| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
#212
September 5th 05, 01:08 AM
|
|||
|
|||
an_old_friend wrote: wrote: an_old_friend wrote: wrote: wrote: snip So in the end, when Jim Miccolis/N2EY, David Heil/K8MN, Brian Kelly/W3RV, and Steven J. Robeson/K4YZ/K4CAP point out that Len is not an amateur, for what purpose do you do so? What do you hope to gain from pointing out that Len isn't an amateur? Indeed it does get tiresome that they go on and on about Could we keep to once a month or once a week (valid I suppose if someone slips in to let them Know) There's something in there that they just won't come out an say. If they do, it will likely be on Aaron Jones "Morse Myths" list. So they get to the very edge of the ledge and peer over, afraid to make the leap. Indeed they can't be honest to admit that what they want is the power to censor and silence all oposition But the moment they do they know that they will be in league with the dark side. Better for them to just pray for and wish it and not actually do it. Did you catch Dan flaming for daring to answer his direct question. Of course I did commit the sin of not answering as he wished cut Him and Bruce are running buddies, so I can't take much of Dan seriously. |
|
#213
September 5th 05, 01:36 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
an_old_friend wrote:
wrote: wrote: snip So in the end, when Jim Miccolis/N2EY, David Heil/K8MN, Brian Kelly/W3RV, and Steven J. Robeson/K4YZ/K4CAP point out that Len is not an amateur, for what purpose do you do so? What do you hope to gain from pointing out that Len isn't an amateur? Indeed it does get tiresome that they go on and on about On and on about? Could we keep to once a month or once a week (valid I suppose if someone slips in to let them Know) Could we? How are you involved? Jim, when you're ready to have a rational discussion with me, I'll be here. when we have a rational discussion it will likely merely be a front for Procoder effort to assinate us, by shocking us into heart attacks I have a sneaking hunch that you've been assinated any number of times. Dave K8MN |
|
#214
September 5th 05, 01:44 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Dave Heil wrote: an_old_friend wrote: wrote: wrote: snip So in the end, when Jim Miccolis/N2EY, David Heil/K8MN, Brian Kelly/W3RV, and Steven J. Robeson/K4YZ/K4CAP point out that Len is not an amateur, for what purpose do you do so? What do you hope to gain from pointing out that Len isn't an amateur? Indeed it does get tiresome that they go on and on about On and on about? about the subject of the text now 3 to 6 lines above this Could we keep to once a month or once a week (valid I suppose if someone slips in to let them Know) Could we? How are you involved? I guess you are syaing we can't. I am certainly involved in the NG much to your ..disaproval shale we say Jim, when you're ready to have a rational discussion with me, I'll be here. when we have a rational discussion it will likely merely be a front for Procoder effort to assinate us, by shocking us into heart attacks I have a sneaking hunch that you've been assinated any number of times. Now you are showing your need for meds, serious meds Dave K8MN |
|
#215
September 5th 05, 01:58 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
an_old_friend wrote:
Dave Heil wrote: an_old_friend wrote: wrote: wrote: snip So in the end, when Jim Miccolis/N2EY, David Heil/K8MN, Brian Kelly/W3RV, and Steven J. Robeson/K4YZ/K4CAP point out that Len is not an amateur, for what purpose do you do so? What do you hope to gain from pointing out that Len isn't an amateur? Indeed it does get tiresome that they go on and on about On and on about? about the subject of the text now 3 to 6 lines above this Could we keep to once a month or once a week (valid I suppose if someone slips in to let them Know) Could we? How are you involved? I guess you are syaing we can't. I am certainly involved in the NG much to your ..disaproval shale we say Jim, when you're ready to have a rational discussion with me, I'll be here. when we have a rational discussion it will likely merely be a front for Procoder effort to assinate us, by shocking us into heart attacks I have a sneaking hunch that you've been assinated any number of times. Now you are showing your need for meds, serious meds Get someone to read you what you wrote. Dave K8MN |
|
#216
September 5th 05, 02:07 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Mike Coslo wrote: 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? No. "Time Bandits" (Terry Gilliam film from 1981, still dead-on) 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!" Also from Time Bandits. 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. Any sufficiently advanced technology appears to work miracles. Ours is a miracle of different processes. We live because of various chemical reactions, taking energy and transforming it into ourselves. Well, some of it. A large diesel engine is more efficient... 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. Why? ... 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. Not necessarily. All that happens must be possible, but all that is possible doesn't necessarily 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"... *That's* HHTTG. The whole subject of creationism is nicely dealt with in the first HHTG book, as part of the explanation of the Babelfish. That was long before the current antiscience inquisition.. 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? That's one explanation. It's not mine. I find most definitions of "God" to be far too limited. 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. How do we know? We've only examined the planets of this solar system. We've barely scratched the surface of this one. For all we know, there are dozens - hundreds - thousands of such uranium deposits deep in the earth. So I guess God must have done it for some reason. http://tinyurl.com/5wth8 No, it was the planet manufacturers on Magrathea. 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. Exactly. Next thing they'll do is want to ban "Inherit the Wind" 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. Which form are the tube worms found near volcanic vents in the deep oceans? 73 de Jim, N2EY |
|
#217
September 5th 05, 02:18 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#218
September 5th 05, 02:22 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
K=D8HB wrote: wrote Mike, are you an atheist? Or are you just playing at one because President Bush is a Christian? There are thousands of gods available to believe in, and for each individ= ual god there are often several different versions of that religion. Take, for e= xample, President Bush's god --- dozens and dozens of different cults all claimin= g to be the "proper" Christians. The only difference between atheists and GWB is that the atheists believe= in one less god than George does. If I have it right, Georges god, in His cosmic loneliness, felt a need to be worshipped, so He invented Us to worship hi= m=2E Those of Us who aren't so inclined, He will banish to spend eternity on 7= 5-meter phone. Beep beep! de Hans, K0HB Most Reverend Keeper of the Codes of Q Hans, you're already on record. I was just curious about Mike. Before the election, almost every liberal was saying that they were Christians. Now that all of the hooplah is over, they're back to being atheists. |
|
#219
September 5th 05, 02:30 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Mike Coslo wrote: wrote: Mike Coslo wrote: 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! Mike, are you an atheist? Or are you just playing at one because President Bush is a Christian? You tell me, Brian! I think Jesus was one cool dude, and has a lot to tell us about how to live One cool dude? That being said, I think that many people who are proclaiming themselves as "Christians" these days are not. The so-called conservative Christians who loudly proclaim their ascendancy these days don't really seem to have much to do with Jesus at all. The closest thing that they are is a modern day version of the Pharisees. Their trends are much more old testament - therefore not sharing in the new covenant proclaimed by Jesus. They push public prayer, also proscribed against by Jesus, They push religious domination of government - same deal. While demanding that the first books of *their* bible (KJV) be taken as absolutely literal, despite two different versions of creation, they totally ignore the Sermon on the Mount, in which Jesus delivers direct orders in as plain language as you will find in the bible. What's up with that? What is up with that is the modern fundamentalist Christians are falling for one of the oldest tricks in the book - the false prophets. That being said, there is no doubt in my mind that the world was *not* created in seven days starting on Sunday, the 23rd of October in 4004 BC as determined by Ussher - and put in print in one of my bibles at home. There is no doubt in my mind that the present day universe *was* created billions of years ago, probably in an event we call "the Big Bang. I highly doubt that it was created by a supreme being. For what happened before then, it becomes quite complex, and I enjoy speculation on that. - Mike KB3EIA - There! I knew you had a lot more to say than mere nide remarks about God. I hope you feel better. |
|
#220
September 5th 05, 02:36 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Frank Gilliland wrote:
On 4 Sep 2005 16:44:42 -0700, wrote in .com: Mike Coslo wrote: snip That being said, there is no doubt in my mind that the world was *not* created in seven days starting on Sunday, the 23rd of October in 4004 BC as determined by Ussher - and put in print in one of my bibles at home. Actually, Genesis says it took six days - because the Creator rested on the seventh day. Rush job, too. Left a lot of holes.... LOL!!! snip I highly doubt that it was created by a supreme being. Why? Couldn't the Supreme Being have set it all in motion, and the Bang was just the method? I get a kick out of some of these discussions. Especially regarding evolution. These "Christians" are constantly trying to poke holes in the theory, yet are too short-sighted to consider that 'evolution' (even with all it's holes) might be one of God's creations. If so, then they are effectively attacking their own faith. I've asked them that (one time I was trapped in a car on a 4 hour drive with a couple fundies- arrrgh) We had a grand old time. I used to keep me yap shut because it doesn't do much good, but after the second hour of them trying to save my soul, I unleashed the dogs on them. Turns out they did not know where the water came from or went to, and didn't know why the kangaroos had to swim from Australia to the middle east in order not to drown. Even my more serious questions were troublesome for them, especially since they were engineers. They really hated my thoughts on how if they were correct about the young universe and Earth were fact, some of the "facts" that they tried to use to disprove Evolution, such as dating anomalies, could not be true because the basic nuclear decay rates (or is that nukular?) were wrong to begin with. - Mike KB3EIA - |
| Reply |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| K8CPA Email | CB | |||
Linear Mode
