Precision in Nature: Evidence of God or Accidents?

47 posts / 0 new

Last post

Sat, 08/09/2014 - 13:08

#32

Lmale

He does not even know that

He does not even know that science uses a different definition of theory and thinks he can talk about science.

Sat, 08/09/2014 - 21:51

#33

Jeff Vella Leone

ALTER2EGO

ALTER2EGO
"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?"

No, I was just pointing out that mathematics is precise and pure, and it does not require a creator.
1+1=2, 2+2=4, etc...

ALTER2EGO
"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?"

I answered this already, I assumed for a moment that there is precision as you claim.
Then I pointed out that you are assuming that precision= creator.
I proved to you that there is a very long way for you to show that precision= creator.
You made this assumption without showing any evidence or anything to support it.

Sat, 08/09/2014 - 22:48

#34

Jeff Vella Leone

then i wish to point out to

then i wish to point out to you;
even if we assume there is a creator, that doesn't mean he/it is better then us.
It could be that he just came before us and learned how to create atoms, and make those incredibly precise elements with enough time.
Assuming we are the first intelligent species in the universe is an arrogant assumption most biased people make.

The big bang theory is just a theory, it does show an idea of how our visible universe got created.
The universe itself is probably bigger and had multiple big bangs, we are just too far and small to even start speculating.

Now you seem to be pushing forward the idea of Deism, which is still a possible scenario, however the burden of proof lies on the one making the claim.
Showing there is precision is not enough to be evidence of a creator since science haven't yet excluded the possibility that the universe is extremely precise or not.

Even if all your assumptions are correct, you still are left where you started, with no idea about this god/creator of yours.

Sun, 08/10/2014 - 16:34

#35

Alter2Ego

JEFF VELLA LEONE (previous

JEFF VELLA LEONE (previous comment):
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 (previous response)
"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?"

JEFF VELLA LEONE: (present comment)
No, I was just pointing out that mathematics is precise and pure, and it does not require a creator.
1+1=2, 2+2=4, etc...

ALTER2EGO (present response):
What are you talking about? Mathematics is found within Jehovah's inspired word, the Judeo-Christian Bible, during which various things are counted. For instance, the Bible speaks of 3 angels that were sent to Abraham, and 30 pieces of silver that were paid to Judas Iscariot when he betrayed Jesus Christ. So obviously, the ability to count aka Mathematics did not simply happen; rather, it was invented.

Not only that, everybody knows that the ability to count 1 computer + 1 computer = 2 computers does not explain how the computers came into existence. So again, what point are you attempting to make as regards the field of Mathematics that merely enables people to count THINGS, as if counting HOW MANY can explanation for HOW the THINGS CAME TO EXIST?

Your response makes no sense, and the fact that you repeated it indicates you are evading the questions raised in my OP. The question in my OP is this: How could each of the first 60-discovered elements on the Periodic Table be so precise and interrelated to one another by accident, considering the fact that accidents produce "unfortunate" results.

DEFINITION OF "ACCIDENT":
"a NONESSENTIAL event that HAPPENS BY CHANCE and has UNDESIRABLE or UNFORTUNATE results." (Source: Websters New Collegiate Dictionary)

QUESTION #3 to JEFF VELLA LEONE:: If a child asks you how 10 houses came into existence, are you going to tell them that the number 10 is proof that the houses did not require someone to create them because Mathematics did not require a creator?

________________
"That people may know that you, whose name is JEHOVAH, you alone are the Most High over all the earth." (Psalms 83:18)

Mon, 08/11/2014 - 02:34

#36

Jeff Vella Leone

"the ability to count aka

"the ability to count aka Mathematics did not simply happen; rather, it was invented."
You either doing it on purpose or you are just dodging an obvious conclusion with an absurd claim.

Mathematics came before religion(fact), one could even speculate that it was always there.(if the universe is infinite)
Claiming that Mathematics was invented is an unsupported claim. Discovering Mathematics is what we did, we did not create it.

You have first to demonstrate that a god exists before claiming that he created Mathematics, then u need to provide evidence for such a bold claim.

"Not only that, everybody knows that the ability to count 1 computer + 1 computer = 2 computers does not explain how the computers came into existence."
Just interpreting what I said wrongly on purpose?
How mathematics came into existence was my point, not the ability to count by humans.

"The question in my OP is this: How could each of the first 60-discovered elements on the Periodic Table be so precise and interrelated to one another by accident, considering the fact that accidents produce "unfortunate" results."

I answered already, if they are as precise as they can be, it does not mean creator, it just means that maybe there is no chaos in the universe but order. And scientists will start addressing that issue and come up with new theories on the matter.

"If a child asks you how 10 houses came into existence, are you going to tell them that the number 10 is proof that the houses did not require someone to create them because Mathematics did not require a creator?"

Just lame.

I will just tell the kids that, we imperfect humans made them.(see the cracks)
I will NOT say that we humans are god the creator of all. Which is an absurd claim you are making without knowing.
Which is so absurd and unscientific that it makes me vomit.

If a creator exists, he might not be perfect but just more technologically advanced since he came before.
Everything must fall in the natural order, including the creator.
The supernatural does not exist, the moment it starts to exist(discovered) it becomes a natural thing instantly.
So:
your assumption that precision= creator is just unfounded
your assumption that creator= god is just unfounded

Mon, 08/11/2014 - 02:53

#37

Jeff Vella Leone

If i have to put an analogy

If i have to put an analogy to what you are trying to do:

An Aborigine is walking along the beach and sees a packet of tissue washed along the beach.
He picks it up and realizes something extraordinary.
The cover(plastic) of the packet of tissue is so perfect that not a drop of water manged to wet the tissue even after he picked it up from the sea water.
He says to himself, this level of precision is impossible, every atom is made in a way to not let pass any water inside.
This is a miracle, clearly god intended me to find this.
These dry tissues are sacred and they must never be wet.

He takes it to his tribe and now they have a new relic by the perfect god.
A packet of DRY tissue.

Since plastic is so precise.

The lesson is:
Just because something is precise it does not mean that god made it.
Just because there is evidence of a creator does not mean that god exists.

Mon, 08/11/2014 - 05:21

#38

Lmale

Lol the bible made maths. Why

Lol the bible made maths. Why is it religious people always forget there religion did not start history. We had knowledge of great many things before judaism let alone christianity or islam. Fking hell anchient greeks figured out the earth and other planets orbited the sun using nothing but maths, religion suppressed this knowledge and claimed everything orbits the earth.

Sun, 12/20/2015 - 19:40

#39

Alter2Ego

ALTER2EGO -to- EVERYONE:

I have been gone from this website for at least a year, and as yet, not one single skeptic has been able to present a logical response to two of the questions raised in my opening post, as follows.

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?

________________
"That people may know that you, whose name is JEHOVAH, you alone are the Most High over all the earth." ~ Psalms 83:18

Sun, 12/20/2015 - 23:35

(Reply to #39) #40

Kataclismic

1) The relationship has to do

1) The relationship has to do with quantum mechanics, ie the number of electrons in the molecule. I don't understand what "precision" has to do with it, it's all about the quanta. If I have a molecule with 5 electrons and I have a molecule with 8 electrons it's not hard to determine that molecules with 6 and 7 electrons exist.

2) It happens in our star right this very moment and the moment you are reading this, every moment it happens not by accident, but by nuclear fusion. Gravity guides the outcome.

Mon, 12/21/2015 - 05:27

(Reply to #40) #41

Nyarlathotep

It is a non-sense question

It is a non-sense question Alter2Ego; since your statement about precision in the 'first 60 discovered elements" on the periodic table is nonsense for many reasons:

1. It isn't at all clear what you mean about precision in this context.
2. Which were the first 60 to be discovered is highly debatable as well.

So you've asked us to explain an ill defined idea's relationship on an ill defined set. Madness at its best.

Mon, 12/21/2015 - 12:23

(Reply to #41) #42

ThePragmatic

@Alter2Ego

Perhaps you could explain this to me.

When something is beyond your comprehension the only honest answer is: I don't know.

If something is astonishing, extraordinary and beyond your understanding, why do you feel the need to insert your particular god to solve the problem? Why is it your god, as opposed to no god or someone else's god, that is to be inserted?

Sun, 01/03/2016 - 18:40

#43

Alter2Ego

KATACLISMIC SAID:

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

ALTER2EGO's RESPONSE:
It is not as simple as you are attempting to make it sound. The scientists did not merely predict the number of molecules in the missing elements, they accurately predicted the CHARACTERISTICS of the missing elements. That is, they accurately predicted how the missing elements would BEHAVE, and they were only able to do this because of the behavior of the elements that they discovered.

BTW: Suppose you explain to the rest of us how each of the first 60 discovered elements got specific amounts of molecules in the first place? Where did the molecules come from?

________________
"That people may know that you, whose name is JEHOVAH, you alone are the Most High over all the earth." ~ Psalms 83:18

https://www.jw.org/en/

Sun, 01/03/2016 - 19:27

(Reply to #43) #44

Kataclismic

I still don't understand the

I still don't understand the argument.

Because humans actually made a breakthrough in understanding the elements you feel that god made it that way? Because only god could make the universe in such a way that us humans could presume some things and understand a little bit of it? How does that hold as a logical argument? I don't think it does.

Scientists spend inordinate amounts of time trying to develop theories to explain where things come from, I'm not qualified to attempt such things, any more than you are qualified to tell me god did it.

Mon, 01/04/2016 - 14:46

(Reply to #44) #45

ThePragmatic

@Alter2Ego

You are demanding answers to questions like "how each of the first 60 discovered elements got specific amounts of molecules in the first place?" and "Where did the molecules come from?"

The questions you are asking are only new versions of the old questions "How does it rain then?", "How do people get sick then?", "Who makes the Earth quake then?"
When science has found the answer to one question, religious people just continue with "where did that come from then?". This is called "moving the goalpost".

It would not matter what answer you get, you would not accept it.
My answer would be "I don't know" and that is clearly not acceptable at all for you. But even if we were to give you a panel of expert researchers and scientists, you would not accept their answers either. To me it seems you're just looking to "put atheists in their place" and this is not any where near honest discourse.

It's easy to just talk at people and not with people.
I urge for honest discourse, for introspection and for a willingness to improve knowledge.

Thu, 01/07/2016 - 02:36

#46

Nyarlathotep

Alter2Ego "That is, they

Alter2Ego "That is, they accurately predicted how the missing elements would BEHAVE, and they were only able to do this because of the behavior of the elements that they discovered."

uhh yeah, that is why it is called periodic.

Thu, 01/07/2016 - 02:38

#47

Nyarlathotep

Alter2Ego "Suppose you

Alter2Ego "Suppose you explain to the rest of us how each of the first 60 discovered elements got specific amounts of molecules in the first place?"

Big bang nucleosynthesis and stellar nucleosynthesis. Look them up, learn something today.

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.

You are here

Pages