Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#181
|
|||
|
|||
Dave Heil wrote: Nomen Nescio wrote: cut It sounds like you are on some medications yourself. You're hearing sounds? Of course he hearing sounds what do you expect that he smell them instead. Indeed the only thing anyone hear is sound Dave K8MN |
#182
|
|||
|
|||
Michael Coslo wrote: Cmdr Buzz corey wrote: K=D8HB wrote: "John Smith" wrote In fact, it was this professor who first told me to look either for angels or aliens--before he finally settled on the angels (intelligence NOT from a mud puddle as you could ever find upon an earth-like planet)... The only thing that I can think of which is more impossible to believe than "mud became man" is angels that just "were". So where did all the matter in the universe orginially come from? If it had no beginning, the it just "was". If it did indeed have a beginning, the what was before that? Maybe nothing. Most humans consider time to be something that goes from here to there, giving meaning to concepts such as "before", "after", "simultaneously", etc. Such a timeview is based on their experience, limited as it is. But consider this: Go outside on a clear night and look for a star. Suppose for discussion sake you look at a star that is 300 light years away. From our point of view, the light you see originated at the star in the year 1705, and has been traveling to the Earth for three centuries. But from the point of view of the photons that make up that starlight, *no* time elapsed between the creation of the photons at the star and their end on your retinas. No time at all. How can the same thing have two so completely different times of existence? (note that in this context "light" means EM radiation of all sorts, from "radio" to gamma rays) Personally, I suspect that answer may be hard to come by. My own beliefs are that we are going to have to meld Big Bang and Steady State together. Big Bang has still not found Proton decay, which to me is a fatal flaw. Steady State as it was thought of in the past, just doesn't hold up to what we know today. Certainly the idea of pre-Big Bang "foam" is interesting, but of course, what was there before the "foam"? Was there a previous universe? Given that the conditions and constants of the Universe were set by the Big Bang, there isn't much doubt that any previous universe would have been much different. Maybe - or maybe not! One thing we assume - IOW, take completely on faith - is that the "laws of physics" are time- and place-invariant. We look at light from distant quasars and galaxies that has come to us from billions of light years distance and time, and we *assume* that the laws of physics are exactly the same across all that time and all that distance. We assume it because there's no evidence to the contrary. So maybe the laws of physics do *not* change from Big Bang to Big Crunch to Big Bang II, etc. Perhaps they are truly eternal and omnipresent...just as the Supreme Being is described to be. That doesn't mean the Supreme Being is only the laws of physics. Where might the energy from these universe/singularity/universe/singularity/universes have come from. Perhaps the quantum world may give us some answers. Perhaps zero point energy may have played a part. Exactly. Or maybe there's a whole bunch of physical laws yet to be discovered. Consider how recently concepts like relativity, electromagnetism, and this thing we call radio have been understood by humans, compared to the age of the earth or the amount of time humans have lived on it. And in such a short time, some folks think they have it all figured out? That's almost funny! 73 de Jim, N@EY |
#183
|
|||
|
|||
|
#184
|
|||
|
|||
Michael Coslo wrote:
John Smith wrote: K0HB: Yes, I have read a couple of books on the subject--most of the authors strike me as being rather weak in math and especially in the area of probability and statistics--quite possibly lotus-blossom-eaters. For some it is easier to attack the thinker than to disprove the idea.... It certainly is a lot easier to say "God makes it so, so it is" The hard part is defining what is meant by "God"... First, just for starters, to get all the necessary elements formed into the complex amino acids to create the RNA is preposterous-- let alone the actual creation of the RNA (and this would only be a virus-- unable to replicate on its own.) Why no, it really isn't preposterous. What are the titles of your books? Next, to get a complex DNA structure would be another extraordinary event, for the proper structure (organism) to be present and form around the DNA AND be able to use the DNA would be another extraordinary event, for this organism to be able to replicate would be one more extraordinary event, for just one of these single celled organisms to go "multi-cellular" would be one more extraordinary event, then for each cell to develop specialized functions--another extraordinary event, for them to form complete organs handling a specific function--another extraordinary event.... AND THIS IS SUPPOSED TO GO RIGHT ON UP TO WHERE THE ORGANISM IS CAPABLE OF SELF- REALIZATION, COMPLEX THOUGHT AND CONSIDERS ITSELF TO HAVE A SPIRIT! At times like this, it's important to recall the Unnamed Law: "If it happens, it must be possible" You are off the scientific track to begin with, otherwise you wouldn't use the string of "Preposterous, Extraordinary, impossible, endlessly number, impossible links, Impossible- end of story" stuff. What's really missing in those statements is imagination. Look at your PC or Mac. Then look at pictures of ENIAC (or actually go see it, as I have done...) Could anyone imagine that today's PCs are the direct descendants of that machine? Yet they are, after just 60 years Want to see a few things that are interesting? Look up lipid structures, and see their likely early life implications. No miracles here, just simple chemistry. You speak of RNA and DNA. When speaking of origins of life, it is probably better to speak of metabolic pathways, as the DNA and RNA probably evolved to accommodate them. And are they complicated! see http://tinyurl.com/dm8hu This is a pdf file of the various metabolic pathways. While the major ones are ATP and glycolysis, there are many. Now whereas you may look at this chart, and say look how complicated! this is proof that we are created by God!, I look at it and say "What kind of God would create such a sloppy convoluted MESS!" "You see, to be quite frank, Kevin, the fabric of the universe is far from perfect. It was a bit of botched job, you see. We only had seven days to make it. And that's where this comes in. This is the only map of all the holes. Well, why repair them? Why not use them to get stinking rich?" I can only speak for myself, but if I were to create life, I would leave no doubt that it was created. There would be no processes, no interconnected pathways, nothing of the sort. "God is not interested in technology... He knows nothing of the potential of the micro-chip or the silicon revolution. He's obsessed with making the grass grow and getting rainbows right... Look at what he spends his time on. 43 species of parrot! Nipples for men! Slugs! HE created slugs! They can't hear. They can't speak. They can't operate machinery. Are we not in the hands of a lunatic? If I were creating the world I wouldn't mess about with butterflies and daffodils. I would have started with lasers, eight o'clock, Day One!" My creatures would see because I made them see, would think because they just do, and there would be no obvious source of life - cut one of them open, and inside would be nothing. A genuine miracle. Simple, and allowing of no argument. Is not life-as-we-know-it a genuine miracle, regardless of how it came about? ... as you can quickly see, this chain of impossible, seemingly endlessly numbered and impossible links of extraordinary events to have all occurred, all at just the right time, all in just the proper order is just too mathematically impossible to have any believe but those willing to believe the most preposterous impossibility which could ever be devised... in plain english--IT IS IMPOSSIBLE--END OF STORY! You try to make it much more complicated sounding than it is. What you're seeing in those statements is a lack of imagination. Plus a failure to comprehend how long a billion years is... Those books on the subject, start quickly to, toss around these CHAINS of extraordinary events without the slightest considerations to the mathematical possibilities, which end up being NON-EXISTENT! What were those books again? "If it happens, it must be possible" I had the fortune to have a mathematics professor who I worked with at the university, who obtained a grant and was into computing these possibilities, he WAS an atheist... and that is a true story! Must have read Oolon Coolophid's "Well That About Wraps It Up For God"... In fact, it was this professor who first told me to look either for angels or aliens--before he finally settled on the angels (intelligence NOT from a mud puddle as you could ever find upon an earth-like planet)... I just flat do not know what to think, it is all too impossible... perhaps the answers are out there... X-Files-theme-plays-in-the-background ... or, perhaps there is a very simple explanation we just have not thought of--yet... any guess is as valid as another... Well, the simplest answer is "All this comes from God". Simple, to the point, and the great thing is that once you accept this, you need look no further. You are her to worship him, and that is all the knowledge needed. I've got a two-liner that works for me: Science is the how God is the why If you want more, if the one liner answer is not enough, I would suggest that you add time to your equations of impossibility. Also the size of the earth. As for your math professor, I wonder if he had the concept of time on the billion year scale? Almost no one does. Worse, too many don't realize they don't know. How is it that the human has eyes? An exquisite organ of sense to be sure. But before we throw up our hands and say that it was too complicated a structure to have simply come about by chance, we might want to take a look at the facts. Phototropism exists at the lowest levels of life. There are bacteria in the ocean that adjust the level at which they "swim" by the amount of ambient light falling on them. It is a pretty simple thing. Various creatures make use of this in varying degrees of complexity, from simple organs that react to light coming from different directions, to simple lensed eyes, to multi lensed wonders that detect movement, to reflective layers behind the sensing structure that allow sight at the individual photon level. As well as our eyes, which although wonderful, are not at the top of the list for acuity. And in the oceans are creatures who have lost the ability to see, because in their environment it's pretty useless. Some forms of life have senses we don't - like migratory birds that can sense the earth's magnetism. But at it's root level, it *is* a simple thing. That's phototropism. A chemical reaction that would exist if there were no life to put it in. That is just one case. The other senses are also similarly simply based. All based on detection of energy sources, and using those sources to extract information from the environment. Just like looking at a modern automobile. While they look very complicated, at heart, they are just a compilation of simple machines. They're also the end product of a long series of small developments. This is in no way to say that life is not a wonderful and amazing thing. It is. It is a messy, complicated, unruly, terribly imperfect yet surprisingly resilient gastraphagus we have here. And yet, some people look at it, and some throw their arms in the air and say that "It is so complex! It could only have been created by God!". While I look at it and say "It is so complex! I doubt any God would create such a mess when under his total control, a simple life form could be created". I doubt that anyone on this planet really knows. We're just at the beginning in so many ways. Consider how recently things like infectious disease, vaccines and basic metabolism were understood. And yet some people think they are qualified to say what is "too complex"? That's almost funny. It is worth study with an open mind. When you work on the billion year time scale, all sorts of possibilities exist. Yup. One more thing is unknown: Is the biology we know the only one possible, or are there many possibilities, and Earth just has one of them? 73 de Jim, N2EY |
#185
|
|||
|
|||
an_old_friend wrote:
Dave Heil wrote: Nomen Nescio wrote: cut It sounds like you are on some medications yourself. You're hearing sounds? Of course he hearing sounds what do you expect that he smell them instead. Indeed the only thing anyone hear is sound Great, Mark, you're hearing sounds on usenet too? I sit here reading words. The computer isn't making a single sound. Did you read what the semi-anonymous Roger wrote, or did you just decide to jump in with both feet inserted in your yap? Dave K8MN |
#186
|
|||
|
|||
"Dave Heil" wrote in message news an_old_friend wrote: Dave Heil wrote: Nomen Nescio wrote: cut It sounds like you are on some medications yourself. You're hearing sounds? Of course he hearing sounds what do you expect that he smell them instead. Indeed the only thing anyone hear is sound ...and this comment from an obviously underadvanced intellect said what? ...."he smell them"? "he hearing sounds"? Well, I be hearing you, bro. Unnerstan whut I be sayin? |
#187
|
|||
|
|||
|
#189
|
|||
|
|||
wrote:
Michael Coslo wrote: John Smith wrote: K0HB: Yes, I have read a couple of books on the subject--most of the authors strike me as being rather weak in math and especially in the area of probability and statistics--quite possibly lotus-blossom-eaters. For some it is easier to attack the thinker than to disprove the idea.... It certainly is a lot easier to say "God makes it so, so it is" The hard part is defining what is meant by "God"... Not for those who want the easy answer. There are plenty enough people who are just slap happy to tell us that! First, just for starters, to get all the necessary elements formed into the complex amino acids to create the RNA is preposterous-- let alone the actual creation of the RNA (and this would only be a virus-- unable to replicate on its own.) Why no, it really isn't preposterous. What are the titles of your books? Next, to get a complex DNA structure would be another extraordinary event, for the proper structure (organism) to be present and form around the DNA AND be able to use the DNA would be another extraordinary event, for this organism to be able to replicate would be one more extraordinary event, for just one of these single celled organisms to go "multi-cellular" would be one more extraordinary event, then for each cell to develop specialized functions--another extraordinary event, for them to form complete organs handling a specific function--another extraordinary event.... AND THIS IS SUPPOSED TO GO RIGHT ON UP TO WHERE THE ORGANISM IS CAPABLE OF SELF- REALIZATION, COMPLEX THOUGHT AND CONSIDERS ITSELF TO HAVE A SPIRIT! At times like this, it's important to recall the Unnamed Law: "If it happens, it must be possible" You are off the scientific track to begin with, otherwise you wouldn't use the string of "Preposterous, Extraordinary, impossible, endlessly number, impossible links, Impossible- end of story" stuff. What's really missing in those statements is imagination. Look at your PC or Mac. Then look at pictures of ENIAC (or actually go see it, as I have done...) Could anyone imagine that today's PCs are the direct descendants of that machine? Yet they are, after just 60 years Want to see a few things that are interesting? Look up lipid structures, and see their likely early life implications. No miracles here, just simple chemistry. You speak of RNA and DNA. When speaking of origins of life, it is probably better to speak of metabolic pathways, as the DNA and RNA probably evolved to accommodate them. And are they complicated! see http://tinyurl.com/dm8hu This is a pdf file of the various metabolic pathways. While the major ones are ATP and glycolysis, there are many. Now whereas you may look at this chart, and say look how complicated! this is proof that we are created by God!, I look at it and say "What kind of God would create such a sloppy convoluted MESS!" "You see, to be quite frank, Kevin, the fabric of the universe is far from perfect. It was a bit of botched job, you see. We only had seven days to make it. And that's where this comes in. This is the only map of all the holes. Well, why repair them? Why not use them to get stinking rich?" Hitchhikers guide? I can only speak for myself, but if I were to create life, I would leave no doubt that it was created. There would be no processes, no interconnected pathways, nothing of the sort. "God is not interested in technology... He knows nothing of the potential of the micro-chip or the silicon revolution. He's obsessed with making the grass grow and getting rainbows right... Look at what he spends his time on. 43 species of parrot! Nipples for men! Slugs! HE created slugs! They can't hear. They can't speak. They can't operate machinery. Are we not in the hands of a lunatic? If I were creating the world I wouldn't mess about with butterflies and daffodils. I would have started with lasers, eight o'clock, Day One!" My creatures would see because I made them see, would think because they just do, and there would be no obvious source of life - cut one of them open, and inside would be nothing. A genuine miracle. Simple, and allowing of no argument. Is not life-as-we-know-it a genuine miracle, regardless of how it came about? Sure! But not the same kind of miracle. Ours is a miracle of different processes. We live because of various chemical reactions, taking energy and transforming it into ourselves. No, I'm talking about life that takes in no energy, and no apparent support structure. It just IS. The life forms should be just sacks of goo that have no obvious reason to be alive. They just are. There would be no question that someone had to "make" that life. ... as you can quickly see, this chain of impossible, seemingly endlessly numbered and impossible links of extraordinary events to have all occurred, all at just the right time, all in just the proper order is just too mathematically impossible to have any believe but those willing to believe the most preposterous impossibility which could ever be devised... in plain english--IT IS IMPOSSIBLE--END OF STORY! You try to make it much more complicated sounding than it is. What you're seeing in those statements is a lack of imagination. Plus a failure to comprehend how long a billion years is... There are moments where I believe that I can. At least for a few minutes. Then I invariably get a headache! 8^) Those books on the subject, start quickly to, toss around these CHAINS of extraordinary events without the slightest considerations to the mathematical possibilities, which end up being NON-EXISTENT! What were those books again? "If it happens, it must be possible" absolutely, and it is possible, it must happen. I had the fortune to have a mathematics professor who I worked with at the university, who obtained a grant and was into computing these possibilities, he WAS an atheist... and that is a true story! Must have read Oolon Coolophid's "Well That About Wraps It Up For God"... In fact, it was this professor who first told me to look either for angels or aliens--before he finally settled on the angels (intelligence NOT from a mud puddle as you could ever find upon an earth-like planet)... I just flat do not know what to think, it is all too impossible... perhaps the answers are out there... X-Files-theme-plays-in-the-background ... or, perhaps there is a very simple explanation we just have not thought of--yet... any guess is as valid as another... Well, the simplest answer is "All this comes from God". Simple, to the point, and the great thing is that once you accept this, you need look no further. You are her to worship him, and that is all the knowledge needed. I've got a two-liner that works for me: Science is the how God is the why Why? Insecurity that causes God to create you so that you worship him because he needs worship, and if you don't he will torture you for eternity? If you want more, if the one liner answer is not enough, I would suggest that you add time to your equations of impossibility. Also the size of the earth. For some reason that reminds me of the natural "reactor that they found in Africa. Seems that there was a concentration of Uranium ore that was reacting a couple billion of years ago. Groundwater was acting as the moderator. (at least the theory that sounds best to me) The odds of that happening are pretty darn slight. So I guess God must have done it for some reason. http://tinyurl.com/5wth8 As for your math professor, I wonder if he had the concept of time on the billion year scale? Almost no one does. Worse, too many don't realize they don't know. Well, when you want to be certain of things, you have to know what you don't know! ;^) How is it that the human has eyes? An exquisite organ of sense to be sure. But before we throw up our hands and say that it was too complicated a structure to have simply come about by chance, we might want to take a look at the facts. Phototropism exists at the lowest levels of life. There are bacteria in the ocean that adjust the level at which they "swim" by the amount of ambient light falling on them. It is a pretty simple thing. Various creatures make use of this in varying degrees of complexity, from simple organs that react to light coming from different directions, to simple lensed eyes, to multi lensed wonders that detect movement, to reflective layers behind the sensing structure that allow sight at the individual photon level. As well as our eyes, which although wonderful, are not at the top of the list for acuity. And in the oceans are creatures who have lost the ability to see, because in their environment it's pretty useless. Some forms of life have senses we don't - like migratory birds that can sense the earth's magnetism. But at it's root level, it *is* a simple thing. That's phototropism. A chemical reaction that would exist if there were no life to put it in. That is just one case. The other senses are also similarly simply based. All based on detection of energy sources, and using those sources to extract information from the environment. Just like looking at a modern automobile. While they look very complicated, at heart, they are just a compilation of simple machines. They're also the end product of a long series of small developments. This is in no way to say that life is not a wonderful and amazing thing. It is. It is a messy, complicated, unruly, terribly imperfect yet surprisingly resilient gastraphagus we have here. And yet, some people look at it, and some throw their arms in the air and say that "It is so complex! It could only have been created by God!". While I look at it and say "It is so complex! I doubt any God would create such a mess when under his total control, a simple life form could be created". I doubt that anyone on this planet really knows. We're just at the beginning in so many ways. Consider how recently things like infectious disease, vaccines and basic metabolism were understood. And yet some people think they are qualified to say what is "too complex"? That's almost funny. It is an admission of failure. Or hubris. Or a strange combination of both. If something is too complex for someone to understand, that does no mean it is too complex for me to understand. And vice versa. It is worth study with an open mind. When you work on the billion year time scale, all sorts of possibilities exist. Yup. One more thing is unknown: Is the biology we know the only one possible, or are there many possibilities, and Earth just has one of them? I think that the answer lies in the many metabolic pathways. And I believe the answer is that there are a lot of possibilities. Earth has two distinct forms of life already. There is plenty of room for more. - Mike KB3EIA - |
#190
|
|||
|
|||
From: on Fri 2 Sep 2005 22:04
Michael Coslo wrote: John Smith wrote: K0HB: Yes, I have read a couple of books on the subject--most of the authors strike me as being rather weak in math and especially in the area of probability and statistics--quite possibly lotus-blossom-eaters. For some it is easier to attack the thinker than to disprove the idea.... ...such as all PCTA attacking any non-PCTA. It certainly is a lot easier to say "God makes it so, so it is" The hard part is defining what is meant by "God"... The PCTA merely have to say THEY are "God" in regards to the code test issue...and so it is... At times like this, it's important to recall the Unnamed Law: "If it happens, it must be possible" The morse code test has always been a part of amateur radio license examinations and so it must continue to be possible (forever and to the end of time, whichever comes first). What's really missing in those statements is imagination. What's really missing in the PCTA arguments is their imagination in considering that morse code mode is archaic, slow, and not used by any other radio service in the USA. Look at your PC or Mac. Then look at pictures of ENIAC (or actually go see it, as I have done...) Could anyone imagine that today's PCs are the direct descendants of that machine? Yet they are, after just 60 years Can anyone imagine that morse code is "the most effectual mode in radio communications and MUST be tested of every radio amateur for licensing" even after all other radio services have stopped using morse code for communications? Can anyone imagine that today's amateur radio transceivers are direct descendants of the 1912 spark-gap transmitter and crystal set receivers of 1912? Can anyone imagine? [not the PCTA] A genuine miracle. Simple, and allowing of no argument. Is not life-as-we-know-it a genuine miracle, regardless of how it came about? Is morse code a "genuine miracle, regardless of how it came about [for wired communications]?" Of course it is...Bless the Miracles and worship them forever by continuing the code test. Science is the how God is the why Morse code is the WAY. Some forms of life have senses we don't - like migratory birds that can sense the earth's magnetism. ...or the PCTA. They're also the end product of a long series of small developments. For the PCTA, all development in radio communications ceased on turning the carrier on and off. I doubt that anyone on this planet really knows. We're just at the beginning in so many ways. Consider how recently things like infectious disease, vaccines and basic metabolism were understood. And yet some people think they are qualified to say what is "too complex"? That's almost funny. PCTA seem united on saying that machine decoding of on-off carrier keying is "too complex." It MUST be done ONLY by human abilities...so the government MUST TEST for that ability. That's almost funny. Except it is tragic, closed-minded. One more thing is unknown: Is the biology we know the only one possible, or are there many possibilities, and Earth just has one of them? In the radio world we know MANY possible modes of communication. Morse code is just one of them. But the PCTA insist that only the "true way" (morse code) must forever be tested. bip bip |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
K8CPA Email | CB |