OceanWaves
Established
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2020
- Messages
- 109
Evidence for God
- Thread starter OceanWaves
- Start date
OceanWaves
Established
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2020
- Messages
- 109
billy t
Veteran
- Joined
- Aug 2, 2020
- Messages
- 747
My friend sent me this the other day. I should watch it.
Yeah the fact that we exist is proof of God. Allah says "do they not look at their own selves?"
Hewlet Packard Enterprise designed the largest single memory computer system that can store 160,000 gigabytes of data. The atheist agrees that the computer is an result of knowledge, wisdom power and intent. The human brain can store about 2.5 million gigabytes of data yet they say it came from natural selection, random mutations and chance.
The company Fujitsu designed the an super computer that is 4 times faster than the human brain and stores 10 times as much data. However, it requires the electricity needed to power 10 thousand homes. The human brain on the other hand runs on the power of an dim light bulb! According to the atheist the super computer was a result of knowledge, wisdom, power and intent and the human brain came by chance!!!!
Furthermore, the Wright Brothers designed the first airfcraft by imitating pigeons. Yet, the aircraft came by design and the pigeons came about by chance.
Many examples can be mentioned. One of our scholars said "one evidence is enough for the believer but for the arrogant person then thousands of evidences will not not be sufficient". Atheists are just arrogant.
A Freeman
Superstar
- Joined
- Nov 11, 2019
- Messages
- 8,362
Nature is No Random Number Generator
If we take an honest and objective look at the world around us, does it really appear to be the result of random occurrences that simply had enough time to sort themselves out? Is there not a difference between patterns and designs? Do causal mechanisms adequately explain what we physically observe in nature?
Science defines a causal mechanism as a sequence of events or conditions, governed by lawlike regularities, leading from the explanans to the explanandum.
So who or what made up the laws that govern these causal mechanisms? How can there be laws without a lawmaker?
One of the most widespread and readily observable designs in nature is Fibonacci numbers. They appear everywhere in nature, from the leaf arrangement in plants, to the pattern of the florets of a flower, the bracts of a pine-cone, the scales of a pineapple, even in hurricanes. They are nature's numbering system. Fibonacci numbers are found in honey bee family trees, shell spirals, petals on flowers, seed heads and in leaf and limb arrangements, to name a few.
Fibonacci numbers are actually a mathematical series. The first twelve numbers in the series are as follows:
0, 1, 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, 21, 34, 55, 89, 144,
where every number in the series is the sum of the two numbers that precede it.
Johannes Kepler, the German mathematician and astronomer, observed that the ratio of consecutive Fibonacci numbers converges. He wrote that "as 5 is to 8 so is 8 to 13, practically, and as 8 is to 13, so is 13 to 21 almost", and concluded that the limit approaches the golden ratio
, where
which has the unique property among positive numbers of its inverse being exactly one less than itself, so that
Interestingly, it was the very same Johannes Kepler, the Astronomer Royal in Prague, who in 1603 computed that in the year 7 B.C. there was a conjunction of Jupiter (the king of the planets) and Saturn (thought to be the protector of Israel) in the Constellation of Pisces (the Sign of the Messiah), that was first visible at daybreak on the 12th of April 7 B.C. The Passover in 7 B.C. was on Monday April 13th which commenced at sunset on the 12th.
The earth-shattering significance of this conjunction – Messiah; King; Protector of Israel; Passover – was the cosmic event described in the second chapter of the book of Matthew, in the Bible, that marked the actual birth-date of Jesus and the promise of the golden age to come.
If we take an honest and objective look at the world around us, does it really appear to be the result of random occurrences that simply had enough time to sort themselves out? Is there not a difference between patterns and designs? Do causal mechanisms adequately explain what we physically observe in nature?
Science defines a causal mechanism as a sequence of events or conditions, governed by lawlike regularities, leading from the explanans to the explanandum.
So who or what made up the laws that govern these causal mechanisms? How can there be laws without a lawmaker?
One of the most widespread and readily observable designs in nature is Fibonacci numbers. They appear everywhere in nature, from the leaf arrangement in plants, to the pattern of the florets of a flower, the bracts of a pine-cone, the scales of a pineapple, even in hurricanes. They are nature's numbering system. Fibonacci numbers are found in honey bee family trees, shell spirals, petals on flowers, seed heads and in leaf and limb arrangements, to name a few.
Fibonacci numbers are actually a mathematical series. The first twelve numbers in the series are as follows:
0, 1, 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, 21, 34, 55, 89, 144,
where every number in the series is the sum of the two numbers that precede it.
Johannes Kepler, the German mathematician and astronomer, observed that the ratio of consecutive Fibonacci numbers converges. He wrote that "as 5 is to 8 so is 8 to 13, practically, and as 8 is to 13, so is 13 to 21 almost", and concluded that the limit approaches the golden ratio
, wherewhich has the unique property among positive numbers of its inverse being exactly one less than itself, so that
Interestingly, it was the very same Johannes Kepler, the Astronomer Royal in Prague, who in 1603 computed that in the year 7 B.C. there was a conjunction of Jupiter (the king of the planets) and Saturn (thought to be the protector of Israel) in the Constellation of Pisces (the Sign of the Messiah), that was first visible at daybreak on the 12th of April 7 B.C. The Passover in 7 B.C. was on Monday April 13th which commenced at sunset on the 12th.
The earth-shattering significance of this conjunction – Messiah; King; Protector of Israel; Passover – was the cosmic event described in the second chapter of the book of Matthew, in the Bible, that marked the actual birth-date of Jesus and the promise of the golden age to come.
A Freeman
Superstar
- Joined
- Nov 11, 2019
- Messages
- 8,362
Golden Rule Reminders Everywhere
If we look to the stars we find that spiral galaxies, including our own Milky Way, also conform to Fibonacci numbers and the golden ratio.
We are literally surrounded with evidence that life on this planet and out in the universe is extremely ordered and strictly adheres to a meticulous set of laws. In fact the more we observe and study our natural surroundings, the clearer it becomes that NOTHING is random. If we revisit Pascal's Triangle we will notice that even it contains Fibonacci numbers.
Fibonacci numbers in the diagonals of Pascal's Triangle
And the Fibonacci numbers don't stop with the macroscopic world; they are part of the microscopic world as well.
The DNA molecule, the program for all life, is also based on the golden ratio, represented as
(phi). It measures 34 angstroms long by 21 angstroms wide for each full cycle of its double helix spiral. DNA in the cell appears as a double-stranded helix referred to as B-DNA. This form of DNA has two grooves in its spirals, with a ratio of phi in the proportion of the major groove to the minor groove, or roughly 21 angstroms to 13 angstroms. The DNA cross-section is likewise based on phi, as the cross-section of the DNA double helix forms a decagon.
A decagon is basically two concentric pentagons, with one rotated by 36 degrees from the other, so each spiral of the double helix must trace out the shape of a pentagon. The ratio of the diagonal of a pentagon to its side is phi to 1. So, no matter which way you look at it, the fundamental building blocks of life are constructed using the golden ratio!
Could it be with so many reminders of the golden ratio and golden numbers in our surroundings and in every cell of every living organism on the planet that someone is trying to send us a message to follow the golden rule? The golden rule, which is a restatement of the Second Great Commandment (Mark 12:31), says we should do unto others as we would have them do unto us.
Strict adherence to this simple rule would end all oppression, injustice and war on this planet.
If we look to the stars we find that spiral galaxies, including our own Milky Way, also conform to Fibonacci numbers and the golden ratio.
We are literally surrounded with evidence that life on this planet and out in the universe is extremely ordered and strictly adheres to a meticulous set of laws. In fact the more we observe and study our natural surroundings, the clearer it becomes that NOTHING is random. If we revisit Pascal's Triangle we will notice that even it contains Fibonacci numbers.
Fibonacci numbers in the diagonals of Pascal's Triangle
And the Fibonacci numbers don't stop with the macroscopic world; they are part of the microscopic world as well.
The DNA molecule, the program for all life, is also based on the golden ratio, represented as
(phi). It measures 34 angstroms long by 21 angstroms wide for each full cycle of its double helix spiral. DNA in the cell appears as a double-stranded helix referred to as B-DNA. This form of DNA has two grooves in its spirals, with a ratio of phi in the proportion of the major groove to the minor groove, or roughly 21 angstroms to 13 angstroms. The DNA cross-section is likewise based on phi, as the cross-section of the DNA double helix forms a decagon.A decagon is basically two concentric pentagons, with one rotated by 36 degrees from the other, so each spiral of the double helix must trace out the shape of a pentagon. The ratio of the diagonal of a pentagon to its side is phi to 1. So, no matter which way you look at it, the fundamental building blocks of life are constructed using the golden ratio!
Could it be with so many reminders of the golden ratio and golden numbers in our surroundings and in every cell of every living organism on the planet that someone is trying to send us a message to follow the golden rule? The golden rule, which is a restatement of the Second Great Commandment (Mark 12:31), says we should do unto others as we would have them do unto us.
Strict adherence to this simple rule would end all oppression, injustice and war on this planet.
A Freeman
Superstar
- Joined
- Nov 11, 2019
- Messages
- 8,362
DNA – Design NOT Accident
The Human Genome Project (HGP) is likely the single largest international science project in the history of mankind. It formally began in 1989 and initially sought to identify and map the 20,000-25,000 genes in human DNA and the sequences of the 3 billion chemical pairs that make up human DNA. The project goals were reportedly met in 2003, although additional sequences in areas like the central regions and ends of each chromosome, where the DNA sequences are highly repetitive, are still being mapped as the technology becomes available to do so.
But even with just what is presently known, the results of this project are astonishing. We have already discovered that DNA is by far the most efficient means of storing data known to man. In just one gram of DNA, which when dry would occupy a volume of approximately one cubic centimeter, it would be possible to store approximately one trillion CDs worth of information (or the equivalent of 250 billion DVDs).
To help put this into perspective, consider that a stack of 250 billion DVDs would stretch more than 3/4 of the way to the moon. And all of that information could be stored in a single gram of DNA the size of a sugar cube.
Put another way, the DNA information is so densely organized that a single teaspoonful could carry the instructions for building the entire population of planet Earth...hundreds of times over. We may think we have done well packing information densely onto chips, computer hard drives and DVDs, etc. but all of these devices store information on the surface only. DNA stores information in three dimensions and is by far the densest information storage mechanism known to man. And DNA also has the ability to self-replicate, fix errors, read and copy itself through a process known as transcription.
If we were to travel inside the cell to witness the transcription process, what we would see is a molecular machine first unwinding a section of the DNA helix to expose the genetic instructions needed to assemble a specific protein molecule. That step would be followed by another machine making copies of these encoding instructions to form the single strand molecule we refer to as messenger RNA.
Once the transcription process has been completed, the slender RNA strand carries the genetic information through the nuclear pore complex, which is the gatekeeper for traffic in and out of the cell nucleus, and is directed to a two-part molecular factory called a ribosome. After attaching itself securely, the decoding process of translation begins.
Inside the ribosome, a molecular assembly line builds a specifically sequenced chain of amino acids. These amino acids are transported from other parts of the cell and then linked into chains often hundreds of units long. Their sequential arrangement determines the type of protein manufactured.
When the chain is finished, it is relocated from the ribosome to a barrel-shaped machine that helps fold it into the precise shape critical to its function. After the chain is folded into a protein, it is then released and shepherded to the exact location where it is needed. And all of this is going on inside every living cell, of every living creature, all of the time.
In every respect this is an absolutely amazing design and process and it is going on at a cellular level with molecular machines that we haven't even begun to understand. Thinking that causal mechanisms could explain this process in the absence of any observable or testable evidence isn't reasonable or scientific at all. Logically speaking this could only be a super-intelligent design and manufacturing process.
The Human Genome Project (HGP) is likely the single largest international science project in the history of mankind. It formally began in 1989 and initially sought to identify and map the 20,000-25,000 genes in human DNA and the sequences of the 3 billion chemical pairs that make up human DNA. The project goals were reportedly met in 2003, although additional sequences in areas like the central regions and ends of each chromosome, where the DNA sequences are highly repetitive, are still being mapped as the technology becomes available to do so.
But even with just what is presently known, the results of this project are astonishing. We have already discovered that DNA is by far the most efficient means of storing data known to man. In just one gram of DNA, which when dry would occupy a volume of approximately one cubic centimeter, it would be possible to store approximately one trillion CDs worth of information (or the equivalent of 250 billion DVDs).
To help put this into perspective, consider that a stack of 250 billion DVDs would stretch more than 3/4 of the way to the moon. And all of that information could be stored in a single gram of DNA the size of a sugar cube.
Put another way, the DNA information is so densely organized that a single teaspoonful could carry the instructions for building the entire population of planet Earth...hundreds of times over. We may think we have done well packing information densely onto chips, computer hard drives and DVDs, etc. but all of these devices store information on the surface only. DNA stores information in three dimensions and is by far the densest information storage mechanism known to man. And DNA also has the ability to self-replicate, fix errors, read and copy itself through a process known as transcription.
If we were to travel inside the cell to witness the transcription process, what we would see is a molecular machine first unwinding a section of the DNA helix to expose the genetic instructions needed to assemble a specific protein molecule. That step would be followed by another machine making copies of these encoding instructions to form the single strand molecule we refer to as messenger RNA.
Once the transcription process has been completed, the slender RNA strand carries the genetic information through the nuclear pore complex, which is the gatekeeper for traffic in and out of the cell nucleus, and is directed to a two-part molecular factory called a ribosome. After attaching itself securely, the decoding process of translation begins.
Inside the ribosome, a molecular assembly line builds a specifically sequenced chain of amino acids. These amino acids are transported from other parts of the cell and then linked into chains often hundreds of units long. Their sequential arrangement determines the type of protein manufactured.
When the chain is finished, it is relocated from the ribosome to a barrel-shaped machine that helps fold it into the precise shape critical to its function. After the chain is folded into a protein, it is then released and shepherded to the exact location where it is needed. And all of this is going on inside every living cell, of every living creature, all of the time.
In every respect this is an absolutely amazing design and process and it is going on at a cellular level with molecular machines that we haven't even begun to understand. Thinking that causal mechanisms could explain this process in the absence of any observable or testable evidence isn't reasonable or scientific at all. Logically speaking this could only be a super-intelligent design and manufacturing process.
A Freeman
Superstar
- Joined
- Nov 11, 2019
- Messages
- 8,362
The Super-Intelligently Designed Language of Life
In addition to being the densest and by far the most efficient means of information storage in the known universe, the genetic code in DNA is also a language.
Perry Marshall, an electrical engineer and specialist in communication systems, has made some important connections between information theory and DNA, which itself is a digital communication system. In fact many digital communication methods that are commonplace in the information technology field have been adapted and applied to genetics research and the Human Genome Project.
The first step in understanding the significance of DNA being a language is to define the difference between a pattern and a design.
Patterns are created from matter and energy only. While patterns frequently occur in nature, not all patterns have designs. Also, with patterns there is never an exact copy. Snowflakes are an example of a naturally occurring pattern.
Conversely, all designs do have patterns and all designs require a language. Music would be an example of a design, where the notes on paper symbolically represent the music that is heard by actually playing the notes.
A language symbolically represents something other than itself. The DNA molecule represents more than itself; it represents the design information and assembly instructions for an entire living organism. Every language has 4 things: alphabet, grammar, meaning and intent. Information CANNOT be created without intent and there are no examples of this ever happening.
All languages also have error correction and redundancy, just as DNA does. In fact, the functions of DNA Nucleotide, Codons, Genes, Operons and Regulons have very recognizable counterparts in the English language.
DNA.....................................Language
Nucleotide (A, T, C, G).........Characters
Codons.................................Letters
Genes...................................Words
Operons................................Sentences
Regulons...............................Paragraphs
So is DNA just a naturally occurring pattern, or is it a design? An essential distinction between patterns and designs is language, and DNA meets all of the criteria for being a language. There are no examples of patterns ever turning into designs so any argument that DNA began as a pattern and then later organized itself into a design is baseless no matter how much time is involved. The following conditions establish that DNA is not just a pattern but is indeed a language:
The very sophisticated language of DNA was designed by a Super-Intelligent Mind.
In addition to being the densest and by far the most efficient means of information storage in the known universe, the genetic code in DNA is also a language.
Perry Marshall, an electrical engineer and specialist in communication systems, has made some important connections between information theory and DNA, which itself is a digital communication system. In fact many digital communication methods that are commonplace in the information technology field have been adapted and applied to genetics research and the Human Genome Project.
The first step in understanding the significance of DNA being a language is to define the difference between a pattern and a design.
Patterns are created from matter and energy only. While patterns frequently occur in nature, not all patterns have designs. Also, with patterns there is never an exact copy. Snowflakes are an example of a naturally occurring pattern.
Conversely, all designs do have patterns and all designs require a language. Music would be an example of a design, where the notes on paper symbolically represent the music that is heard by actually playing the notes.
A language symbolically represents something other than itself. The DNA molecule represents more than itself; it represents the design information and assembly instructions for an entire living organism. Every language has 4 things: alphabet, grammar, meaning and intent. Information CANNOT be created without intent and there are no examples of this ever happening.
All languages also have error correction and redundancy, just as DNA does. In fact, the functions of DNA Nucleotide, Codons, Genes, Operons and Regulons have very recognizable counterparts in the English language.
DNA.....................................Language
Nucleotide (A, T, C, G).........Characters
Codons.................................Letters
Genes...................................Words
Operons................................Sentences
Regulons...............................Paragraphs
So is DNA just a naturally occurring pattern, or is it a design? An essential distinction between patterns and designs is language, and DNA meets all of the criteria for being a language. There are no examples of patterns ever turning into designs so any argument that DNA began as a pattern and then later organized itself into a design is baseless no matter how much time is involved. The following conditions establish that DNA is not just a pattern but is indeed a language:
- DNA is an encoding/decoding mechanism/system that stores and transmits the messages of the living organism
- the DNA molecule represents more than itself; it represents an entire living organism
- DNA has alphabet, syntax, semantics, pragmatics (or more simply stated alphabet, grammar, meaning and intent)
- DNA can be copied and even stored in other media with no loss of information
The very sophisticated language of DNA was designed by a Super-Intelligent Mind.
A Freeman
Superstar
- Joined
- Nov 11, 2019
- Messages
- 8,362
Evolution needs to Evolve
So we now have undeniable proof that life on this planet was designed by a Super-Intelligent Mind and that if life did evolve, the capacity to evolve had to be designed and programmed into the DNA. An example of this is the telomeric structure that determines life-span.
On the tips of each chromosome there is a structure called a telomere. The simplest way to think of this structure is that it is a timing device, with a series of beads attached to the end. Every time the cell divides the telomere is shortened by a bead. Once the beads are all gone, cell division is no longer possible, eventually resulting in cell death.
The machinery by which cells divide is controlled by the instruction code programmed into the DNA. So a big part of aging is a pre-programmed genetic limit rather than the result of any random mutation or genetic drift.
It is interesting to note that in the English language, the word "evolution", with a single exception, always refers to an intelligent process, whether it is applied to personal or social development, business, manufacturing or technology, etc. That single exception is of course materialistic Darwinian evolution.
Darwinism is actually the belief in random mutation with no intention, no purpose, and no planning, coupled with natural selection and enough time. This hypothesis of evolution by random process has now been scientifically disproven by information theory.
Natural selection on the other hand is perfectly valid and has been proven time and time again. But no one has ever actually demonstrated that random mutation can create new information. Information theory shows us why this is so: in communication systems, random mutation is exactly the same as noise, and noise always destroys the signal; it NEVER enhances it.
In communication systems this is called information entropy, and the formula for information entropy is exactly the same as it is for thermodynamic entropy. To keep things simple, entropy is a scientific term describing an irreversible process of degradation. Once lost, the information can never be recovered, much less enhanced. Thus we can be absolutely certain that random mutation is not the source of biodiversity.
So we now have undeniable proof that life on this planet was designed by a Super-Intelligent Mind and that if life did evolve, the capacity to evolve had to be designed and programmed into the DNA. An example of this is the telomeric structure that determines life-span.
On the tips of each chromosome there is a structure called a telomere. The simplest way to think of this structure is that it is a timing device, with a series of beads attached to the end. Every time the cell divides the telomere is shortened by a bead. Once the beads are all gone, cell division is no longer possible, eventually resulting in cell death.
The machinery by which cells divide is controlled by the instruction code programmed into the DNA. So a big part of aging is a pre-programmed genetic limit rather than the result of any random mutation or genetic drift.
It is interesting to note that in the English language, the word "evolution", with a single exception, always refers to an intelligent process, whether it is applied to personal or social development, business, manufacturing or technology, etc. That single exception is of course materialistic Darwinian evolution.
Darwinism is actually the belief in random mutation with no intention, no purpose, and no planning, coupled with natural selection and enough time. This hypothesis of evolution by random process has now been scientifically disproven by information theory.
Natural selection on the other hand is perfectly valid and has been proven time and time again. But no one has ever actually demonstrated that random mutation can create new information. Information theory shows us why this is so: in communication systems, random mutation is exactly the same as noise, and noise always destroys the signal; it NEVER enhances it.
In communication systems this is called information entropy, and the formula for information entropy is exactly the same as it is for thermodynamic entropy. To keep things simple, entropy is a scientific term describing an irreversible process of degradation. Once lost, the information can never be recovered, much less enhanced. Thus we can be absolutely certain that random mutation is not the source of biodiversity.
A Freeman
Superstar
- Joined
- Nov 11, 2019
- Messages
- 8,362
Building a Better Watch
About 200 years ago, William Paley advanced a teleological argument for the existence of God that goes something like this: if I found a watch in the woods I would know it was designed, and since life also has a purpose, it too must have been designed.
David Hume's attempted refutation of this argument was that we can't prove life has a purpose, so we can't prove design. He posited that for the design argument to be feasible, order and purpose are only observed when they result from design. Hume went on to claim that order is regularly observed in nature, in presumably mindless processes such as the formation of a snowflake.
But we already know that a snowflake is a pattern, NOT a design. It is the result of the correct conditions being met to form a snowflake. The essential distinction between patterns and designs is language. You cannot present a design idea without language and the idea ALWAYS precedes the implementation of the idea.
If we reexamine Paley's watch argument we find that the common element to both the watch and to life is language, and language requires intent. The watch is preceded by a design idea that becomes a plan or blueprint for building the watch. Life is preceded by DNA, the language created to carry out the plan and assembly instructions for life.
Therefore Hume's attempted refutation fails against the better watch argument.
About 200 years ago, William Paley advanced a teleological argument for the existence of God that goes something like this: if I found a watch in the woods I would know it was designed, and since life also has a purpose, it too must have been designed.
David Hume's attempted refutation of this argument was that we can't prove life has a purpose, so we can't prove design. He posited that for the design argument to be feasible, order and purpose are only observed when they result from design. Hume went on to claim that order is regularly observed in nature, in presumably mindless processes such as the formation of a snowflake.
But we already know that a snowflake is a pattern, NOT a design. It is the result of the correct conditions being met to form a snowflake. The essential distinction between patterns and designs is language. You cannot present a design idea without language and the idea ALWAYS precedes the implementation of the idea.
If we reexamine Paley's watch argument we find that the common element to both the watch and to life is language, and language requires intent. The watch is preceded by a design idea that becomes a plan or blueprint for building the watch. Life is preceded by DNA, the language created to carry out the plan and assembly instructions for life.
Therefore Hume's attempted refutation fails against the better watch argument.
A Freeman
Superstar
- Joined
- Nov 11, 2019
- Messages
- 8,362
The Missing Link
As previously mentioned, materialistic Darwinian evolution stands alone in its application of the word "evolution". In all other uses of the word, evolution describes a process of learning based on the scientific evaluation method of observing a cause and effect along with testing and validating prior to implementation. It is of critical importance to note there is a "feedback loop" in this process, or in other words a means for the information gathered to be incorporated and put into use.
Darwinism would have us believe that blind, random mutations can and supposedly do occur with no intention, purpose or planning. All that is needed is to throw in natural selection and enough time and everything will magically sort itself out. But has this process EVER been observed? No. If you introduce noise into communication it never helps. If you introduce chaos into order, the information doesn't organize or improve itself no matter how much time there is.
Random mutations follow the exact same principle. The very idea of random mutation violates the whole nature of how information is created. Assuming for a moment that mutations would improve rather than degrade features, how would the mutations target a specific area in need of improvement? It's of critical importance to note there is no "feedback loop" in this process, or in other words there's no means for the information gathered to be incorporated and put into use.
This is the critical missing link in the entire Darwinian mindset and the reason LaMarckian evolutionary theory was dismissed decades ago. There simply isn't a physical means for the information gathered by the organism to be communicated and programmed into the DNA code, in the exact location required to make specific and meaningful changes to the transitional area.
As previously mentioned, materialistic Darwinian evolution stands alone in its application of the word "evolution". In all other uses of the word, evolution describes a process of learning based on the scientific evaluation method of observing a cause and effect along with testing and validating prior to implementation. It is of critical importance to note there is a "feedback loop" in this process, or in other words a means for the information gathered to be incorporated and put into use.
Darwinism would have us believe that blind, random mutations can and supposedly do occur with no intention, purpose or planning. All that is needed is to throw in natural selection and enough time and everything will magically sort itself out. But has this process EVER been observed? No. If you introduce noise into communication it never helps. If you introduce chaos into order, the information doesn't organize or improve itself no matter how much time there is.
Random mutations follow the exact same principle. The very idea of random mutation violates the whole nature of how information is created. Assuming for a moment that mutations would improve rather than degrade features, how would the mutations target a specific area in need of improvement? It's of critical importance to note there is no "feedback loop" in this process, or in other words there's no means for the information gathered to be incorporated and put into use.
This is the critical missing link in the entire Darwinian mindset and the reason LaMarckian evolutionary theory was dismissed decades ago. There simply isn't a physical means for the information gathered by the organism to be communicated and programmed into the DNA code, in the exact location required to make specific and meaningful changes to the transitional area.
A Freeman
Superstar
- Joined
- Nov 11, 2019
- Messages
- 8,362
The Gene Pool
In all communication systems, the encoding/decoding process of an idea starts at the top, goes to the alphabet for encoding, and then the alphabetic/symbolic representation of the idea gets transmitted to the recipient, where it is subsequently decoded. As we know, information does NOT occur naturally and ALL information is based on language.
While language may take on many different forms, there is no other way to convey information from design to implementation aside from language. DNA is not only a language; it is the most exquisitely engineered communication protocol that anyone has ever seen. In humans, it is a three-billion lettered program communicating to the cell to carry out specific functions in a very calculated and specific way. And DNA is unrivaled in its sophistication, elegance, precision, repeatability and in its storage density.
Which begs the question: Does anyone really believe that this highly complex, highly reliable molecular machinery could come about by chance or by random mutation? Without solid proof, wouldn't such a belief amount to a blind leap of faith?
It has been said that "...the point of evolutionary theory is to explain phenomena without having to appeal to intelligence or divine design". Indeed. That is precisely the point and therein lies the fundamental flaw in reasoning.
Regardless of the field of study, the goal of all scientific research should be the pursuit of truth. We should all feel as Henry David Thoreau did when he said "Any Truth is better than make-believe…rather than love, than money, than fame, give me truth." So if someone rules out certain possibilities beforehand, how can their evaluation method be valid? How can any conclusions they may reach be objective? We have a long history of selfishly manipulating scientific theories into scientific “fact” only to have them later disproved when the truth can no longer remain hidden.
It is an established fact that ALL information is based on language and does NOT occur naturally. Information is neither matter nor energy and neither matter nor energy can produce information. Information CANNOT be created without intent, and intention (or will) is the property of a conscious mind, NOT the result of senseless, unconnected random mutations no one has ever observed and which have been proven to be impossible.
Impossible?
DNA carries the encoded hereditary assembly instructions in the form of base pairs or letters which form the connecting "rungs" of the double-helix ladder of life. Sections or "words" of DNA can be formed from these letters and are referred to as genes. Typically a single gene will code for a single protein chain.
In the smallest theoretical living thing, the average gene would still consist of over 1200 letters, or base pairs. For reference, the smallest living cell contains 600 genes while a set of human chromosomes consists of over 2 million genes. So what is the statistical probability of a series of the DNA code letters arranging themselves in order to form just one…JUST ONE…usable "word" (gene) by chance?
To give chance the best hope of success, the following assumptions have been made:
Many of the twenty amino acids though are coded by more than one triplet, and though some believe these duplicate codons represent "historical accidents” or "junk DNA" there is a growing body of evidence that this isn't the case. If there is no such thing as junk DNA, the probability of a single gene arranging itself by chance in the entire universe is simply one chance in the total number of possible arrangements. In other words,
Which could be expressed as 1/10^722, or 10^-722. But even if we assume that junk DNA does exist, and decided to treat all of the duplicate codons as if they were useless extras, the odds don't get much better. With only twenty-one different possible primary outcomes for each codon position (twenty amino acids plus the "end of the chain"), for a chain 400 amino acids long the potential outcomes are 21^400, which is approximately 10^528. Allowing one substitution per chain, the equivalent total of different sequences would reduce to 10^524.
Since this is still less likely than the sequencing to produce a single, usable protein, 1/10^240 will be used for the probability of obtaining a usable gene on any try for the very first gene. This probability reduces to 1/10^236 by allowing for one substitution. Multiplying this by the total orders produced in a year of all of the nucleotide sets from the entire cosmos, the probability of getting a usable gene in a year is 10^89/10^236, or 1/10^147. So with all of the concessions given in the list of assumptions above, a usable gene could be expected to occur in 10^147 years. And that's just to produce ONE gene working with all of the nucleotide sets of all of the atoms of the universe at incredible speed. Let's not forget that the smallest known cell has about 600 genes.
For reference, if we assume that the universe is 15 billion years old, we would need trillions of trillions of trillions of trillions...repeat this 12 times total...of times the assumed age of the universe to produce one gene by chance even working at the astronomical speed assumed. So anyone who mistakenly thinks that enough time can magically produce extremely improbable results is choosing to believe in a proven fantasy. The fallacy of such a mistaken belief lies in the size of the figures.
To better understand just how big a number like 10^147 really is, consider that one trillion trillion is only 10^24. Written out, 10^147 is a 1 followed by 147 zeros. And we're still talking about just ONE gene arranging itself by dumb luck during that period of time. Each subsequent gene match would be another order of magnitude less likely to occur. Common sense should make it clear that getting hundreds or even millions of genes to arrange themselves by chance given these odds is completely ridiculous. But does that mean life by the Darwinian evolutionary theory is absolutely impossible?
In all communication systems, the encoding/decoding process of an idea starts at the top, goes to the alphabet for encoding, and then the alphabetic/symbolic representation of the idea gets transmitted to the recipient, where it is subsequently decoded. As we know, information does NOT occur naturally and ALL information is based on language.
While language may take on many different forms, there is no other way to convey information from design to implementation aside from language. DNA is not only a language; it is the most exquisitely engineered communication protocol that anyone has ever seen. In humans, it is a three-billion lettered program communicating to the cell to carry out specific functions in a very calculated and specific way. And DNA is unrivaled in its sophistication, elegance, precision, repeatability and in its storage density.
Which begs the question: Does anyone really believe that this highly complex, highly reliable molecular machinery could come about by chance or by random mutation? Without solid proof, wouldn't such a belief amount to a blind leap of faith?
It has been said that "...the point of evolutionary theory is to explain phenomena without having to appeal to intelligence or divine design". Indeed. That is precisely the point and therein lies the fundamental flaw in reasoning.
Regardless of the field of study, the goal of all scientific research should be the pursuit of truth. We should all feel as Henry David Thoreau did when he said "Any Truth is better than make-believe…rather than love, than money, than fame, give me truth." So if someone rules out certain possibilities beforehand, how can their evaluation method be valid? How can any conclusions they may reach be objective? We have a long history of selfishly manipulating scientific theories into scientific “fact” only to have them later disproved when the truth can no longer remain hidden.
It is an established fact that ALL information is based on language and does NOT occur naturally. Information is neither matter nor energy and neither matter nor energy can produce information. Information CANNOT be created without intent, and intention (or will) is the property of a conscious mind, NOT the result of senseless, unconnected random mutations no one has ever observed and which have been proven to be impossible.
Impossible?
DNA carries the encoded hereditary assembly instructions in the form of base pairs or letters which form the connecting "rungs" of the double-helix ladder of life. Sections or "words" of DNA can be formed from these letters and are referred to as genes. Typically a single gene will code for a single protein chain.
In the smallest theoretical living thing, the average gene would still consist of over 1200 letters, or base pairs. For reference, the smallest living cell contains 600 genes while a set of human chromosomes consists of over 2 million genes. So what is the statistical probability of a series of the DNA code letters arranging themselves in order to form just one…JUST ONE…usable "word" (gene) by chance?
To give chance the best hope of success, the following assumptions have been made:
- All of the atoms in the entire cosmos have been made into base pairs and are ready and available for use/linking up.
- The linking/polymerization process will take place at the fastest known speed of atomic processes (estimated to be around 10^16 per second)
- At this polymerization rate, the number of complete chains/words (genes) per second is 8.3 x 10^12 in any one set. In a year, a set of nucleotides/base pairs would produce 2.6 x 10^20 genes, which we will round off to 10^21.
- Chance is trying for the first gene in the universe, so there is no pattern strand of DNA or RNA existing. The four different nucleotides will occur only in random order in the chain.
- If just one side of the ladder or double helix is obtained, it will be considered sufficient, in the thought that if one is obtained, the other side might form by base pairing.
- Nucleotides are made of atoms of carbon, nitrogen, hydrogen, oxygen, and phosphorus, of which phosphorus is the least plentiful and therefore the limiting element.
- There are estimated to be 1.5 x 10^72 phosphorus atoms in the universe, which will make 10^68 sets, so that one copy of each of the four kinds of nucleotides is present at each point of the 1,200-unit chain being formed.
- Three atoms of phosphorus are needed for each activated nucleotide. This will make 10^68 sets, so that if each set is producing 10^21 sequences per year, that will be a total of 10^89 different chains annually, using all of the appropriate atoms of the universe.
- Each chain will be dismantled immediately and another one built until there is a usable gene. This will be done at the prodigious speed of eight trillion chains per second.
- There are no duplicate codons.
- Nothing will interfere, so chance will have an ideal opportunity. And if a usable sequence is ever obtained, the action will stop so it may be preserved.
- The probability of getting a meaningful amino acid sequence to produce a usable protein for an amino acid chain 400 long is 1 in 4^400, which is equal to 1 in 10^240.
Many of the twenty amino acids though are coded by more than one triplet, and though some believe these duplicate codons represent "historical accidents” or "junk DNA" there is a growing body of evidence that this isn't the case. If there is no such thing as junk DNA, the probability of a single gene arranging itself by chance in the entire universe is simply one chance in the total number of possible arrangements. In other words,
The probability of just one gene in the entire universe arranging itself by chance is 1 in 10^722.
Which could be expressed as 1/10^722, or 10^-722. But even if we assume that junk DNA does exist, and decided to treat all of the duplicate codons as if they were useless extras, the odds don't get much better. With only twenty-one different possible primary outcomes for each codon position (twenty amino acids plus the "end of the chain"), for a chain 400 amino acids long the potential outcomes are 21^400, which is approximately 10^528. Allowing one substitution per chain, the equivalent total of different sequences would reduce to 10^524.
Since this is still less likely than the sequencing to produce a single, usable protein, 1/10^240 will be used for the probability of obtaining a usable gene on any try for the very first gene. This probability reduces to 1/10^236 by allowing for one substitution. Multiplying this by the total orders produced in a year of all of the nucleotide sets from the entire cosmos, the probability of getting a usable gene in a year is 10^89/10^236, or 1/10^147. So with all of the concessions given in the list of assumptions above, a usable gene could be expected to occur in 10^147 years. And that's just to produce ONE gene working with all of the nucleotide sets of all of the atoms of the universe at incredible speed. Let's not forget that the smallest known cell has about 600 genes.
For reference, if we assume that the universe is 15 billion years old, we would need trillions of trillions of trillions of trillions...repeat this 12 times total...of times the assumed age of the universe to produce one gene by chance even working at the astronomical speed assumed. So anyone who mistakenly thinks that enough time can magically produce extremely improbable results is choosing to believe in a proven fantasy. The fallacy of such a mistaken belief lies in the size of the figures.
To better understand just how big a number like 10^147 really is, consider that one trillion trillion is only 10^24. Written out, 10^147 is a 1 followed by 147 zeros. And we're still talking about just ONE gene arranging itself by dumb luck during that period of time. Each subsequent gene match would be another order of magnitude less likely to occur. Common sense should make it clear that getting hundreds or even millions of genes to arrange themselves by chance given these odds is completely ridiculous. But does that mean life by the Darwinian evolutionary theory is absolutely impossible?
A Freeman
Superstar
- Joined
- Nov 11, 2019
- Messages
- 8,362
Understanding the Law of Chance
Émile Borel, a distinguished French expert on probability, stated what he called “the single law of chance”, or merely “the law of chance”, in these words:
“Events whose probability is extremely small never occur”.
He calculated that probabilities smaller than 1/10^15 were negligible on the terrestrial scale, and he went on to say:
"We may be led to set at 10^-50 (1 in 10^50 odds) the value of negligible probabilities on the cosmic scale. When the probability of an event is below this limit, the opposite event may be expected to occur with certainty, whatever the number of occasions presenting themselves in the entire universe."
By “opposite event”, he means no event, or failure to occur. So thinking that even one gene could arrange itself by chance into any usable order in the entire universe isn't remotely realistic, if we apply this statement by the eminent mathematician. Simply stated another way, by the single law of chance, it will NEVER occur.
Not in a million years. Not even in 15 billion.
Émile Borel, a distinguished French expert on probability, stated what he called “the single law of chance”, or merely “the law of chance”, in these words:
“Events whose probability is extremely small never occur”.
He calculated that probabilities smaller than 1/10^15 were negligible on the terrestrial scale, and he went on to say:
"We may be led to set at 10^-50 (1 in 10^50 odds) the value of negligible probabilities on the cosmic scale. When the probability of an event is below this limit, the opposite event may be expected to occur with certainty, whatever the number of occasions presenting themselves in the entire universe."
By “opposite event”, he means no event, or failure to occur. So thinking that even one gene could arrange itself by chance into any usable order in the entire universe isn't remotely realistic, if we apply this statement by the eminent mathematician. Simply stated another way, by the single law of chance, it will NEVER occur.
Not in a million years. Not even in 15 billion.
DanRaleigh
Rookie
- Joined
- May 19, 2018
- Messages
- 58
The Quran gives us an indication that the universe expands and contracts. Therefore, the origin of the universe could even be infinitely old. You mentioned some fascinating work(quoted below) of human beings. But how can we know if God is behind the Quran? How can we know that the book was not transmitted to us by a deceptive intelligence with a wrong intention?
billy t
Veteran
- Joined
- Aug 2, 2020
- Messages
- 747
If the Qur'aan was from other than God then it would call to the worship of others besides Him. All false religions call to the worship of others besides God in some form. They either give the attributes of God to the creation or vice versa. Islaam in its pure form is the only truly monotheistic religion.
DanRaleigh
Rookie
- Joined
- May 19, 2018
- Messages
- 58
Does that mean if an intelligence speaks to us and give us evidence supporting "monotheistic beliefs," we can identify the intelligence as God?
Tidal
Star
- Joined
- Mar 4, 2020
- Messages
- 3,803
Top pic- I put this grass seed on a piece of damp tissue and within days it'd sprouted (bottom pic) and notice the thin tendrils it'd sent out in all directions to soak up the water bless its little cotton socks..
My point is that although scientists can analyse, dissect and break a seed down into it's chemical components and write books about it, they can't actually MAKE one.
That's because it contains some kind of "life force" which they don't know how to even begin to replicate, which brings us to the question 'where does the life force come from?'
Wait! I feel a bible quote coming on-
"God.. in whose hand is the soul of every living thing" (Job12:10 KJV)
My point is that although scientists can analyse, dissect and break a seed down into it's chemical components and write books about it, they can't actually MAKE one.
That's because it contains some kind of "life force" which they don't know how to even begin to replicate, which brings us to the question 'where does the life force come from?'
Wait! I feel a bible quote coming on-
"God.. in whose hand is the soul of every living thing" (Job12:10 KJV)
Last edited:
DanRaleigh
Rookie
- Joined
- May 19, 2018
- Messages
- 58
Does that mean, if we don't know how to make a seed, then that means, the Quran was sent by God and/or the Bible was sent by God?
Last edited:
Tidal
Star
- Joined
- Mar 4, 2020
- Messages
- 3,803
Sorry mate I dunno what you mean, I'm a Christian and the Koran means absolutely nothing to me and I'm simply not interested in it..
God said- "Before I formed you in the womb, I knew you" (Bible: Jeremiah 1:5)
Last edited:
DanRaleigh
Rookie
- Joined
- May 19, 2018
- Messages
- 58