296d
@kellyjay saidYou have never provided evidence of:
I have, you ignore it saying I'm humanizing things that we see, which is on one level true because we use our brains to do things that otherwise would not be done, so out of hand you blow it off. You find an excuse to blow off everything sent your way, you can ignore a mountain of evidence if you have a speck of doubt to cast on it.
1. A Transcendent Mind which really exists,
or
2. an instance of supernatural causality at work in any observable phenomenon indisputably causally linked to item 1. above.
All you have have ever presented here are assumptions because you don't accept naturalistic explanations.
No one here denies the effects, that the universe exists, that sentient life exists, etc. But you fail to show evidence for any supernatural cause of these effects (which no one denies). Claiming that "everything is evidence, everywhere you look, right before your eyes" of divine influence is a nonstarter. We want to see first that a Transcendent Mind really exists, and second that supernatural causality is actually operating in any given observable phenomenon and not mere concomitance.
Let us know when you have God detector, so we know item 1. is true, and then let us know when you have a functioning supernatural causality detector, so we know item 2. is true. Until then, you're just guessing.
@moonbus saidNarrow the scope of your question, you talking specifically about life, the universe, the engine of Ford motor engine?
You have never provided evidence of:
1. A Transcendent Mind which really exists,
or
2. an instance of supernatural causality at work in any observable phenomenon indisputably causally linked to item 1. above.
All you have have ever presented here are assumptions because you don't accept naturalistic explanations.
No one here denies the [i]effects ...[text shortened]... oning supernatural causality detector, so we know item 2. is true. Until then, you're just guessing.
You can see the engineering in the motor to understand how it works you don’t need to bring up Henry Ford. A grasp of thermodynamics and mechanical engineering we can identify what is going on in each part of the motor. We may even use words like horsepower, which you may have issues with.
Would our understanding engineering cause us to deny the existence of some agency who transcends all the material in the engine, namely Henry Ford?
Your use of the words “supernatural” is simply acknowledging what is not normally seen in the day to day, it doesn’t mean cannot be real on its face. Transcending means outside as Henry Ford is outside of his motor.
If life can not be explained through normal natural means then that points to something outside of our experiences. If God creates is the normal way it is ever done, nothing about that would be supernatural.
You can not even come up with a plausible explanation for the forward thinking required for the instructions causing blood clotting, or how cells check information in itself before they divide. Cancer is a nasty thing when cell division is not properly regulated or controlled. You just accept mindlessness is completely responsible? You are shown reasons you just look for any excuse to ignore them.
@kellyjay saidChemicals don't check anything. There is no forward thinking in blood clotting.
Narrow the scope of your question, you talking specifically about life, the universe, the engine of Ford motor engine?
You can see the engineering in the motor to understand how it works you don’t need to bring up Henry Ford. A grasp of thermodynamics and mechanical engineering we can identify what is going on in each part of the motor. We may even use words like horsep ...[text shortened]... ssness is completely responsible? You are shown reasons you just look for any excuse to ignore them.
Mammals in which blood does not clot, seldom live long enough to reproduce and pass on the trait. This is all the explanation required to understand why this particular trait is recessive or non-dominant; mammals in which blood does clot survived long enough to reproduce, and thereby passed on the characteristic. No further explanation is required.
296d
@kellyjay saidWhy place qualifiers on what I said?
Blind faith doesn’t but before people refined the word it simply spoke to fidelity.
Faith in God (how most people use the word 'faith' ) in no way requires proof. That's a good thing, because none exists. That alone is the reason for holy texts.
@suzianne saidProof is for the mathematical world, evidence and what we trust, what we find as reasonable abounds everywhere.
Why place qualifiers on what I said?
Faith in God (how most people use the word 'faith' ) in no way requires proof. That's a good thing, because none exists. That alone is the reason for holy texts.
296d
@moonbus saidThe body doesn't magically do all the things it does, it is programmed to do it unless you have some other word you would use to describe the events. Body forms play out according to genetics, and all of the complex processes within life are due to what the body was coded to do. Mammals in which blood does not clot don't live, that does not however explain the on-off mechisms in every one of them that does. You have not explained anything what in the words did you think you explained, engage your brain for crying out loud.
Chemicals don't check anything. There is no forward thinking in blood clotting.
Mammals in which blood does not clot, seldom live long enough to reproduce and pass on the trait. This is all the explanation required to understand why this particular trait is recessive or non-dominant; mammals in which blood does clot survived long enough to reproduce, and thereby passed on the characteristic. No further explanation is required.
@suzianne saidIf, as you correctly point out, no proof exists for God’s existence, why do you have ‘faith’?
Why place qualifiers on what I said?
Faith in God (how most people use the word 'faith' ) in no way requires proof. That's a good thing, because none exists. That alone is the reason for holy texts.
If science cannot yet explain how the first self-replicating DNA molecule came into being, the gigantic leap from the chemical to the biological, why then have ‘faith’ that it must have been a god? Do you not, like me, have every confidence that in 10, 50, 100 years science will resolve that mystery, and hence there will be no need for God?
@kellyjay saidFor once you’re right, it’s not magic. But you employ anthropomorphic metaphors again to characterize it as a straw man, knock it over and dismiss what it is. Computers are coded. Web sites are coded. Encrypted monetary instruments are coded. Cells are not. It’s just a figure if speech, not what’s really happening at the molecular level.
The body doesn't magically do all the things it does, it is programmed to do it unless you have some other word you would use to describe the events. Body forms play out according to genetics, and all of the complex processes within life are due to what the body was coded to do. Mammals in which blood does not clot don't live, that does not however explain the on-off mechi ...[text shortened]... ained anything what in the words did you think you explained, engage your brain for crying out loud.
It’s not magic, what cells do. “Magic” is when someone speaks a ‘power word’ and then something appears out of nothing. Like in Harry Potter. Or Genesis, “Let there be light” and light exists out of sheer nothingness. That’s what magic looks like. I’m with Harry’s uncle Vernon on this one, “ there’s no such thing as magic!”
296d
@pianoman1 saidThere will always be a need for God.
If, as you correctly point out, no proof exists for God’s existence, why do you have ‘faith’?
If science cannot yet explain how the first self-replicating DNA molecule came into being, the gigantic leap from the chemical to the biological, why then have ‘faith’ that it must have been a god? Do you not, like me, have every confidence that in 10, 50, 100 years science will resolve that mystery, and hence there will be no need for God?
Look around you, at the current state of man on this planet.
@moonbus saidDo you think just because you define what I'm saying as anthropomorphic the truth of the points being made is void? Information is the primary thing in life that makes it work, you brought up words, they carry information it doesn't matter if that information is being cast about with paper and ink, or electronically with ASCII codes for computers, you can even send messages through smoke signals, or dots and dashes with moris code signals, the cells in life are also information processing devices that uses the information to do work repeatedly, or as needed. Yes, all of that is being done on a molecular level right in front of you, and like evil, you shut your eyes to it and deny reality. The way information is handled can vary as I said, you can see it done all of the time, yet "I see nothing" is your response.
For once you’re right, it’s not magic. But you employ anthropomorphic metaphors again to characterize it as a straw man, knock it over and dismiss what it is. Computers are coded. Web sites are coded. Encrypted monetary instruments are coded. Cells are not. It’s just a figure if speech, not what’s really happening at the molecular level.
It’s not magic, what cells do. “Ma ...[text shortened]... what magic looks like. I’m with Harry’s uncle Vernon on this one, “ there’s no such thing as magic!”
295d
@moonbus saidComputers don't error check, yet in them, checks are done. You are bound and determined to keep your mind closed off to what is right in front of you.
Chemicals don't check anything. There is no forward thinking in blood clotting.
Mammals in which blood does not clot, seldom live long enough to reproduce and pass on the trait. This is all the explanation required to understand why this particular trait is recessive or non-dominant; mammals in which blood does clot survived long enough to reproduce, and thereby passed on the characteristic. No further explanation is required.