Religion Poll

[u9y42]

You have to admit, accepting something unquestioningly, something for which there is no evidence and which offers no greater understanding of how the world around us works, does seem a bit irrational.

As for this universe coming from nothing or a "big bang", that is the best explanation science has come up with; but even if it isn't the whole story, contrary to religion, it allows us to make predictions and gain a deeper understanding. In short, it allows us to make more rational choices in relation to our environment. Religion on the other hand doesn't evolve, doesn't adapt to new knowledge.

"Religion" or on a more basic level, the belief in intelligent design gives me the basis in which to see that there is order and a design in which the world operates.  To me a world without an intelligent designer would be as irrational as having a computer operate without any software.  The computer could perhaps have "evolved" from nothing and just be a chunk of metal,  but there had to be an intelligent creator of the software that gives the program the design it needs to operate.  Even changing one piece of code, or taking code out causes the program to fail (kind of like what happens when there is an "error" in our DNA code which causes problems in our bodies with mutations and so on.)

The fact that we have DNA shows that there was some planning or "information" that took place to begin with.  In a way, information in our world and in our structure proves intelligence and a "designer."  So it is logical to think that there was a plan.  Without that the world might exist but we would not have intelligence at all. 

The order you see is already mostly explained by the laws of physics; simply adding a god to it doesn't help in any way, shape or form, we gain no new understanding, and it limits the questions we can ask about the world, because the answer is an arbitrary "god willed it so".

And what you go on to describe, it basically comes down to the old "Watchmaker analogy", which hasn't been seriously considered ever since the mechanisms for evolution of species were discovered; in no way does it follow that the existence of DNA proves there had to be a designer.

[BitChick]

You have to admit, accepting something unquestioningly, something for which there is no evidence and which offers no greater understanding of how the world around us works, does seem a bit irrational.

As for this universe coming from nothing or a "big bang", that is the best explanation science has come up with; but even if it isn't the whole story, contrary to religion, it allows us to make predictions and gain a deeper understanding. In short, it allows us to make more rational choices in relation to our environment. Religion on the other hand doesn't evolve, doesn't adapt to new knowledge.

"Religion" or on a more basic level, the belief in intelligent design gives me the basis in which to see that there is order and a design in which the world operates.  To me a world without an intelligent designer would be as irrational as having a computer operate without any software.  The computer could perhaps have "evolved" from nothing and just be a chunk of metal,  but there had to be an intelligent creator of the software that gives the program the design it needs to operate.  Even changing one piece of code, or taking code out causes the program to fail (kind of like what happens when there is an "error" in our DNA code which causes problems in our bodies with mutations and so on.)

The fact that we have DNA shows that there was some planning or "information" that took place to begin with.  In a way, information in our world and in our structure proves intelligence and a "designer."  So it is logical to think that there was a plan.  Without that the world might exist but we would not have intelligence at all.  

The order you see is already mostly explained by the laws of physics; simply adding a god to it doesn't help in any way, shape or form, we gain no new understanding, and it limits the questions we can ask about the world, because the answer is an arbitrary "god willed it so".

And what you go on to describe, it basically comes down to the old "Watchmaker analogy", which hasn't been seriously considered ever since the mechanisms for evolution of species were discovered; in no way does it follow that the existence of DNA proves there had to be a designer.

To think that order comes from chaos is problematic and can limit how we see the world and lead to problems in scientific thinking.  Just something to think about.

[lynn_402]

While I consider myself an Atheist, I do believe there could be some type of existence after we die.

Isn't that the definition of an agnostic?
Unless you believe in Timothy Leary's vision, in which the few seconds during which a brain still works after we die are perceived as a surreal eternity; I find this an interesting idea

[Bitcoin Magazine]

Christ got me today.  Just yesterday I was an atheist... 

[Vod]

To think that order comes from chaos is problematic and can limit how we see the world and lead to problems in scientific thinking.  Just something to think about.

Yet absolute order formed from absolute chaos in the creation of your god?   

[beetcoin]

getting order from chaos.. is chaos theory. it's the prevailing theory.. that there is even order in random things.

[lynn_402]

The fact that we have DNA shows that there was some planning or "information" that took place to begin with.  In a way, information in our world and in our structure proves intelligence and a "designer."  So it is logical to think that there was a plan.  Without that the world might exist but we would not have intelligence at all. 

Don't you agree that, in the 4.5 billions of years that the Earth has existed, molecules could have had the time to assemble themselves on their own, through fortunate collisions of atoms? I mean, in that much time, all the possibilities can happen, and as soon as the first cell is formed in a random process and the most basic strand of RNA (precursor of DNA) is formed, replication and evolution would then kick in and make life as we know it appear and change really fast.

[beetcoin]

The fact that we have DNA shows that there was some planning or "information" that took place to begin with.  In a way, information in our world and in our structure proves intelligence and a "designer."  So it is logical to think that there was a plan.  Without that the world might exist but we would not have intelligence at all. 

Don't you agree that, in the 4.5 billions of years that the Earth has existed, molecules could have had the time to assemble themselves on their own, through fortunate collisions of atoms? I mean, in that much time, all the possibilities can happen, and as soon as the first cell is formed in a random process and the most basic strand of RNA (precursor of DNA) is formed, replication and evolution would then kick in and make life as we know it appear and change really fast.

i think bitchick doesn't quite understand evolution very well.

[Vod]

Don't you agree that, in the 4.5 billions of years that the Earth has existed, molecules could have had the time to assemble themselves on their own, through fortunate collisions of atoms?

Could have been 10 billion years.  It's possible fragments of early DNA were floating through space from some other planet and came to earth via meteorites. 

[lynn_402]

Don't you agree that, in the 4.5 billions of years that the Earth has existed, molecules could have had the time to assemble themselves on their own, through fortunate collisions of atoms?

Could have been 10 billion years.  It's possible fragments of early DNA were floating through space from some other planet and came to earth via meteorites.  

Actually, it's unlikely that DNA could have survived space's radiation. However, amino acids could very well have come from meteors and that would have indeed kickstarted life. Some ridiculously complex molecules have been found on metorites in the last decades - because of the long amount of time they have to become more complex in space.

i think bitchick doesn't quite understand evolution very well.

To be fair, evolution and the chemical origin of life are, although related, different domains.

[u9y42]

The order you see is already mostly explained by the laws of physics; simply adding a god to it doesn't help in any way, shape or form, we gain no new understanding, and it limits the questions we can ask about the world, because the answer is an arbitrary "god willed it so".

And what you go on to describe, it basically comes down to the old "Watchmaker analogy", which hasn't been seriously considered ever since the mechanisms for evolution of species were discovered; in no way does it follow that the existence of DNA proves there had to be a designer.

To think that order comes from chaos is problematic and can limit how we see the world and lead to problems in scientific thinking.  Just something to think about.

I'm not sure what you mean by chaos and order in this context; care to elaborate?

But to further my point in the previous post, and paraphrasing Dawkins: things might look complex at first, and you might be tempted to believe there is no other way for them to have arisen; until you look closer. He goes on to give an example of the laryngeal nerve, which in some animals (giraffes for example) can be detoured by as much as 4.6 meters, instead of going by its most direct route. If anything this should be considered a "design flaw", but it's exactly what you would expect after billions of years of evolution.

For your reference, the video in which he gives this example is http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YUe0_4rdj0U, at about 21 minutes in, but I highly recommend the whole thing if you have time.

[BitChick]

The fact that we have DNA shows that there was some planning or "information" that took place to begin with.  In a way, information in our world and in our structure proves intelligence and a "designer."  So it is logical to think that there was a plan.  Without that the world might exist but we would not have intelligence at all.  

Don't you agree that, in the 4.5 billions of years that the Earth has existed, molecules could have had the time to assemble themselves on their own, through fortunate collisions of atoms? I mean, in that much time, all the possibilities can happen, and as soon as the first cell is formed in a random process and the most basic strand of RNA (precursor of DNA) is formed, replication and evolution would then kick in and make life as we know it appear and change really fast.

i think bitchick doesn't quite understand evolution very well.

I think evolutionists do not understand the intelligent design of the world very well.

My point is that we do not see order come from chaos. That is not something that is observed in our world.  But we do see great signs of intelligence and planning in how everything operates and works together.  The fact that we are intelligent as humans proves we had to have had someone or "something" more intelligent program us to work the way we do.  It is just logical.  To have intelligence come from nothing is not observable in our world.  

[beetcoin]

The fact that we have DNA shows that there was some planning or "information" that took place to begin with.  In a way, information in our world and in our structure proves intelligence and a "designer."  So it is logical to think that there was a plan.  Without that the world might exist but we would not have intelligence at all.  

Don't you agree that, in the 4.5 billions of years that the Earth has existed, molecules could have had the time to assemble themselves on their own, through fortunate collisions of atoms? I mean, in that much time, all the possibilities can happen, and as soon as the first cell is formed in a random process and the most basic strand of RNA (precursor of DNA) is formed, replication and evolution would then kick in and make life as we know it appear and change really fast.

i think bitchick doesn't quite understand evolution very well.

I think evolutionists do not understand the intelligent design of the world very well.

My point is that we do not see order come from chaos. That is not something that is observed in our world.  But we do see great signs of intelligence and planning in how everything operates and works together.  The fact that we are intelligent as humans proves we had to have had someone or "something" more intelligent program us to work the way we do.  It is just logical.  To have intelligence come from nothing is not observable in our world.  

we do see order in chaos.. it's called chaos theory. it's the reason why you can have an approximation of what the weather will be in 3 days.

[lynn_402]

I think evolutionists do not understand the intelligent design of the world very well.

My point is that we do not see order come from chaos. That is not something that is observed in our world.  But we do see great signs of intelligence.  The fact that we are intelligent as humans proves we had to have had someone or "something" more intelligent program us to work the way we do.  It is just logical.  To have intelligence come from nothing is not observable in our world.  

The whole universe is a proof that order comes from chaos. At first there was the highly chaotic Big Bang, then chaotic galaxies formed, which gave birth to stars, which organized more complex matter, which made unchaotic planets, and so on

[cooldgamer]

The fact that we have DNA shows that there was some planning or "information" that took place to begin with.  In a way, information in our world and in our structure proves intelligence and a "designer."  So it is logical to think that there was a plan.  Without that the world might exist but we would not have intelligence at all.  

Don't you agree that, in the 4.5 billions of years that the Earth has existed, molecules could have had the time to assemble themselves on their own, through fortunate collisions of atoms? I mean, in that much time, all the possibilities can happen, and as soon as the first cell is formed in a random process and the most basic strand of RNA (precursor of DNA) is formed, replication and evolution would then kick in and make life as we know it appear and change really fast.

i think bitchick doesn't quite understand evolution very well.

I think evolutionists do not understand the intelligent design of the world very well.

My point is that we do not see order come from chaos. That is not something that is observed in our world.  But we do see great signs of intelligence and planning in how everything operates and works together.  The fact that we are intelligent as humans proves we had to have had someone or "something" more intelligent program us to work the way we do.  It is just logical.  To have intelligence come from nothing is not observable in our world.  

What would have created the creator?  If intelligence doesn't come from nothing, then he couldn't exist without something creating him, and creating that.  Circular logic

[Vod]

What would have created the creator?  If intelligence doesn't come from nothing, then he couldn't exist without something creating him, and creating that.  Circular logic

She believes the creator always existed.

Yet mass always having existed, an infinite times more probable, is beyond her understanding.

That's brainwashing for you.

[beetcoin]

^ that's what i was going to say. in order to solve flawed logic, she is using.. flawed logic.

[BitChick]

I think evolutionists do not understand the intelligent design of the world very well.

My point is that we do not see order come from chaos. That is not something that is observed in our world.  But we do see great signs of intelligence.  The fact that we are intelligent as humans proves we had to have had someone or "something" more intelligent program us to work the way we do.  It is just logical.  To have intelligence come from nothing is not observable in our world.  

The whole universe is a proof that order comes from chaos. At first there was the highly chaotic Big Bang, then chaotic galaxies formed, which gave birth to stars, which organized more complex matter, which made unchaotic planets, and so on

What can we observe scientifically that shows order from chaos?  A big bang could not have left the universe in an orderly state based on observable science.  Nothing we observe exploding leads to order and creation of anything new does it?  A "big bang" could not have led to human intelligence and the amazing design of our bodies.  There are just too many variables at play for everything to have happened by random chance.   The position of the earth in relation to the sun, water on the earth, the way our bodies work, etc.  There are just too many things that for them to have happened by chance it is mathematically impossible even adding the "millions and billions of years" to the problem.

[BitChick]

The fact that we have DNA shows that there was some planning or "information" that took place to begin with.  In a way, information in our world and in our structure proves intelligence and a "designer."  So it is logical to think that there was a plan.  Without that the world might exist but we would not have intelligence at all.  

Don't you agree that, in the 4.5 billions of years that the Earth has existed, molecules could have had the time to assemble themselves on their own, through fortunate collisions of atoms? I mean, in that much time, all the possibilities can happen, and as soon as the first cell is formed in a random process and the most basic strand of RNA (precursor of DNA) is formed, replication and evolution would then kick in and make life as we know it appear and change really fast.

i think bitchick doesn't quite understand evolution very well.

I think evolutionists do not understand the intelligent design of the world very well.

My point is that we do not see order come from chaos. That is not something that is observed in our world.  But we do see great signs of intelligence and planning in how everything operates and works together.  The fact that we are intelligent as humans proves we had to have had someone or "something" more intelligent program us to work the way we do.  It is just logical.  To have intelligence come from nothing is not observable in our world.  

What would have created the creator?  If intelligence doesn't come from nothing, then he couldn't exist without something creating him, and creating that.  Circular logic

Where does intelligence come from then?  Could it come from nothing?  Is that something we observe?  Hence my argument about the computer.  We can have a hunk of metal but with someone intelligent designing the software to make it run, it would do absolutely nothing.  Our bodies are far more complex than a computer.  Our brains more complex than any software design. But I am called illogical for saying that it took an intelligent designer to create us?  It is more logical from observation that there was someone intelligent that designed us.  That is all I am saying.

[beetcoin]

I think evolutionists do not understand the intelligent design of the world very well.

My point is that we do not see order come from chaos. That is not something that is observed in our world.  But we do see great signs of intelligence.  The fact that we are intelligent as humans proves we had to have had someone or "something" more intelligent program us to work the way we do.  It is just logical.  To have intelligence come from nothing is not observable in our world.  

The whole universe is a proof that order comes from chaos. At first there was the highly chaotic Big Bang, then chaotic galaxies formed, which gave birth to stars, which organized more complex matter, which made unchaotic planets, and so on

What can we observe scientifically that shows order from chaos?  A big bang could not have left the universe in an orderly state based on observable science.  Nothing we observe exploding leads to order and creation of anything new does it?  A "big bang" could not have led to human intelligence and the amazing design of our bodies.  There are just too many variables at play for everything to have happened by random chance.   The position of the earth in relation to the sun, water on the earth, the way our bodies work, etc.  There are just too many things that for them to have happened by chance it is mathematically impossible even adding the "millions and billions of years" to the problem.

as already stated, meteorology. or peruse this wiki http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chaos_theory