Out of the Blue

Today is the seventh(?!) anniversary of Michael Abrash's departure from id Software. If you are curious about what the programmer and author (his Ramblings in Realtime can be read online here) is up to lately, he is currently writing libraries at RAD Game Tools where he has worked on creating Bink for the PlayStation 2 and a new version of the Miles Sound System, and he will be conducting a session this week at the Game Developers Conference on "Optimizing Pixomatic For Modern Processors."

Play Time: Mentele Al Ordenata.
Stories of the Day: Things get worse with Coke.
The Honesty Virus (registration required).
Philadelphia's Veterans Stadium imploded.
Media of the Day: Daring Planet Teaser.
Follow-up: Mars rovers to embark on final mission.
Thanks Mike Martinez.
View : : :
56 Replies. 3 pages. Viewing page 1.
Newer [  1  2  3  ] Older
56.
 
Re: bangernmash
Apr 8, 2004, 11:53
56.
Re: bangernmash Apr 8, 2004, 11:53
Apr 8, 2004, 11:53
 
Nobody has yet answered the simple question. What came before nothing? What came before the universe? The truth ius you cannot answer it because you don't know. Worrying isn't it?

Tiberius, that "evidence" is questionable. Have you ever read up on the counter arguments to the primordial soup? It is literally impossible for chemicals to bind themselves in such a manner as to be useful. It's clear your mind is as closed as everyone else that is debating insulting here. I would have used the word debate, but I get the impression that nobody here even knows what the meaning of the word is, let alone doing it in an adult manner. The mentality of which some of you behave is purely child like.


I haven't only quoted creationist sites BTW. You want some from the grand daddy himself? Darwin himself claimed, "...innumerable transitional forms must have existed, why do we not find them imbedded in countless numbers in the crust of the earth? Why is not every geological formation not full of such intermediate links? Geology assuredly does not reveal any such finely graduated organic chain; and this perhaps is the most obvious and gravest objection which can be urged against my theory." Origin of Species. Again Darwin observed, "Nothing is more extraordinary in the history of the vegetable kingdom, as it seems to me, than the apparently very sudden or abrupt development of the higher plants." Francis Darwin, The Life and Letters of Charles Darwin.

As for evidence of the Bible's authority or this rediculous theory that both moog and elrix have come up with, are based on nothing more than speculation from their own brainwashed minds. To say that the Bible has evolved is funny to say the least. Try reading this when you get time. It is proven that the New Testament is the most accurate historical document known to mankind.

http://www.carm.org/evidence/textualevidence.htm
http://www.missiontoamerica.org/history.html

55.
 
bangernmash
Mar 24, 2004, 15:38
55.
bangernmash Mar 24, 2004, 15:38
Mar 24, 2004, 15:38
 
I don't confuse the Crusaders, Catholics, Christians, Mormons, or whoever the fuck is trying to tell me god exists and created earth from nothing - they are all fucking insane crackheads. Morons who believe scripture which has no proof whatsoever to back it up aside from dates (which were mostly wrong in the Bible anyways), repeat it verbatim, and base their philosophies on nonsensical, scientifically impossible stories have been causing our race incredible harm throughout our history. When you ignore science, ignore truth, and force that ignorance onto other people, which has been the M.O. of all sects of christianity (except the Cathars, but they were slaughtered by Christians and Catholics) in history, you are reinforcing passed on stupidity.

Do you believe the Earth is the center of the Universe? Do you believe Noah put over 60 million animals onto a boat? Do you know how much rain would have to fall in order to cover the whole of the Earth?

I separated the post I made earlier into mormon-friendly stupidity sized paragraphs - I realize a life of blinding oneself with scripture which has most every sentence separated into it's own paragraph could make reading human-style text nearly impossible. You will find all the compelling arguments you need to disprove god's existence in that post. Don't find them compelling? Their your arguments.

(scripture blinded moron comfort-space)


Lastly, quit quoting creationist websites, dude. None of those guys have done their homework, and you just make obvious you have no capacity for thought beyond repeating others. Wait, that seems to mirror your philosophy perfectly...

"Don't ever confuse the crusaders, the catholic church, mormonism or any of these things with the real church. ie. People who believe in what the Bible says, not what some sinner says from a th[r]one in Rome or Salt Lake City."
uh... guess what Jenious Mystro? the Bibles "difinitive" version as it is known was edited thoroughly by Roman Catholics - meaning that book you cling to was made by the "sinners"



Liberal (TM) : THE PUNK OF THE 2000s! 99% integrity free! Now with added hypocrisy! PLUS: You choose the shitty music!
This comment was edited on Mar 24, 15:43.
STAY RIGHT WHERE YOU ARE, GET OUT OF THAT BED AND GET DOWN ON THE FLOOR, GET OUTSIDE RIGHT NOW, RIGHT HERE: GET DOWN ON THE CEMENT, I DONT CARE IF YOU'RE NUDE, GET DOWN ON THE CEMENT, I DON'T CARE IF ITS FREEZING! WHERES THE DRUGS, WE KNOW YOU GOT THE DRU
54.
 
Evolution by mutation
Mar 24, 2004, 15:09
54.
Evolution by mutation Mar 24, 2004, 15:09
Mar 24, 2004, 15:09
 
heres some direct evidence of Evolution through mutation, in humans.
http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99994817
no, jesus didn't relax those muscles you fucking mormon vegetarian.

Liberal (TM) : THE PUNK OF THE 2000s! 99% integrity free! Now with added hypocrisy! PLUS: You choose the shitty music!
STAY RIGHT WHERE YOU ARE, GET OUT OF THAT BED AND GET DOWN ON THE FLOOR, GET OUTSIDE RIGHT NOW, RIGHT HERE: GET DOWN ON THE CEMENT, I DONT CARE IF YOU'RE NUDE, GET DOWN ON THE CEMENT, I DON'T CARE IF ITS FREEZING! WHERES THE DRUGS, WE KNOW YOU GOT THE DRU
53.
 
Re: Mars Rover Picture
Mar 24, 2004, 11:33
53.
Re: Mars Rover Picture Mar 24, 2004, 11:33
Mar 24, 2004, 11:33
 
Taking the Bible literally as one would a transcript of a previous newsday is problematic at best.

The stories in the Bible are traditional, they were told from generation to generation before being committed to paper. They are paradigmatical, they provide a prime example of how one should lead a good life. They are also supra-historical, the stories are beyond the legendary retelling of actual events. This is what mythologies are. Much like life on Earth, the Bible has evolved throughout history as well.

Myth has a modern connotation of being false or make-believe, I am not arguing that the Bible is meaningless junk. Those who take the stories of the Bible 100% literally (such as backtracking the ages of everyone since Adam and Eve to arrive at a world creation date), have to realize that they are reading a heavily massaged text that has changed and evolved throughout history.

There are truths to be found in the Bible, but it is not a CNN historical record. The polishing by a thousand tellers has ground the minute historical details into the realm of mythology.

52.
 
Re: Mars Rover Picture
Mar 24, 2004, 10:15
52.
Re: Mars Rover Picture Mar 24, 2004, 10:15
Mar 24, 2004, 10:15
 

http://home.entouch.net/dmd/wrong.htm
disapproves 12 creationists arguments (including the above mentioned L-protein stuff)

What makes you lunatic ist jumpting in a discussion about facts (evolution etc) to a discussion about philosphical/social consequences ("sin").
sin is a human concept (as religios forms = churches, temples), you can believe about it what you want there is nothing anyone can ever prove or disapprove.

evoltion and the creation of the universe the solar system etc are on the other hand things which you can (if you are open to it) find scientific proof for.

For those interested (obviously you are not):
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/
http://evolution.berkeley.edu/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Bang
are nice pages offering information about evolution and the big bang.

take a course into biology, physics or mathematics at a university near you.
they offer education willingly i have heard.

there are other ways god may or may not exist (if you believe in him), ways which comply with evolution and other scientific facts.

over and out
tiberius

51.
 
Re: Mars Rover Picture
Mar 24, 2004, 09:21
51.
Re: Mars Rover Picture Mar 24, 2004, 09:21
Mar 24, 2004, 09:21
 
Ok I gave your massive 200 line paragraph a quick perusal Moog. I will only say one thing about your post. Don't ever confuse the crusaders, the catholic church, mormonism or any of these things with the real church. ie. People who believe in what the Bible says, not what some sinner says from a thone in Rome or Salt Lake City.

50.
 
Re: Mars Rover Picture
Mar 24, 2004, 09:09
50.
Re: Mars Rover Picture Mar 24, 2004, 09:09
Mar 24, 2004, 09:09
 
I still haven’t read anything even remotely convincing as an argument here. It’s all speculation so far. “This is how it could have arisen” or other such speculative wording. What about taking this right back to the beginning? Before anything existed, how does anyone explain where the “cosmic egg” came from? Why did it explode? Was there nothing before it? If nothing existed before it, who or what made it? If it did exist, that means it had an infinite past. None of these questions can even become close to being answered, since nobody has any means to measure this far back in time. It even defies the word “time”. When was the beginning?

Moog, use some paragraphs, otherwise I won’t read what you have to say. There is a chance you might have a valid point in there somewhere, but make it more readable at least Do what I do and type your reply in Wordpad externally. You can see the format a little better this way.

Elrix, yes I am one of those "fanatics" that takes the creation account literally. This is what requires faith on my part. Is it harder to believe this, than it is to believe it all came from nothingness?

Zathrus, what makes you think I am now a lunatic? Is it because I believe in an all-powerful God? I could say the same for you too. Someone that possibly believes all matter in the universe (assuming you believe in the Big Bang theory), came about by an explosion of nothing. It would be hilarious if it wasn't such a serious topic and have such serious consequences. Like one man said, “If I believe everything we see came about by an explosion, I also believe that a copy of the Webster’s dictionary came about by an explosion in a printing shop”. So far I have been more rational than most arguing here and have not attacked anyone personally. To explain your questions, we all pay the price, even those that believe. That’s why I think so many Christians give us a bad rap by only stating that others are sinners. This makes us look like we are looking down on others. It’s not quite this way, since we are ALL sinners and we all have to pay the price. “For all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God”. Romans 3:22. I know I am not perfect. What about you?

Here are some more quotes from scientists that actually study in this field.

"Lightning and chance can, on principle, never produce only pure laevorotatory forms; they produce race-mates only - exactly 50% D and exactly 50% L forms - and are therefore unsuitable for life's proteins." and "...just as useless for biogenesis as no amino acids at all..." Wilder-Smith says in the book Natural Sciences. Here he is speaking of “naturally” created amino acids (created in a laboratory with similar atmosphere that was hypothesized for the primordial soup). The man responsible for this experiment (Dr Stanley Miller) later stated, "The problem of the origin of life has turned out to be much more difficult than I, or most other people, envisioned."

One of my favourites... Randy L. Wysong in The Creation-Evolution Controversy:

"Evolution can be thought of as a sort of magical religion. Magic is simply an effect without a cause. "Chance", "time" and "nature" are the small gods enshrined at evolutionary temples. Yet these gods cannot explain the origin of life. These gods are impotent. Thus, evolution is left without competent cause and is, therefore, only a magical explanation for the existence of life. And, like other cultures practising magic, evolution has it's witchdoctors. But their dance in not performed in the glimmer of bonfires, rather, it is performed in the various temples found on campuses around the world, in subsidized research institutions and in the light cast by spark discharge tubes. Is it not fairy tales that spin wild yarns of physical transformations - mice into horses, gingerbread men into men, children into spiders? Of course, it is not the fairy's word or the witch's spell that causes evolutionary transformation, it is the intellectually acceptable power of the stardust of the time-chance-nature deity. Those who doubt, who lack faith in the rights of the evolutionary high priests are fitting only for exorcism of the spirit of an open mind, and the possession by the spiritual dogma: "Since life is here, life evolved." Evolutionists attribute to time, chance and nature the capacities that creationists attribute to God." He goes further...

"Evolution requires plenty of faith: a faith in L-proteins [left handed molecules] that defy chance formation; a faith in the formation of DNA codes which if generated spontaneously would spell only pandemonium; a faith in a primitive environment that in reality would fiendishly devour any chemical precursors to life; a faith in experiments that prove nothing but the need for intelligence in the beginning; a faith in a primitive ocean that would not thicken but would only hopelessly dilute chemicals; a faith in natural laws including the laws of thermodynamics and biogenesis that actually deny the spontaneous generation of life; a faith in future scientific revelations that when realized always seem to present more dilemmas to the evolutionist; faith in probabilities that tenuously tell two stories - one denying evolution, the other confirming the creator; faith in transformations that remain fixed; faith in mutations and natural selection that add to a double negative for evolution; faith in fossils that embarrassingly show fixity through time, regular absence from transitional forms and striking testimony to a world-wide water deluge; a faith in reductionism that ends up reducing the materialist arguments to zero and enforcing the need to invoke the supernatural creator. The evolutionary religion is consistently inconsistent. Scientists rely upon the rational order of the universe to make accomplishments, yet the evolutionist tells us the rational universe had an irrational beginning from nothing. Due to lack of understanding about mechanisms and structure, science cannot even create a simple twig. Yet the evolutionary religion speaks with bold dogmatism about the origin of life."


49.
 
Re: Mars Rover Picture
Mar 23, 2004, 14:50
49.
Re: Mars Rover Picture Mar 23, 2004, 14:50
Mar 23, 2004, 14:50
 
Now we all know that no matter how long we leave our computer sitting around, Half Life 2 will not suddenly appear on our machines if we have a random number generator running in the background

And this is a fundamental misunderstanding of how evolution works.

Evolution did not produce anything extremely complex (like HL2) out of random chance with no intermediary steps. There were trillions upon trillions of intermediate steps between proteins (which we know occur naturally in space) and humanity. They build upon one another, just as a house is built step by step and not created out of nothingness instantaneously.

We do have proof of evolution on a small scale -- in both plants and animals (much less bacteria, where you can just about watch it occur) -- in recent history (past 100 years). It's not a large leap to understand the processes that would cause macro evolution over large timespans given what we've seen occur in such short ones.

How do creationists explain the actual “bugs”. Sin. We fell from grace by not being obedient to God and this is the price we pay.

Ok. Righto. Conversation over. You're a lunatic. Absolutely bonkers. There's no way to reason with you, because you're beyond reason.

You actually believe that? Do you also believe that earthquakes, tornados, hurricanes, and volcanos are divine retribution? Would you care to explain why many fine, upstanding, god-fearing people have life-ending diseases while atheists do not? Or why heathens have no problems getting pregnant while many believers cannot? Yeah... I'm sure you'll say it's a "divine plan" because there's absolutely no reason for it whatsoever, at least none that you can rationally explain through your faith. Which makes you irrational and impossible to have any kind of sane discussion with.

48.
 
Re: Mars Rover Picture
Mar 23, 2004, 13:09
48.
Re: Mars Rover Picture Mar 23, 2004, 13:09
Mar 23, 2004, 13:09
 
Two questions bangersnmash, how old do you think the Earth actually is and do you think God literally created all life on Earth in 7 days?

I'm just curious where you fall on the Creationist spectrum.

47.
 
Re: Mars Rover Picture
Mar 23, 2004, 12:47
47.
Re: Mars Rover Picture Mar 23, 2004, 12:47
Mar 23, 2004, 12:47
 
ok Bangernushcats:
I will sum up your post:
Shit is complex, so it must be created by god. Period. You ever try just counting, one by one, the approximate number of atoms in an ounce of water? An ounce of water is about 26 grams, molar mass of water is about 24g/mol.

We'll assume for simplicity sake that an ounce of water has 24 grams. If the mass of water is 24g, and the molar mass of water is 24g/mol, we have exactly 1 mol of water molecules. There are three atoms per molecule, so that leaves us with ~18 * 10^23 atoms. Thats 1,800,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 atoms. Do you know how long it takes to count to 1,800,000,000,000,000,000,000,000?
Assuming it takes a tenth of a second to count each number, thats roughly 342465753424657534 years! Shit, man, the amount of time that takes trumps the number of 3 billion years in which evolution should have taken place, so god must exist! How about this figure: One-hundred-fifty-seven-quadrillion, two hundred fifty six billion, nine hundred million, seven hundred fifty thousand, four hundred twenty-two point 5 !!!! JESUS CHRIST MAN, THAT NUMBER IS HUGE!!!!!!!!!!!! With numbers that big, 1,000,000,000,000,000 seems small! SO HOW COULD GOD EXIST???

The process of writing a video game, even one as complex as Half-Life 2, starting with no coding knowledge, and working alone, would take an entire lifetime!!!! Let's call it 100 years! Sweet Fuck, that's a 3 millionth of the timescale evolution happened on so how could god exist??? HOW???

Between you making yourself look stupid, and me accentuating your stupidity with fantasticly thought out logic as seen above (which I learned from you), we have the whole "Creationists are fucking morons with no sense of reality, or logic, period" argument covered.

Now, to counter your point:
Humans, the product of billions of years of evolution on earth, are the first known being with the ability to control our destiny beyond survival due to our intelligence. Part of this burden is the ability to think, and the curiosity necessary to facilitate continued thinking. This curiosity coupled with an unexplained world led to two things - religion, a cheap explanation for everything, and science. Some early civilizations, like the Greeks for example, used gods to explain everything - such as the movement of the planets vs the movement of stars, the rising/setting of the sun and moon, they even invented hell as the concept and place you know it to be. Greeks were special in that when their scientists and astronomers discovered things which negated their gods, they changed their mythology to conform with fact.

Onto christians. These fuckers, when presented with something which disagreed with their scripture, tortured, killed, and jailed anyone who believed it. People like Newton - whose "crime" was claiming Earth was not the center of the universe... by the way, do you believe that? The Bible says it's true, so... anyway. Hundreds of people were also massacred for another outlandish belief: that the earth is round, not a disc, as the Church believed. Sure enough, science and that dreaded curiosity proved both to be fact - it took a while, but even the church eventually accepted it as fact. In modern times, that which can be observed (trees, birds, chemical reactions, astronomy) has almost all been explained - that which hasn't isn't due to intelligence, but lack of equipment. One example is the HST's (hubble space telescope, which cost over 1,000,000,000 dollars!!!! OMFG HUGE!!! MUST HAVE BEEN MADE BY GOD! never mind it sees trillions times farther than the holy jesus and mary designed eye, but...) deep field images - we suspected the universe was real big, but now we are seeing just how big it is (BTW, we are not at the center). Our ignorance was not due to stupidity, or lack of gusto, but lack of equipment. This is the exact same scenario as the genome (which was only 60,000 base pairs last I read), we have known of it's existence since the 70s, however, lack of equipment has kept us from discovering it in it's entirety - which we are now. The genome, like the universe, or like the Atom, is complex beyond our knowledge, but that sure the fuck isn't a sign of design - it is a sign of us not having spent the time researching it's entirety. Just like "well shit emo, who will ever need more than 640kb?" was short sighted ignorance due only to not understanding the scope of the issue/item/problem at hand.

Up until recently, we had better fucking things to research than the genome - like medicines now becoming obselete, thus requiring innovative, and more intelligent ones (hence genome research) - and it is only that fact that leaves us now with an incomplete knowledge.

Evolution in the same thing - evidence in the form of genealogies, fossil for a few species, DNA, has begun to prove evolution occurs - just as the discovery of Venus, Mercury, and Moons of Jupiter proved the Earth was pretty fucking far from the center of the Universe.

Why don't you accept it? Not because you are some fucking intellectual, or because you want to challenge people to think - but because the Church, and your antiquated, often proven VERY wrong view of the world would fall the fuck apart if you accepted the truth.

edit: PS: This much effort to prove your faith clearly shows you arenot capable of real, blind, faith in god. You are thus going to hell. na na na na

edit #2: Split into very obvious sections for inbreeds who cannot concentrate hard enough, nor exert enough intelligence to read paragraphs.

Liberal (TM) : THE PUNK OF THE 2000s! 99% integrity free! Now with added hypocrisy! PLUS: You choose the shitty music!

This comment was edited on Mar 24, 15:17.
STAY RIGHT WHERE YOU ARE, GET OUT OF THAT BED AND GET DOWN ON THE FLOOR, GET OUTSIDE RIGHT NOW, RIGHT HERE: GET DOWN ON THE CEMENT, I DONT CARE IF YOU'RE NUDE, GET DOWN ON THE CEMENT, I DON'T CARE IF ITS FREEZING! WHERES THE DRUGS, WE KNOW YOU GOT THE DRU
46.
 
Re: Mars Rover Picture
Mar 23, 2004, 09:07
46.
Re: Mars Rover Picture Mar 23, 2004, 09:07
Mar 23, 2004, 09:07
 
sorry

With all of this so-called intelligence behind us, just to get to a draft stage clearly defies this information arising by chance.
but i don't think that because "we" don't understand something (yet) is a proper reason to state that evolution has (not) happend. There is just no (logical) connection between these arguments.

As someone else stated above, we, our brains and everything has not evolved because we wanted to be like we are, or completly out of random.
a cell reproduces about every 20 minutes (if i remember correctly) and is a nearly identical copy of itself, but with this high speed small changes add quickly.
or take a look at bacteria and how quickly they evolve (adapt) to new drugs.

sure we (all living beeings) are very complicated, but we didn't came into existence out of thin air, we had lots of ancestors.

Its just not a correct comparison to compare 2.5billion years with 3 billions cells in our brain, because except of the high numbers ther are no correspondecies.
What i find intriguing about evolution is, that proven concepts where developed multiple times (like eyes of different species, are sometimes very much alike, not all for sure)

Things always become more comlicated, just like this f***ked up shopsystem i am working on (/sarcasm)

tiberius

edit: missed the closing q

This comment was edited on Mar 23, 09:08.
45.
 
Re: Mars Rover Picture
Mar 23, 2004, 06:41
45.
Re: Mars Rover Picture Mar 23, 2004, 06:41
Mar 23, 2004, 06:41
 
Wow. After finishing this reply, it’s rather large. But hey, we are all adults here and I am sure you will see some sense in what is written on this reply. Remember, I am not repeating what other creationist web sites state. I have believed for a long time something was wrong with the explanation that the incredible complexity around us came about by chance. There is so much information in so many different places, it doesn’t make sense to me. The links I am providing are from Harvard University or the Human Genome Project. There is no bias so far in the references I have provided you. Although on this reply there will be a couple.

Nothing new added... I meant no new information.

Most of these arguments, which declare that evolution of the eye is "simple" and "easily explained”, are very far from the truth. Lets look at it this way – it took 10 years, with hundreds of scientists and universities with the help of hundred of computers just to get a “draft” of the human genome. With all of this so-called intelligence behind us, just to get to a draft stage clearly defies this information arising by chance.

The following quote comes from the section “Genetics 101” on the human genome project - just in case we miss the basics.

“The genome is an organism’s complete set of DNA. Genomes vary widely in size: the smallest known genome for a free-living organism (a bacterium) contains about 600,000 DNA base pairs, while human and mouse genomes have some 3 billion. Except for mature red blood cells, all human cells contain a complete genome.”

Now read under “What we’ve learned so far”, on the same page. “The functions are unknown for over 50% of discovered genes.” This shows we still have a vastly limited knowledge of what it does.

“Deriving meaningful knowledge from the DNA sequence will define research through the coming decades to inform our understanding of biological systems. This enormous task will require the expertise and creativity of tens of thousands of scientists from varied disciplines in both the public and private sectors worldwide.”

“The avalanche of genome data grows daily. The new challenge will be to use this vast reservoir of data to explore how DNA and proteins work with each other and the environment to create complex, dynamic living systems.”

On the second link in the reference section you should read the list of “What happens when the human genome sequence is completed?”. You will quickly find that we have not even scratched the surface with all of the intelligence of the many scientists and universities around the world and with the processing power at our fingertips. So, it all arose randomly, with no mechanism to increase information and no order or intelligence to create intelligence? I don’t think so.

“Deriving meaningful knowledge from DNA sequence will define biological research through the coming decades and require the expertise and creativity of teams of biologists, chemists, engineers, and computational scientists, among others. A sampling follows of some research challenges in genetics--what we still won't know, even with the full human sequence in hand.”

“It would take about 9.5 years to read out loud (without stopping) the 3 billion bases in a person's genome sequence. This is calculated on a reading rate of 10 bases per second, equaling 600 bases/minute, 36,000 bases/hour, 864,000 bases/day, 315,360,000 bases/year.” Or 95 years if you read them out at 1 base per second.

Now apply to this a chance that all of this, can somehow come about by chance, even with “survival of the fittest” natural selection. 2.5 billion years seems miniscule.

“Since the human genome is 3 billion base pairs long, 3 gigabytes of computer data storage space are needed to store the entire genome. This includes nucleotide sequence data only and does not include data annotations and other information that can be associated with sequence data.”

This is not 3 gigabytes of random 1’s and zeros. It’s meaningful, purposeful information. That’s roughly the size of Far Cry the game, or some other recently released game. Now we all know that no matter how long we leave our computer sitting around, Half Life 2 will not suddenly appear on our machines if we have a random number generator running in the background. No matter how long you leave it. We are talking about a code like C++, only far more advanced. For something so large, it is relatively bug free. How do creationists explain the actual “bugs”. Sin. We fell from grace by not being obedient to God and this is the price we pay. Is this too simple to accept? Perhaps for many it is. But it’s no simpler than so much complexity having come about by chance.

I think you can see where I am going with this. Look at the brain on the link I sent in the last post at Harvard. Go back a few steps using the arrows and read up on the complexity of the brain. There are 1 trillion cells in this organ alone. Which time scale were we referring to? 2.5 billion years? Yes, you could say I have an idea of large timescales, as part of this comprehension of large numbers is part of my argument against evolution. Now the 1 trillion cells of the brain are just the beginning of this complexity. Now we need to link these cells in meaningful ways. This makes the complexity of the brain exponentially greater. All stemming from this ingenious code called DNA.

“The brain contains 10ˆ12 (one million million) cells, an astronomical number by any standard. I do not know whether anyone has ever counted the cells in a human liver, but I would be surprised if it had fewer cells than our brain. Yet no one has ever argued that a liver is as complicated as a brain. We can see better evidence for the brain's complexity in the interconnections between its cells. A typical nerve cell in the brain receives information from hundreds or thousands of other nerve cells and in turn transmits information to hundreds or thousands of other cells. The total number of interconnections in the brain should therefore be somewhere around 10ˆ14 to 10ˆ15, a larger number, to be sure, but still not a reliable index of complexity. Anatomical complexity is a matter not just of numbers; more important is intricacy of organization, something that is hard to quantify.”

The number referring to connections in the brain would look like this written down - 1,000,000,000,000,000

I find it interesting when evolutionists mock creation, as scientists themselves are very far from understanding how many things in the natural world work. Here is one last try to open someone’s mind and think outside the box of regurgitated education.

“The University of Tokyo's genome analysis system is the second largest Sun Fire 15K server supercluster in the world. HGC has deployed eight Sun Fire 15K servers and two Sun Fire 6800 servers with a total of 788 UltraSPARC III processors and approximately 1.7 TB of memory, making it one of the largest human genome analysis systems in Japan.”

So the genome came about by random? I don’t think so.

Reference
http://www.ornl.gov/sci/techresources/Human_Genome/project/info.shtml
http://www.ornl.gov/sci/techresources/Human_Genome/faq/seqfacts.shtml#post
http://www.ornl.gov/sci/techresources/Human_Genome/faq/faqs1.shtml
http://www.hoise.com/primeur/03/articles/monthly/AE-PR-02-03-60.html
http://neuro.med.harvard.edu/site/dh/b2.htm
Careful, this next reference is a creation biased page
http://www.trueorigins.org/retina.asp
http://www.trueorigins.org/dawkinfo.asp

44.
 
Re: Mars Rover Picture
Mar 22, 2004, 21:21
WarPig
 
44.
Re: Mars Rover Picture Mar 22, 2004, 21:21
Mar 22, 2004, 21:21
 WarPig
 
Who or what created God... out of nothing?

-------------------------------------------------------
Erections lasting longer than four hours, though rare, require immediate medical attention.
Avatar 1750
43.
 
Re: Mars Rover Picture
Mar 22, 2004, 20:23
43.
Re: Mars Rover Picture Mar 22, 2004, 20:23
Mar 22, 2004, 20:23
 
You could always try to stop masturbating.. or at least stop downloading so much porn.



------
Leading the "Support our Arrow keys" movement!
------
Diablo & Diablo 2 for the DS, it makes sense Blizzard!
42.
 
Re: Mars Rover Picture
Mar 22, 2004, 18:14
42.
Re: Mars Rover Picture Mar 22, 2004, 18:14
Mar 22, 2004, 18:14
 
lol... I love religion vs. science!
Furthermore to the eye thing, if eyes were "designed" by a being so much more intelligent than humans, explain glaucoma, hereditary blindness, blindness from masturbation, and provide a cure for at least the third of the three. Please.
ps. I tried praying

Liberal (TM) : THE PUNK OF THE 2000s! 99% integrity free! Now with added hypocrisy! PLUS: You choose the shitty music!
STAY RIGHT WHERE YOU ARE, GET OUT OF THAT BED AND GET DOWN ON THE FLOOR, GET OUTSIDE RIGHT NOW, RIGHT HERE: GET DOWN ON THE CEMENT, I DONT CARE IF YOU'RE NUDE, GET DOWN ON THE CEMENT, I DON'T CARE IF ITS FREEZING! WHERES THE DRUGS, WE KNOW YOU GOT THE DRU
41.
 
Re: Mars Rover Picture
Mar 22, 2004, 16:19
41.
Re: Mars Rover Picture Mar 22, 2004, 16:19
Mar 22, 2004, 16:19
 
Nothing new is created.

That's patently false. A successful mutation (which is rare, as most mutations are immediately or eventually fatal without any positive for the organism in question) can create new attributes that did not exist previously.

Of course you will come up with a lot of evidence that appears to support evolution

Really? All the sites that came up on the first page were pro-creationism. Might be because it's a creationist buzzword. And they all ignore that what we currently consider the "simplest" cell was probably not the original cell. However the first "cell" came about, it was probably over 2 billion years ago. The chances of any remnants of that still existing are about zero. And, yes, non-cellular objects can replicate as well. Look into viruses, retro-viruses, and prions. Prions are nothing more than strands of proteins, but they can somehow replicate as well. There's relatively little research on them since we've only recently become aware of them (prions, btw, are what cause CJD, aka Mad Cow disease).

Just look at the design in the human eye here and try and explain how this can come about by random chance.

Well, here's a chance for you to do a Google search -- search for "eye evolution" (no quotes). All of the top sites will quickly and easily debunk this alleged "intelligent design" proof.

Now multiply this by the millions of species that exist upon the earth and try and find explanations for feathers, leaves, skeletons, muscle structures etc and try and explain how any of this came about by random chance.

You seem to think that: A) all of them had to evolve independantly, B) they had to evolve to the current point in short order, C) they had an end-goal in evolution. None of this is true. There are branches in evolution, but that's all they are -- branches. And on timescales that are so vast that very few people can imagine them. Most mammals evolved in the past 200 million years or so. If all mammals bred like rabbits (some breed much, much faster, some much, much slower) then that's something on the order of 1 billion generations. Given that most geneologists are ecstatic to trace lineages back 10-20 generations I'd say that the average person has a miserable conception of those time frames.

Oh, and it took 2.5 billion years for life to get to the point of mammals. Much of that in generation gaps that can be measured in minutes or hours. Probability starts taking odd turns when you're talking about that much time.

40.
 
Re: Mars Rover Picture
Mar 22, 2004, 12:32
40.
Re: Mars Rover Picture Mar 22, 2004, 12:32
Mar 22, 2004, 12:32
 
Sure Bangernshciosm, evolution is a faith like religion... except there is myriads of scientific proof for evolution, and not a shred besides conjecture, and a book written by humans for creation.
Your logic is flawed badly, dude. For example, the eye thing. Ever looked at a lizards eye? Or a cat's? OR an Eagle's? Pretty much the same basic design... Iris, pupil, cones and rods of varying concentration, lens. Surely, a sign of design!!!!! Or, you could just as easily say it is proof of evolution - animals who exploit certain differences in their individuals eyes have a greater chance to mate (as eyes in things such as eagles, lizards, and cats greatly effect their chances of survival), and thus have a greater propensity to pass on said traits to their offspring - wash, rinse and repeat (always repeat) over the last 5 million years, and voila! - evolution at it's finest. Either argument at this point (given the information provided in these posts) has no fact whatsoever backing it up. You base your "overall point" on such conjecture, with no evidence at all. If you want to convert - sorry, "make people think" that god exists, you should start by thinking yourself rather than repeat what some crackhead has on his website.

edit: I repeat, do you have any concept of how long 3 billion years is? The majority of creatures on earth (insects, microorganisms) have a generation gap of less than a week. a billion generations is plenty enough time for evolution to stay it's course.

Liberal (TM) : THE PUNK OF THE 2000s! 99% integrity free! Now with added hypocrisy! PLUS: You choose the shitty music!
This comment was edited on Mar 22, 12:41.
STAY RIGHT WHERE YOU ARE, GET OUT OF THAT BED AND GET DOWN ON THE FLOOR, GET OUTSIDE RIGHT NOW, RIGHT HERE: GET DOWN ON THE CEMENT, I DONT CARE IF YOU'RE NUDE, GET DOWN ON THE CEMENT, I DON'T CARE IF ITS FREEZING! WHERES THE DRUGS, WE KNOW YOU GOT THE DRU
39.
 
Re: Mars Rover Picture
Mar 22, 2004, 12:27
39.
Re: Mars Rover Picture Mar 22, 2004, 12:27
Mar 22, 2004, 12:27
 
I was waiting for someone to come up with the eye example.

Thats one of the creationist's favourites. unfortunatly the argument you put forward is completly wrong.

Let me explain (briefly).
Eyes were not created completly by chance nor were they designed bya single individual. they are very complex, but species did not create an eye because they thought it to be a good idea over a couple of years.

The eye has taken a very long time to develop. and to begin with it wasent an actual eye.

Basically imagine this.

A basic organism, no real defining characteristics, it needs to understand its surroundings so it develops a simple attribute to percieve light using its skin (Like a sun tan but faster). over time its children then develop more advanced forms of this attribute, allowing it to identify light it needs to 'see' and other things like depth perception etc.

At the same time it is also working on more advanced forms of propulsion ie a tail to swim with, and arms to hold onto prey (which incidentally it needs sharp teeth for, so it develops them).

Now the obvious answer to this as you pointed out is what is the chances of it just happening on the right things each time? and youd be right odds on that are pretty low.

But what you are forgetting are the millions of other permutations that the organisms childrens childrens childrens etc take. the ones that breed traits that are not benificial are usually wiped out by the stronger (Survival of the fittest), leading to a streamlining of the breed sresulting in the complex things that you see around you.

Im surprised you havent brought up the explosive beetle argument either.

Anyways, as ive said before elsewhere on these boards, have a read of "The science of the discworld" by Terry Pratchett and others for a good counter creationist argument.

Hopefully the above is clear enough, been a while since ive read the books to back up what i said.

------
Leading the "Support our Arrow keys" movement!
------
Diablo & Diablo 2 for the DS, it makes sense Blizzard!
38.
 
Re: Mars Rover Picture
Mar 22, 2004, 12:10
38.
Re: Mars Rover Picture Mar 22, 2004, 12:10
Mar 22, 2004, 12:10
 
Moog,

Sorry but Mormonism is a cult and something I will stay away from as long as I will evolutionary dogma. Anyway...

I am not out to prove there is a God. Only to disprove (or at least get people to think about) evolution. By the way, you can prove there is a God and not be entirely without faith either. Now you have to trust Him

"Ever read the Bible". Yes on a regular basis. Do you?

Tiberius, I am not sure if you have similar views to that of Moog, but if so I am trying to explain that evolutionary science is as much a faith as what a belief in God is.

The overall point (I am not sure if either of you read the article on the eye) is to show that even with intelligence behind us, we cannot create anything even remotely close to the complexity of the eye yet. If we do, then there is intelligence behind it, not random events. If even our best scientists cannot come up with something remotely close to the complexity of this object, which is made by random chance, then I certainly wont believe that same intelligence when they try and describe where it all came from in the first place.


37.
 
Re: Mars Rover Picture
Mar 22, 2004, 11:45
37.
Re: Mars Rover Picture Mar 22, 2004, 11:45
Mar 22, 2004, 11:45
 
do you know the mathematical game of life by conway?

it's a very nice example how thou some very simple rules, very complex things can "evolve".

the game can be played on squared paper, but there are a lot of simulation programms out there:
each square equals a cell and can have one of 2 stats.
it can either live or is dead.

For a space that is 'populated':
Each cell with one or no neighbors dies, as if by loneliness.
Each cell with four or more neighbors dies, as if by overpopulation.
Each cell with two or three neighbors survives.
For a space that is 'empty' or 'unpopulated'
Each cell with three neighbors becomes populated.
(taken direktly from: http://www.bitstorm.org/gameoflife/)
Also a good page:
http://www.radicaleye.com/lifepage/

My point being:
Given simple rules and a lot of time evolution can
"develop" even complex structures that have the possibilty to develop simple cups

Tiberius

(There are guys who have constructed selfreproducing systems with conways game of life, which would correspond simple living cell organims (protozoa) )

Hope I didn't make to many spelling/grammar mistakes, i am not a native english speaker.


56 Replies. 3 pages. Viewing page 1.
Newer [  1  2  3  ] Older