are talking about the 'simple cell here)
maybe most importantly its an information system. DNA is a language. A four bit? (quaternary) language that builds a specific body plan.
And nobody has the foggiest idea how the most complex language known to man comes out of some kind of random process.
even after it gets started if given aboigenesis for free (chemical evolution). for evolution "macro" it is necessary for that random process to produce viable information changes.
for this to work the solution offered is deep time. remember the scientific process observable testable repeatable ? is deep time even 'scientific?
the sweetheart of abiogenesis "was" the RNA world hypothesis but that paper has been retracted.
"...abiogenesis is widely supported by research." your the only person I have heard make that claim. its has got so bad that panspermia (the aliens did it) seems to be the popular excuse of the day.
fred hoyle
"A common sense interpretation of the facts suggests that a super intellect has monkeyed with physics, as well as with chemistry and biology, and that there are no blind forces worth speaking about in nature."
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/Nave-html/Faithpathh/Hoyle.html
here is another answer. i suggest start it @1:50
Dr. James Tour - "I don't understand evolution"
3. if you went to the dark side of the moon or perhaps another planet and found alien machinery would you conclude its evidence of nothing
some people see biology as machinery. at a molecular level stuff is even called molecular machines. you spend your time insisting the stuff is a product of some kind of accidental random process. seems you might be a outliar in that ancient belief? perhaps your doing that so you can reject that you have detected God.
Guests cannot view or vote in polls. Please register or login.