Has nature ever created a code?

1352 posts / 0 new
Last post
xenoview's picture
@jnv3

@jnv3
Are you saying that god created life?
If god is real, then provide objective evidence for said god.
I don't think you have any objective evidence, all you have is subjective evidence from your mind.

Sheldon's picture
Macro evolution is a

Macro evolution is a scientific fact. Atheism has nothing whatsoever to do with the process or methods of science validating such facts.

This is a typical cliched piece of duplicitous creationist rhetoric.

Anyone who equates evolution with atheism, or vice versa is simply exposing their own creationist agenda.

You have failed to demonstrate a shred of objective evidence for any supernatural causation, or any deity. Your OP has been exposed as a fallacious specious creationist cliche.

Why are You still here? Do You think endless stubborn repetition is going to achieve something here? You can believe all the vapid creationist superstition you like, but bombarding atheists with empty creationist rhetoric won't change scientific facts, or make your creationist beliefs objectively valid.

Why not go to a creationist site and lap up the approbation of people who share your delusional beliefs? It must be more rewarding for someone as closed minded as you.

Sheldon's picture
YOU came to an atheist forum

YOU came to an atheist forum
YOU are desperately ignoring objective facts.
YOU are making ever more desperate denials of science.
YOU are the one using cliched fallacies passed off as rational argument.
YOU are the one resorting to duplicitous misrepresentations of other people's posts.
YOU are the one who sought out atheists and are trying to pedal your superstition.

Only you seem desperate to me. I was blissfully unconcerned by vapid creationist rhetoric and propaganda before you showed up, and will remain so when you inevitably leave.

Sheldon's picture
J N Vanderbilt III

J N Vanderbilt III
"Wow all that typing ignored totally by me,
This is comical"

Not as comical as your grammar.

"You atheists out there still marveling (sic) at all the magical mutations that made your magical macro evolution possible? And your functional impossibility of creation of proteins?"

No, I am too busy pointing, and laughing at your grammar & spelling, again.

"One of my favorite stories is how fish came out of the water to live on land (over time of course) and turn into philosophers"

Well fictional stories do seem to be your bag, which is pretty typical for creationists.

Is this going to another creationist who has had his verbiage dismantled, trying to pretend he was simply trolling all along, just so he can pretend to save face? I've seen it all before, champ.

tbowen's picture
how fish came out of the

how fish came out of the water to live on land (over time of course) and turn into philosophers
IS a lie, but you choose to believe it

arakish's picture
Especial Note: Sorry Admins

Especial Note: Sorry Admins/Mods. This is my lasy Hurrah! at this moron. Unless it specifically calls me out. And notice, I no longer think of jnv3 as anything other than an "it." No longer qualifies as human.

JNV3: "how fish came out of the water to live on land (over time of course) and turn into philosophers IS a lie, but you choose to believe it"

Then why don't you just carry your sorry lying ass elsewhere and let us know our facts while you can believe in whatever schizophrenic dissociative delusion you wish to believe.

Why don't you go back to that theist site and brag about how you slam dunked us with your continuous idiotic and retarded fallacies, and lying and misrepresenting what we wrote. I am fairly certain your theistic friends will pat you on the back for showing how intelligent us atheists are compared to you illiterate theists.

Scientists/Atheists read many books and feel they still have a lot to learn.
Religious Absolutists barely read one book and feel they know everything.

And make sure you link to this thread so they can see how illiterate, retarded, and idiotic you truly are.

rmfr

Old man shouts at clouds's picture
@ JNV3

@ JNV3

how fish came out of the water to live on land (over time of course) and turn into philosophers
IS a lie, but you choose to believe it

Don't be such a fucking dill.

Show us evidence for your "god" and stop making us both laugh and projectile vomit at your comments.

and stop fucking lying!

Sheldon's picture
Argumentum ad ignorantiam

Argumentum ad ignorantiam fallacy, and a puerile straw man fallacy. You're on fire today.

Armando Perez's picture
J N Vanderbilt ,

J N Vanderbilt ,

Just this one comment shows you do not even a basic understanding of evolution.

Sheldon's picture
aperez241

aperez241
"J N Vanderbilt , Just this one comment shows you do not even a basic understanding of evolution."

Or logic, lets not forget his fucking hilarious "you have your logic, and I have mine" comment, quality humour.

Nyarlathotep's picture
aperez241 - Just this one

aperez241 - Just this one comment shows you do not even a basic understanding of evolution.

1000 agrees!

Sheldon's picture
J N Vanderbilt III

J N Vanderbilt III
"how fish came out of the water to live on land (over time of course) and turn into philosophers
IS a lie, but you choose to believe it"

It is a lie, but i's yours not anyone else's. A lying creationist, well I'm not remotely shocked as I've seen it all before. Anyone else remotely surprised at his duplicity?

tbowen's picture
You guys are the religion of

You guys are the religion of LUCKY mutations and impossible proteins of which You offer no details to provide any proof, so don’t worry about me needing to provide proof of God

Armando Perez's picture
Mutations are an objective

Mutations are an objective fact, seen, analyzed, and used all the time. Natural selection is a fact, seen, analyzed, and used all the time. Nothing religious about it.

God is not a proven fact at all.

Sheldon's picture
" don’t worry about me

" don’t worry about me needing to provide proof of God"

Never mind proof, a single shred of objective evidence would be a start.

You can rant and deny scientific facts all you want, this just makes you look like a typical rediculous creationist having a tantrum because he can't bully atheists into accepting his vapid superstition.

No one is biting, get over it.

tbowen's picture
No mutations ever observed

No mutations ever observed facilitating macro evolution, instead just your incredulous faith that a fish turned into man(over time)

Sheldon's picture
"No mutations ever observed

"No mutations ever observed facilitating macro evolution,"

Liar, and you've been given the links to the research in this very thread. You may be a theist or not, but you are an unabashed liar, that much is unequivocal, so much for the ninth commandment. T'was ever thus...lies for Jesus is it?

tbowen's picture
Sheldon no macro evolution

Sheldon no macro evolution turning one creature into another has ever been witnessed and you my friend are the liar here. I’ve given you fruit fly example which you have chosen to ignore, after hundreds of mutations they are still fruit flies w same body plans

Sheldon's picture
Speciation has been observed,

Speciation has been observed, and you have been given multiple links in this thread to the research. Playing word games to create straw man arguments won't changed this.

"I’ve given you fruit fly example which you have chosen to ignore, after hundreds of mutations they are still fruit flies "

Another lie, you didnt give this examole it was linked for you, and the research shows in this example speciation of fruit flies. So how is this your example, example of what, your cretinous stupidity making you unable to grasp that speciation IS macro evolution? Each time you post you prove you donteven know what these basic scientific terms mean.

There are literally thousands of different species of fruit flies you duplicitous blinkered buffoon. So your cretinous creationist cliche above is like observing a chimpanzee evolving into a human and screeching lah lah lah it's still an ape lah lah lah.

All you're showing is the depth of your ignorance on a topic you are making risible claims about. As has been stated, you haven't even the most basic grasp of evolution or taxonomy, you dont even know that speciation is an example of macro evolution , but you do know speciation has been observed, that part is another deliberate lie from you. No amount of word games using terms like "creatures" or "type" will change the fact MACRO EVOLUTOIN HAS BEEN OBSERVED. Get over it...macro evolution and micro evolution are the same process on different time scales.

Now since you're setting this arbitrary standard did you see the ludicrous biblical myths of a virgin birth, the risible resurrection myth, or the equally risible creation myth of humans being conjured into existence in their current form from clay using magic? No of course not, none of that hokum nonsense has been objectively observed, yet you want to set a different standard of belief for an objectively evidenced scientific fact.

So you're clearly a hypocrite as well as a liar then.

Meepwned's picture
"Sheldon no macro evolution

"Sheldon no macro evolution turning one creature into another has ever been witnessed and you my friend are the liar here. I’ve given you fruit fly example which you have chosen to ignore, after hundreds of mutations they are still fruit flies w same body plans"

That is correct and we do not believe that. Your assertion that we do is a strawman fallacy.

Evolution is a description of population mechanics. Evolution does not, ever, say that individual organisms evolve into other species. Evolution is the slow accumulation of mutations over time, within populations.

Sheldon's picture
He's shamelessly movingvthd

He's shamelessly moving the goalposts each time his creationist verbiage is disproved.

He claimed only micro evolution is true and not macro. It was pointed out that macro evolution is micro evolution on a larger timescale. So then he switched from no macro evolution has occurred, to its never been observed. He was given links to selective breeding research that produced speciation , one of those examples involved fruit flies. Then he switched from macro evolution to using straw man terms like type and creature. He has ignored the other examples you will note. He keeps citing fruit flies but seems to not know there are different species of them, just as there are different species of apes that include humans.

He's undoubtedly profoundly ignorant on this topic, but he's also thoroughly dishonest as well. Both are fairly typical among creationists in my experience of them.

Species evolution through natural selection is an established scientific fact with a global scientific consensus. It is explained and evidenced in the scientific theory of evolution. The evidence is overwhelming and convergent from multiple scientific fields of study. To deny it now based on naught but blind faith in bronze age creation myths is no different to denying the rotundity of the earth.

Not one piece of objective scientifically validated evidence has ever contradicted or falsified species evolution or natural selection, and creationism has no objective evidence at all to support it. This was true when this thread started and it's equally true now.

He'll be mumbling about irreducible complexity next. He's already posted just about every cliches creationist howler there is, including the risibly stupid "evolution is not a fact just a theory" stinker. As if scientific theories can't explain and evidence scientific facts.

My favourite dumb claim from him though still has to be "Sheldon, you have your logic and I have mine."

It's so moronic you just have to clutch your belly throw your head back and bellow with laughter.

TheBlindWatchmaker's picture
Laughs falsely believing that

Laughs falsely believing that atheists think creatures can spontaneously change into something else.

Believes a magical bearded cosmic wizard poofs everything into existence.

THE.IRONY.

Sheldon's picture
If you want irony how about

If you want irony how about him claiming that macro evolution is untrue because it's never been observed, as if anyone ever saw humans created in an instant from clay, or people rising from the dead 3 days after dying from crucifixion.

Theists are irony impaired.

TheBlindWatchmaker's picture
That is quite spectacular to

That is quite spectacular to the highest degree.

And the OP was bereft of any intellectual fortitude, I mean really!

Has nature ever created a code? DNA is a code that gets coded and translated and has error correction. I challenge anyone to point out a code, other then DNA, that is created by nature. The point here is that codes are ONLY created by intelligence

Here's one for the OP, what creates intelligence?

Sheldon's picture
"Here's one for the OP, what

"Here's one for the OP, what creates intelligence?"

I'm not sure the word "creates" is justified there. It's theists who normally sneak it into a "question" as if we won't notice it's a begging the question fallacy.

How about this...what evidence can anyone demonstrate that sentient evolved animals require anything more than natural phenomena to produce them?

After all the existence of sentient organic life is an objective fact, as is the existence of natural phenomena such as species evolution. So if anyone is going to assume something else is needed they will need to demonstrate objective evidence commensurate to that assumption. Or simply admit we dont yet know how life originated, and can make no assertions about it.

Not just point to gaps in our current understanding of how life originated and things like how DNA came to exist, then assume that having no explanation justifies assuming an unevidenced deity did it.

Fallacious God of the gaps arguments are not very compelling. Especially since no one can demonstrate any objective evidence for any deity. Or any supernatural cause for anything.

TheBlindWatchmaker's picture
Of course, But that was

Of course, But that was intentionally put there.
But perhaps I should have worded it as such, 'created'.

I think many on here have tried in vein to have the causality question answered, in regards to natural phenomena.
They are quick to sweep it aside, strange that isn't it?!

tbowen's picture
You are in a dither because

You are in a dither because speciation is not macro evolution, no changes in novel body plans, or morphology. And has never been observed.
How come fruit flies w their fast generations and undergone thousands of mutations have the same exact body plans? Evolution w new novel body parts/organs is a myth perpetuated by the likes of you, the facts even say so

Sheldon's picture
"speciation is not macro

"speciation is not macro evolution"

"Macro evolution is evolution on a scale at or above the level of species, in contrast with micro evolution, which refers to smaller evolutionary changes of allele frequencies within a species or population."

You're a lying moron. How thick does a person have to be to not Google fucking macro evolution before mouthing off with absurd creatard propaganda.

"Evolution w new novel body parts/organs is a myth perpetuated by the likes of you, "

The entire scientific world accepts it as an objective fact. Only creatards like you try to deny it. Take it up with science champ.

Tell us how many scientific facts that don't refute any part of your superstitious religious beliefs do you deny, just evolution would be my guess, another creationist without the imagination to recognise their own selection bias.

arakish's picture
jnv3: "speciation is not

jnv3: "speciation is not macro evolution"

Yes it does.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/05/science/mutant-crayfish-clones-europe...

This crayfish became a whole new species when the males died off. Now it clones itself without need for males.

Go back to school and study Theory of Evolution, Abiogenesis, and Parthenogenesis.

And do not skip classes.

rmfr

arakish's picture
@ J N Vanderbilt III

@ J N Vanderbilt III

And stop with the pedantic rhetoric. Repeating yourself ain't gonna change anything. Until you can provide OBJECTIVE HARD EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE to back up your preposterous ideas of mental retardedness, the Five Razors are applied:

  1. Sagan's Razor: Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
  2. Hitchens's Razor: What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.
  3. Arakish's Razor: NO EVIDENCE = NO EXISTENCE.
  4. Xenoview's Razor: Objective claims requires objective evidence.
  5. Tin-Man's Butter Knife: Any ridiculous nonsense presented will be countered with opposing ridiculous nonsense of an equal or greater amount.
  • Cognostic's Shovel: When someone starts slinging bullshit at you, get a shovel and sling it back.

***slash*** ***slash*** ***slash*** ***slash*** ***slash*** ***flinging shovelful***

rmfr

Pages

Donating = Loving

Heart Icon

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.

Or make a one-time donation in any amount.