ALTER2EGO -to- EVERYONE:
For the average person, precision indicates that an intelligent person guided the outcome. According to Webster's New World College Dictionary, the word "precision" is defined as follows:
"the quality of being precise; exactness, accuracy"
The reverse of precision is imprecision/inaccuracy/inexactness, which is always the result of an accident or a spontaneous event that happens by chance with no one guiding the outcome. Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary defines an accident as:
"a nonessential event that HAPPENS BY CHANCE and has undesirable or unfortunate results." (Source: Websters New Collegiate Dictionary)
Notice that an accident, by definition, is something unplanned aka it "happened by chance." Notice the similarity of the definition for "spontaneous" (as in "spontaneous event").
DEFINITION OF "SPONTANEOUS":
"Spontaneous means unplanned or done on impulse."
Spontaneous dictionary definition | spontaneous defined
AGRUMENT #1 FOR AN INTELLIGENT CREATOR:
Scientific evidence shows there is extreme precision in everything around us in the natural world. This precision renders the evolution theory and Big Bang theory mere fiction, because both theories rely on accidents or spontaneous events. Precision leaves no room for error or for accidental events. Rather, precision requires deliberation.
Take, for example, the first 60 elements that were discovered on the Periodic Table of the Elements of planet earth. Some of those 60 elements are gases and are therefore invisible to the human eye. The atoms--from which the Earth's elements are made--are specifically related to one another. In turn, the elements--e.g. arsenic, bismuth, chromium, gold, krypton--reflect a distinct, natural numeral order based upon the structure of their atoms. This is a proven LAW.
The precision in the order of the elements made it possible for scientists such as Mendeleyev, Ramsey, Moseley, and Bohr to theorize the existence of unknown elements and their characteristics. These elements were later discovered, just as predicted. Because of the distinct numerical order of the elements, the word LAW is applied to the Periodic Table of the Elements. (Sources: (1) The McGraw-Hill Encyclopedia of Science & Technology, (2) "Periodic Law," from Encyclopdia Britannica, Vol. VII, p. 878, copyright 1978, (3) The Hutchinson Dictionary of Scientific Biography)
SIDE NOTE: Laws found in nature, as defined by Webster's New World Dictionary, are:
"a sequence of events that have been observed to occur with UNVARYING UNIFORMITY under the same conditions."
QUESTIONS FOR DISCUSSION:
1. Were it not for the precise relationship among the first 60 discovered elements on the Periodic Table, would scientists have been able to accurately predict the existence of forms of matter that at the time were unknown?
2. Could the precise law within the first 60 discovered elements (on the Periodic Table) have resulted by chance aka spontaneously aka by accident? Or is this evidence for the existence an intelligent Designer/God who guided the outcome?
3. Evolution and Big Bang theories both rely upon things happening by chance aka at random. If evolution or Big Bang were credible explanations for the existence of life on earth or the existence of millions of planets in the heavens, how do either theory account for the Periodic Table of the Elements of planet earth in which the first 60 discovered elements are so precise, and so interrelated with one another, that the Periodic Table has been assigned the word "LAW"?
________________
"That people may know that you, whose name is JEHOVAH, you alone are the Most High over all the earth." (Psalms 83:18)
Subscription Note:
Choosing to subscribe to this topic will automatically register you for email notifications for comments and updates on this thread.
Email notifications will be sent out daily by default unless specified otherwise on your account which you can edit by going to your userpage here and clicking on the subscriptions tab.
Alt 2, what is your opinion on gambling and are you familiar with the game of Craps or Poker?Either of which I could use to discuss a point with you about chance probability and things being precisely so? I for this discussion would feel better about using Craps, but I would try to put it in terms of poker if I had to.
This whole argument boils down to a puddle of water saying "i fit just right in this puddle, therefore gawwd!"
ELLIE HARRIS:
This whole argument boils down to a puddle of water saying "i fit just right in this puddle, therefore gawwd!"
ALTER2EGO:
How did the water come into existence in order for it to create the puddle? Did the water create itself?
________________
"That people may know that you, whose name is JEHOVAH, you alone are the Most High over all the earth." (Psalms 83:18)
Two free hydrogen atoms joined with an oxygen atom and water was created, this happened many times to create every water molecule in all of what you would call creation.
Using your line of logic though, How did your god JEHOVAH come into existence for it to create all of creation? Did JEHOVAH create himself?
Great POINT ZAP!!!!! There must have been something that always Was.... something Infinite ....... to cause all the Finite.......
The lovely thing about science is that it's okay to say that not all the answers are discovered yet. We learn more every day. Science doesn't throw up its hands and say, "We don't know the answer, therefore god(s) did it, let's stop looking." If that were the case, you might be dead by now from an infection and sure as heck wouldn't be participating in an Internet forum.
May be it is a bad experience you had with "religious people" or your definition of religion, which makes you think like this. Having curiosity to know is one thing, and believing in God is another. Science should be an essential part of the religion because human is an intelligent being and it will throw off a religion without any scientific foundation. (Remember "rejecting the bad theories" thing I said about religions).
It might be your definition of religion which throws up its hands and stops looking for a reason, but my definition says that, "God, please give me the intelligence/inspiration to understand the reason behind the infection".
Sounds like Christian Science. What an abomination.
Thats SO true.... like the Ancient peoples that thought the Sun was a God Driving a burning Chariot across the sky.......
That's a false dichotomy. The argument from fine tuning suffers from the fallacy inherently though.
Life is tuned to the earth and to each other because it evolved that way, and evolution isn't accidental or random. Evolution is driven by reproduction, so it is very goal oriented.
All those elements in the table were made inside stars. Our planet was made from the corpse of a star. The heavy elements are on all the rocks. Didn't NDT make this clear in Cosmos? There's a precise relationship because all these elements were made in the same kitchen and their concentrations are not independent. Carbon being always most available and the heaviest ones least available.
First off, your "debate" is more like a guided discussion for the ignorant. You clearly outline the "information" we are to except, and then pose questions that are easily answered by it. As a military member I'm very familiar with this teaching method, as I use it all the time to cover general information with junior service members, where an in depth explanation is not necassary. Such a topic might include operating a weapons system, where a chemistry class on how gunpowder burning and expanding air generating force on weapons parts would be overkill when all they need to know is how to load it, clean it, and fix common malfunctions. However, science is the in-depth explanation, so cutting corners with this teaching is highly erroneous.
So let's hit this fast and hard. The pattern you see in the periodic table of elements is man-made and has several factors. Each factor is actually varible, and can change how each individual atom acts. Protons are the core of an atoms nucleus, and the key differentiation between elements. However, the number of nuetrons form elements into isotopes. The number of electrons can form each element into an ion. Isotopes and ions of the same element can behave quite differently form what is excepted as the ideal element. They can form ionic and covavlent bonds easier or harder, and can also radioactively decay, and be prone to nuclear fussion or fission. So even in making the periodic table we generally excepted that the atoms that occur most commonly on earth would be the "Base", however in reality this is slightly erroneous, as we came to this conclusion from a relative view of how elements form and behave on earth. This is why we have the sciences of "Chemistry" and "Physics" which study how atoms and forces interact on each other. Because we now know that the periodic table is not a static representation of all there is to understand about atoms.
Next, you also more or less implied that both evolution and the big bang theories are incorrect becase they rely on "random" interactions. I both agree, and dissagree. While in the evolutionary theory we still refer to mutations caused by radiated isotopes as "random", they do have physical causes based on sub-atomic particle movement. And they in fact occur regularly in predictable ways. However whether or not it's the right time and place for such a mutation to succeed in its environment is decided by natural processes wich are extremely complex. So yes, it's random withing a certain degree. But totally understandable through science. Much like the big bang is based off the same understanding of physics and chemistry. I guess to answer your question
"If evolution or Big Bang were credible explanations for the existence of life on earth or the existence of millions of planets in the heavens, how do either theory account for the Periodic Table of the Elements of planet earth in which the first 60 discovered elements are so precise, and so interrelated with one another, that the Periodic Table has been assigned the word "LAW"?"
The answer is that evolution and the big bang do not explain the laws governing the periodic table of elements. They were based on them, so quite the opposite is true. The laws and understanding of the periodic table of elements explain Evolution and The Big Bang. My question is, why do you only except scientific laws and theories that show patterns, calling them proof of "a creator", but turn around and bite them when there is the faintest notion that the facts contradict your holy book?
RASUNGOD0:
That's a false dichotomy. The argument from fine tuning suffers from the fallacy inherently though.
ALTER2EGO:
As soon as you can present a logical explanation for why the fine-tuning argument "suffers from the fallacy inherently," you will have made a point.
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
RASUNGOD0:
Life is tuned to the earth and to each other because it evolved that way, and evolution isn't accidental or random. Evolution is driven by reproduction, so it is very goal oriented.
ALTER2EGO:
You are arguing for spontaneous or accidental events when you claim "Life is tuned to the earth and to each other because it evolved that way." Spontaneous or accident events do not repeatedly result in precision. But since you are making the claim, suppose you prove it by providing an example of precision among man-made creations, which has repeatedly occurred by accident or by spontaneous means. In other words, the precision was not intended.
I will watch for your examples along that line.
________________
"That people may know that you, whose name is JEHOVAH, you alone are the Most High over all the earth." (Psalms 83:18)
TRAVIS PASKIEWICZ:
So let's hit this fast and hard. The pattern you see in the periodic table of elements is man-made and has several factors. Each factor is actually varible, and can change how each individual atom acts. Protons are the core of an atoms nucleus, and the key differentiation between elements. However, the number of nuetrons form elements into isotopes. The number of electrons can form each element into an ion. Isotopes and ions of the same element can behave quite differently form what is excepted as the ideal element. They can form ionic and covavlent bonds easier or harder, and can also radioactively decay, and be prone to nuclear fussion or fission. So even in making the periodic table we generally excepted that the atoms that occur most commonly on earth would be the "Base", however in reality this is slightly erroneous, as we came to this conclusion from a relative view of how elements form and behave on earth. This is why we have the sciences of "Chemistry" and "Physics" which study how atoms and forces interact on each other. Because we now know that the periodic table is not a static representation of all there is to understand about atoms.
ALTER2EGO:
If your intent was to "hit this fast and hard," you failed miserably.
You correctly stated: "The pattern you see in the periodic table of elements is man-made." But you neglected to mention that the pattern on the Periodic Table is merely a documentation of what scientists OBSERVED. Humans do not get any credit for the existence of the first 60-discovered elements or for the precision and the interrelationship among those elements. Why so? Because humans did not CREATE any of the first 60-discovered elements.
If you want to give humans credit for producing a chart called the "Periodic Table of Elements" simply because they lined up the elements based upon atomic number, fine. But until you or another skeptic/atheist can explain how those elements came into existence without the intervention of an intelligent being, and why they are so precise that they are referred to in the scientific world as "Law," the questions in my OP remain unanswered.
________________
"That people may know that you, whose name is JEHOVAH, you alone are the Most High over all the earth." (Psalms 83:18)
I think your knowledge of basic chemistry is lacking. That's not all that uncommon, as most people accept the generalizations and assumptions that are given to explain the basic concepts that one might see in highschool and don't really continue into the discipline far enough to to realize that they're mostly man made distinctions. Travis, you did a really good job with your explanation, but I think unfortunately this person is below that. May I attempt to bridge some of the gap?
It's pretty basic. Atomic particles are organized by several factors, and their organization gives the matter that they are a part of various different characteristics. Humans, seeing these characteristics, had decided to classify them by such characteristics and labeled them. However, each element (let's just take carbon for example) is not really a static thing so much as a *range* of various organization patterns throughout which certain characteristics are preserved. If you pick up a piece of granite, it's not just a block of identical atoms. It's a collection of vastly different atoms (and at the rate of energy transference in most cases even pinning down a static atom is a hard and somewhat nebulous task), actually. We just drew the distinctions, thus "creating" the elements.
It's like measuring a mile. A mile is a man made measure, though distance is fairly objective and not created by man. How is a mile exactly 5280 feet, *each and every* time? Nothing phenomenal about that. We humans have decided exactly how much difference in density and distance between the electrical fields surrounding an atom's nucleus we will consider to constitute an electron shelf. So, while humans did not create the elements, we did create the precision. It helps us see patterns and make sense of the world.
to answer your question.. Yes that's what humans do we are pattern finding machines.
you ask "Were it not for the precise relationship among the first 60 discovered elements"
I would challenge the assumption that there is a precise relationship. there is precise organisation in our model of the elements,but this is only applicable if you take one view of what composes an element.
Had science first found the quantum structures the organisation of the periodic chart may look quite different.
I'm not sure what you mean by Imprecise, if you mean chaotic or no connection whatsoever to each other.. they would not be elements so the question seems a little self defeating :)
*Sigh*... I knew what this argument would become! Every time someone comes out with a "Precision in Nature" arguement, it's never simply enough to say that the "Precision" is an illusion, because what it is in reality is how man has broken down interations into small, relevant peices in information. And each peice of this information is part of larger observed interactions, so yeah, if you put the peices together back into the full picture, it looks like precision. For example, we'll continue using the periodic table. Here is an anomoly you obviously overlooked, "H+". Know what "H+" is? Bet you only memorized enough chemistry facts mto make your lame ass allegation that the periodic table is proof of precision guided by your god. "H+" is a Helium ion with a positive charge. If you know anything about chemistry you should know that Helium is, by the periodic table ideal atom, is one proton, nuetron, and electron. However, in this particular Ion, there is no neutron or electron. Thats right, a positive Helium ion is actually just a proton. And, technically speaking, all other "Elements" are just a conglomeration of Helium ions and isotopes at their nucleus. However, a single proton can still maintain soveriegnty as it's own element, Helium, until it is induced under high pressure, such as in the center of a star, to fuse with another atom. So are you getting how the periodic table is more like a catalogue of commonly found interactions of sub-atomic particles that are found on earth? It's not a precision guide to the only possible situations. But I digress... your not here to argue physics are you?
What you came here to say is you believe god made everything. And I can agree, the universe would generally concurs that a Sparnoza type god who is impersonal and uneffected by this universe could indeed be the true creator... But the abrahamic god? No, there's more fallacies both theologically and emperically that proves that no such god who takes a personaly interest in man-kind and performs miracles that defy natural laws , exists. But feel free to post your bible quotes, which we have no evidence to prove the books were written by the men who claim to wrote them, or that they were written in the given times, or that the subject contained therein is anything more than mythology, here.
SAMMY SHAZAAM:
I think your knowledge of basic chemistry is lacking. That's not all that uncommon, as MOST PEOPLE ACCEPT THE GENERALIZATIONS AND ASSUMPTIONS THAT ARE GIVEN TO EXPLAIN THE BASIC CONCEPTS that one might see in highschool and don't really continue into the discipline far enough to to realize that THEY'RE MOSTLY MAN MADE DISTINCTIONS. Travis, you did a really good job with your explanation, but I think unfortunately this person is below that. May I attempt to bridge some of the gap?
ALTER2EGO -to- SAMMY SHAZAAM:
You are giving me wash, rinse, and repeat when you attempt to explain away the precision in the elements as mere "generalizations and assumptions that are given to explain the basic concepts that are . . . mostly man made distinctions". Travis Paskiewicz tried that lame explanation already and got nowhere. Specifically, he stated: "The pattern you see in the periodic table of elements is man-made and has several factors." I then responded to him as follows:
ALTER2EGO -to- TRAVIS PASKIEWICZ:
You correctly stated: "The pattern you see in the periodic table of elements is man-made." But you neglected to mention that the pattern on the Periodic Table is merely a documentation of what scientists OBSERVED. Humans do not get any credit for the existence of the first 60-discovered elements or for the precision and the interrelationship among those elements. Why so? Because humans did not CREATE any of the first 60-discovered elements.
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
ALTER2EGO -to- SAMMY SHAZAAM:
So instead of you telling me: "I think your knowledge of basic chemistry is lacking," your best bet is to try and come up with a credible explanation for how the first 60-discovered elements could be so precise and so interrelated to one another that scientists were able to accurately predict the characteristics of missing elements.
Since your obvious claim is that the precision among the first 60 discovered elements on the Periodic Table is not proof of intelligent design, then you are left with accidents or spontaneous events for their existence. That equates to 60 different accidents back-to-back that ended up producing 60 precise elements. But that is the least of the problem for atheists. They still have to overcome the mathematical probability that all 60 of those elements could be interrelated—by accident. Keep in mind that, by definition, a single accident produces undesirable or unfortunate results, not precision. And keep in mind that we are talking 60 different accidents followed by more accidents that would cause each element to be related to the other elements.
DEFINITION OF "ACCIDENT":
"a nonessential event that HAPPENS BY CHANCE and has UNDESIRABLE or unfortunate results." (Source: Websters New Collegiate Dictionary)
________________
"That people may know that you, whose name is JEHOVAH, you alone are the Most High over all the earth." (Psalms 83:18)
You're obviously missing the entire point. there is only one, huge accident, and we humans divided it up into 60 categories because we like doing things like that.
I really don't know how to make it simpler for you?
SAMMY SHAZAAM:
You're obviously missing the entire point. there is only one, huge accident, and we humans divided it up into 60 categories because we like doing things like that.
I really don't know how to make it simpler for you?
ALTER2EGO -to- SAMMY SHAZAAM:
I am "missing the entire point," while you continue to give me atheist fairytale in which precision happened to 60 different elements by a single accident? That bit you dreamed up about a single accident resulting in 60 interrelated, precise elements would best be presented a the Laugh Factory. Here is why:
1. The first 60-discovered elements belong to the same category, while you make the fallacious claim that "we humans divided it up into 60 categories because we like doing things like that." The category is referred to as Periodic LAW. And that is "law" as in "scientific law." Below is the definition of "law" from two dictionaries:
DEFINITION OF "LAW":
"a sequence of events that have been observed to occur with UNVARYING UNIFORMITY under the same conditions." (Source: Webster's New World Dictionary)
DEFINITION OF "SCIENTIFIC LAW":
"a phenomenon of nature that has been proven to invariably occur whenever certain conditions exist or are met; also, a formal statement about such a phenomenon; also called natural law"
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/Scientific+law
Now, let us for the sake of argument use your fallacious claim that all of the first 60-discovered elements--referred to as Periodic LAW--were the result of a single accident? You fail again. Why so? Because by definition, "accident" causes UNDESIRABLE or UNFORTUNATE results.
DEFINITION OF "ACCIDENT":
"a nonessential event that HAPPENS BY CHANCE and has UNDESIRABLE or UNFORTUNATE results." (Source: Websters New Collegiate Dictionary)
A precise pattern of 60 is neither unfortunate nor desirable. Instead, a precise pattern of 60 is an example of exactness and accuracy.
DEFINITION OF "PRECISION":
"• 1 The quality, condition, or fact of being EXACT and ACCURATE:
o SYNONYMS
o 1.1[AS MODIFIER] Marked by or adapted for accuracy and exactness: a precision instrument"
http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/us/definition/american_english/precision
________________
"That people may know that you, whose name is JEHOVAH, you alone are the Most High over all the earth." (Psalms 83:18)
Apparently some people just don't grasp the core concept of relativism. Especially for those in religions that preach humility, that's *highly* ironic.
To ALTER2EGO
I'm not an expect chemistry, but I do know a thing or 2 on quantum physics.
So I was holding back in posting in this topic initially.
However from your posts alone, it seems you are making a claim that precision= intelligent creator?
Am I wrong?
May I remind you, that you first need to support this claim if you are making it.
Since precision can come from many things.
EG:
The number 2 is precisely 2.
And it is not just a way we humans describe quantity of objects.
2 rocks are precisely 2 rocks independently of what method you use to count them.
So let assume for the moment that there is precision in the universe, there is a very long way for you to show that this precision is evidence in some way of an intelligent creator.
Why cannot the universe be precise from start and just because we don't understand it's mechanics, we see some things as random?
I am not saying that randomness does not exist but could easily be an illusion. Especially with the new discoveries in quantum mechanics.
So I think your entire argument and questions were based on this assumption which was horribly wrong to begin with.
In science you cannot start with the answer.
Else you will end up making assumptions and consider them as facts.
Awesome Points Jeff......... I specially like the part about how you can't start with the answer.... I think we would all do well to gather as much info as possible before making decisions on things.... ;-)......
Yeah it is amazing to me too about the Randomness being very rare also on all fronts we are finding less and less Randomness.... I know alot of the current Neo Macro-evolutionists are trying to figure out how we could get so much diversity with so little Randomness.... And like you mentioned about it being an illusion and possible does not even exist.... When i look at it the less Randomness is instead exchanged with purposefulness..... its that way on purpose which seems to lead me to a belief in Design and less in Random chance.....
Just my 2 cents.....
This topic started interesting then ego started to troll.
'Atheist fairytale' ffs
Try to pay attention what im about to say is important. If people constantly correct you the same way maybe its because they are right. Its not a conspiracy.
Atheist only share one concept were not some secret society made by satan to test your faith etc.
Lol! Not judging you in the least but...
I do believe that's the most lucid thing you've said on the forum so far :)
If only theists would realize that we really don't give a rat's behind what lies they decide to tell themselves, as long as they agree to stay out of our business, politics, sciences, and other meaningful life endeavors.
I'm not quite sure I understand questions 1 and 2 to be honest. The Periodic Table is nothing more than a logical means of arranging the elements. At its most simplistic, it can be seen as a graph which plots the number of protons in an element's nucleus against the number of electrons found in its outer shell. So, as a means of predicting the properties and reactivity of unknown elements, it was an incredibly useful tool; in fact, this predictive quality is one of the main reasons Mendeleev developed the idea
Question 3 is worthy of a little more thought, but I'm afraid it displays a common ignorance shared by those who know little of the subject matter.
Let's take: "If evolution or Big Bang were credible explanations for the existence of life on earth..." for example. Evolution does not explain the 'existence' of life. Evolution explains how organisms (or more accurately, their gene pools) progressively adapt under environmental pressures, and in addition, how speciation occurs. It is no more the 'cause' of life than a bus timetable is the 'cause' of the internal combustion engine.
There's none so blind as those that will not see, I'm afraid.
Thats not ignorance though ive spoken to an ex seminary student this crap about evolution being either unproven or just a theory is simply propaganda.
The priests are being taught what to say the church does not even tell them they are lies.
I usually just post a link to not just a theory .com and leave the conversation there 99% of theists wont check the link.
NO doubt on Micro evolution and adaptation... virtually 100% that an species will evolve to changing environmental conditions.... I read a study here a while back about how human fingers are getting slimmer in order to manipulate smaller and more intricate parts as it possibly helps survival more than big thick fat fingers to throw a Log at an invading tribe...... ;-)
When you are talking Macro-evolution the ability for one species to randomly evolve into a completely different species then it is still much more theory than proven fact...... As we are still waiting to prove one single instance of such.......
No people are confusing evolution with the fossil record.
Evolutions just one of many tools we used to examine the fossil record. Its the fossil record that shows macro changes.
JEFF VELLA LEONE:
To ALTER2EGO
I'm not an expect chemistry, but I do know a thing or 2 on quantum physics. So I was holding back in posting in this topic initially.
ALTER2EGO -to- JEFF VELLA LEONE
Quantum Physics is nothing more than a theory aka a group of hypotheses/educated guesses that can be disproven. It is an attempt by mortal man at understanding the behavior of matter and energy at various levels.
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
JEFF VELLA LEONE:
May I remind you, that you first need to support this claim if you are making it. Since precision can come from many things.
EG:
The number 2 is precisely 2.
And it is not just a way we humans describe quantity of objects.
2 rocks are precisely 2 rocks independently of what method you use to count them.
ALTER2EGO -to- JEFF VELLA LEONE:
The number 2 is "precisely 2" because it requires two different items. But what point are you attempting to make? That the two different items created themselves simply because, in combination, they = 2?
For instance, if you saw two different pieces of chalk on the floor, are you going to then argue that because the different pieces of chalk are precisely two pieces of chalk, then each of those two pieces of chalk did not require someone to create them?
Now, let us apply that to the first 60 discovered elements on the Periodic Table. Each of the elements are precise in and of themselves. For instance, any increase or decrease in the atomic number for the element called CHROMIUM would change its characteristics so that it would cease to be chromium. The same is true for all of the other elements on the Periodic Table. In turn, each of the elements are related to all of the other elements on the Periodic Table. So much so, that when some of the first 60 discovered elements were missing, scientists were able to accurately predict the characteristics of the missing elements.
DEFINITION OF "ACCIDENT":
"a NONESSENTIAL event that HAPPENS BY CHANCE and has UNDESIRABLE or UNFORTUNATE results." (Source: Websters New Collegiate Dictionary)
DEFINITION OF "SPONTANEOUS":
"Spontaneous means UNPLANNED or done on impulse."
http://www.yourdictionary.com/spontaneous
QUESTION #1 to JEFF VELLA LEONE: How could precision among the first 60 discovered elements on the Periodic Table have happened without intelligent intervention, since, by definition, precision cannot repeatedly occur by accident or by spontaneous means?
________________
"That people may know that you, whose name is JEHOVAH, you alone are the Most High over all the earth." (Psalms 83:18)
Pages