4 things needed to destroy myth of creator deity
- Thread starter billc
- Start date
Do you have one in mind lol? Elle McPherson?
- Joined
- Mar 5, 2005
- Messages
- 9,929
- Reaction score
- 1,451
From the article:
as I said, a step closer, if one can understand what was done, and Mr. Pastore says, at 2:43, states We're still no closer.
Empty Hands
Senior Master
I've been around the fringes of this debate for some time. The usual outcome is rampant goalpost moving, which is what we see here. The experiment demonstrates convincingly that life is just chemistry, albeit massively complex chemistry, that can be replicated. There is no living spark, no special living essence, which is actually a very old debate in biology convincingly settled here.
Someday we won't need the shell, and an entire cell will be synthesized from purified chemical components. When that day comes, there will be some other reason that it won't count.
My Organic Chemistry Professor said something very wise to us once. "Don't base your faith on the inability of man to create life, because someday it will happen, and your faith will fail."
Empty Hands
Senior Master
In my experience, Sigma-Aldrich.
- Joined
- Mar 5, 2005
- Messages
- 9,929
- Reaction score
- 1,451
A genetic brand,dontcha think? :lfao:
In any case my argument isn't with his position as much as it is the arguments he uses to support that position. Science neither proves nor disproves a single thing about a creator, the sould, or spirit. This may be because of deficiencies in the current state of science: there was a military demolition expert, some general whose name I can't recall, who insisted that the atomic bomb could not work. There are any number of scientific positions that do a complete 180 over time, as the means to investigate further becomes available from earlier investigations.Likewise, it is not the place of religion,or faith to justify itself with scientific positions-or to argue that they're incorrect simply because they fit in with their cosmology. In Mr. Pastore's case, he's also making the all too common religious error of viewing the creation myth of Genesis as a factual, historical and scientific account,rather than as the allegory it (and,for the most part, all creation myths) was intended to be: comprehension of the deity in its entirety-whether one believes or not-is supposed to be beyond the comprehension of most human brains,most of the time. It's like non-physicists dealing with the idea that before the "bigbang" there was nothing and no "time." Consequently, fangjian is partially right-there was no "before the bigbang"-hence my use of the word preceding-and whatever preceded the big bang would have to be outside this dimension,universe and space/time to have preceded them, and, consequently, brought them into being. Such a being, along with wherever and whenever it was when it brought a bout the first moment in our time, the first space in our space, is beyond the means of science as it stands now to detect-just as the extradimensional, extratemporal,and extrauniversal are to our dimension, space/time and universe.
In any case: religion/science, for the time being, ne'er the twain shall meet-nor should they. His "four big bangs" are really more like four frail flatulences, yet another billibanality (ooh! I did use it as a noun,.....)
Empty Hands
Senior Master
I can see the eventual reductio now: you didn't weld the individual atoms together using your own hands, so it doesn't count!
Empty Hands
Senior Master
Chemists synthesize organic molecules from simple precursors like short chain alkanes, benzenes and the like using simple reactants and solutions. Living creatures are not necessary.
Like this:
You are proving my reductio right in front of me in minutes.
Really, you are completely outmatched on this front, this is my life's work. It would be like me trying to teach you something about frequent political posting.
- Joined
- Mar 5, 2005
- Messages
- 9,929
- Reaction score
- 1,451
Bob, where did the "thank" button go?
Empty Hands
Senior Master
Then you didn't create this post because you didn't create the electrons that were used to transmit and display it.
Rampant goalpost moving, just like I said.
- Joined
- Mar 5, 2005
- Messages
- 9,929
- Reaction score
- 1,451
And that is absolutely correct. Give the baldish youngster from Peoria a cigar!
If you want to completely billibanalize this thread, I suppose I could......:lfao:
Empty Hands
Senior Master
Because a very large number of people believe in a God of the Gaps. Wherever there is something we don't understand, can't perceive, or can't do? Well, that's God. In the old days when we didn't understand lightning, the God of the Gaps was Jupiter or when we didn't understand the wind there were Spirits of the Air. The Gaps are getting smaller though. Now that we know what causes those, the God of the Gaps has been relegated to pre-Big Bang cosmology or the creation of life. Someday we will create life, and another Gap will close. Such are people.
- Joined
- Mar 5, 2005
- Messages
- 9,929
- Reaction score
- 1,451
No gaps: if the big bang theory is true, then an entity such as a Creator simly must have preceded it. Likewise any other act or moment of creation.
