Donating = Loving
Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.
Log in or create an account to join the discussions on the Atheist Republic forums.
Donating = Loving
Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.
Donating = Loving
Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.
FREE E-BOOKS
Get the book "Why There Is No God" and one more book for FREE!
Sign up below for the Atheist Republic Newsletter to get the books.
Record Your Message!
Record your voice here for it to be aired on the Atheist Republic Voicemails Podcast.
Send us your views and opinions, your personal stories, messages of support, comments on recent news, or any comments you would like to share about your part of the world.
Note : By clicking record you are allowing us to broadcast your message on any of our platforms.
Affiliate Disclaimer
Links to atheist related books, shirts and movies and other atheism related products are affiliate links.
All proceeds will go to keeping the Atheist Republic website up and running; providing resources, advocacy, community tools and encouragement to atheists all over the world.
"So you think I’m delusional to think that only codes come from intelligence? "
I never claimed that was the reason actually, but yes if you believe that intelligence only produces codes then you're demonstrably delusional. Intelligence daily produces all manner of things like literature art and music for example.
"Quite the vice versa my friend,"
I have No idea what that means sorry, is it in English?
"if codes don’t come from humans then they come from other sources of intelligence,"
Evidence please, can you show an example of a code coming from non human intelligence? It's been months and you've run away from the request enough times for us all to infer you cannot.
"Show me otherwise"
Argumentum ad ignorantiam fallacy, yet again. Please reference that claim for a negation of your constant claim that you are using logic to evidence your deity, QED. I have also not claimed codes can only come from human intelligence, only stated I don't believe your claim that codes cant be prouced by the natural physical universe, as humans produce them the clsim is absurdly wrong, or that unevidenced supernatural causation is needed for codes, as you can't demonstrate any evidence the your claim. This important distinction is something you not only don't grasp, but willfully refuse to acknowledge, for future ref that would make you delusional.
"Also what a miracle about cells ability to code and decode happend “evolved” simultaneously!!!!!!"
Not my claim, so well done again champ. Arakish is the one placing scientific pearls about evolution before swine, so to speak.
You still haven't answered my question:
Please demonstrate one example, **with objective evidence, of a code created by intelligence - other than human, or not as part of the natural material world? We have evidence of codes occurring naturally, show one example to support your claim they occurr through supernatural causation, let alone your absurd assertion "The can only occurr" through supernatural intelligence.
Tempus fugit now, you have squandered months on your endless merry go around, time for you to piss or get off the pot.
@jnv3 So, you do agree that codes only come from intelligence. Unfortunately, DNA and RNA are not codes. They are collections of sequences of amino acids.
Yes, they show up in certain patterns. Patterns are not all codes. Codes are designed to convey information to our brains and for at least one of us to understand it. Patterns may or may not be designed and do not require anyone to understand them.
We refer to DNA and RNA as codes to facilitate an easier way to teach how they work. Giving something a new name does not change what it is. Describing it differently does not change how it functions.
Plugging a god into the gaps of science is the god of the gaps fallacy. Fallacious arguments do not get a free pass around here. If we spot issues, we will point them out. It is up to YOU to listen to our criticisms and make the appropriate changes. It IS possible to argue for a god in a non-fallacious way. In fact, that's what we want! Bring a logical, sound, and valid argument.
Exactly.
I think his problem, along with a lot of other "theist" types, is that they see the "code" of DNA like a blueprint. Like the string of DNA is instructions on how to build a human, like the blueprints are instructions on how to build a house, or something like that.
There's no code in an atom of hydrogen and oxygen to build water. It's literally, just what happens when you get the right mixture of hydrogen and oxygen together under the right conditions. Water is never intended, it's just a result of normal reactions.
At the end of the day, life depends on biology, biology depends on chemistry, and chemistry along with everything else depends on physics.
Humans are not the intent of DNA, we are result of physics "just happening".
You are obviously glossing over the unique specified order of the nucleotides. This order is TOTALLY independent of chemistry laws. This represents a code because mrna gets translated into specific proteins. Just as a novel written in a book is not just chemical ink on paper
So, you're saying that if there were no code we could expect mrna to bond with other random molecules and produce "junk" protein?
It would not produce any proteins at all.
Btw there has not been enough time in the age of the universe for evolution to produce even a single protein
Why wouldn't it produce protein?
Since you are unwilling to provide objective hard empirical evidence for your original claim, do you have objective hard empirical evidence to back up this claim?
And remember the Four Razor's:
rmfr
@jnv3 A pattern is a pattern, no matter how complex. Your assumption of how long it would take to form a protein is flawed. Amino acids have been found on asteroids, the moon, mars etc. The idea that life only formed here is ignorant.
Nobody knows if other places produced life too. There are other planets that are in a habitable zone. There may be other universes. They could have produced life too. They could have been running the amino acid shuffle, just like most places could have.
Our sample of how life formed is insufficient to definitively say it could only happen here and that ours was the only way that it could happen.
We do NOT fully understand how life can begin. We have hypothesis on potential ways that it could form.
Besides, even if abiogenesis was proven false, it doesn't prove a god did it. All it would prove is that abiogenesis, the hypothesis, is false. There could be other hypothesis about how non-life became life.
Abiogenesis has the lead over the god hypothesis, as it has been proven possible. No matter how improbable, it is possible.
The hostile arakish should know that anything he says is being totally ignored by me, best he save his hostile breath.
As for amino acids being found, that’s akin to finding a screw and claiming that an airbus A-380 is practically built. New research is revealing that life and DNA are information based so time infinite is not your friend
“The probability of getting a properly folded chain of one-handed amino acids, joined by peptide bonds, is one chance in 10^74+45+45, or one in 10^164 This means that, on average, you would need to construct 10^164 chains of amino acids 150 units long to expect to find one that is useful.
Functionally impossible
Yeah, see that statement does not include any reference to time or volume/locations. It is non-sense.
/e for example:
No breath to save. I am typing. And you only say I am hostile because you cannot provide OBJECTIVE HARD EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE.
Are you such a weenie whiney baby?
rmfr
Source required. Otherwise, the Four Razors:
rmfr
I want my own razor!
maybe:
I'll have to work on it.
I'm not allowed to have sharp objects. So the best I could hope for would be a Tin-Man's butter knife.
How about this?
Tin-Man's Butter Knife: If you can't make fun of it, then what's the use.
rmfr
@ Arakish
The Accurate Tin Man's Guide: "If you cant make butter of it, whats the fun?" * laughs outrageously*
Okay, I think I've got it...
Tin-Man's Butter Knife:
"Any ridiculous nonsense presented will be countered with opposing ridiculous nonsense of an equal or greater amount."
Sounds quite scholarly, does it not?... *beaming smile*
I like. I am going to add and call it the Five Razors. I know your's is a Butter Knife, But even though they were called the Three Musketeers, there was four. There. Five Razors.
rmfr
EDIT: Still waiting for Nyarlathotep to get his settled.
A.. There's no such thing as a "properly" folded protein.
B.. They fold because of the CHEMISTRY/PHYSICS involved. Hydrophobic/hydrophilic folding is one example. This isn't "proper" folding, it's folding that 'just happens' because of the chemistry/physics involving the amino acid molecules and the water molecules.
@jnv3 Even if the possibility was 10^14425525423 it would still be possible. Improbability says little about the possibility as we do not have enough data to verify it. Nor do we have sufficient data to try and calculate the probability in the first place. A data set of 1 is useless in calculating probability.
In fact, the possibility of life arising is 100%. It happened. Plus, you haven't factored in the many worlds hypothesis.
Also, would you mind citing sources and providing objectively hard empirical evidence? Your claims fall well within the scope of science.
The Christian god isn't necessarily evidence that the universe is a flawed creator.
I can say one thing. With all the bologna jnv3 has thrown on this thread, no one is going to hungry for a while.
rmfr
@J N Vanderbilt III you are unable to demonstrate how a contravention of the laws of nature could be proved, thus your attempt to show that nature is not an adequate explanation for all things is not falsifiable.
And I'll post again what I have already posted.
"Nature does not produce codes. Humans apply codes to provide a framework to better understand how something works."
And as Randomhero1982 posted (paraphrased): "Nature just is."
rmfr
Of course the possibility of life arising is 100%. It happened, but not by chance
If a protein folds incorrectly, death, and disease abound or no life to begin with
the origin of life has never been observed but you atheists have faith that it happened by ill functional chance.
In flipping a coin , The chances of getting all heads 100 times in a row is similar to the chance of getting 100 left-handed amino acids to form a biological protein. On average, how many times and how often will we need to flip the coin to achieve 100 heads in a row? Over 300 million times a second for over one quadrillion years! Good luck
@jnv3
What are the chances? Only once. That is all you need. As said, you need to go back to school and quit skipping so many classes.
rmfr
Coin flips are random. The odds of getting heads on any flip is 50%, every single time.
Things like amino acids don't just form randomly. Certain compounds, molecules, and elements bond with, or react with, other types. And some don't. You can't just randomly throw neon into the mix and get something new and random, because neon normally doesn't react with anything.
Comment ignored
J N Vanderbilt III,
Why do you keep arguing when you have been told that RNA has been shown to emerge spontaneously? As by your definition of code, it is a code so your initial question is answered.
In fact, retroviruses, like HIV, use their genomic RNA as a template from which to synthesize DNA using reverse transcriptase. So DNA is created from RNA.
These facts are what prompted some biologist to state the RNA-World Hypothesis, where RNA and not DNA was the main nucleic acid.
Pages