Do atheists find meaning in life from inventing fairy tales?

_{Denyse O'Leary

March 29, 2018

Atheism, Culture, Naturalism}

Share: Facebook; Twitter; LinkedIn; Flipboard; Print; Email

From Richard Weikart at the Federalist:

The 2018 study in question by David Speed, et al, “What Do You Mean, ‘What Does It All Mean?’ Atheism, Nonreligion, and Life Meaning,” used surveys to try to figure out if atheists find meaning in life or are nihilistic. This survey defined someone as nihilistic if he or she upheld the position: “In my opinion, life does not serve any purpose.”

This study found that atheists and non-religious people are not nihilistic, because they claimed that they did have a purpose in life. This is an interesting finding that seems to refute the oft-repeated charge (levied by religious folks) that atheists are nihilistic.

However, there is a problem with this finding. The survey admitted the meaning that atheists and non-religious people found in their lives is entirely self-invented. According to the survey, they embraced the position: “Life is only meaningful if you provide the meaning yourself.”

Thus, when religious people say non-religious people have no basis for finding meaning in life, and when non-religious people object, saying they do indeed find meaning in life, they are not talking about the same thing. More.

Study. (public access)

Didn’t fairy tales used to be Hollywood’s specialty?

See also: Can science survive long in a post-modern world? It’s not clear.

Comments

Ahhh, well, I wouldn't even consider Cyrenaic hedonism: it's clearly as blind and dumb a heuristic as Dawkin's blind watchmaker. Easy, cheap pleasure that ultimately ruins experience, even of itself. I would chase a refined ethical and utilitarian hedonism that considers the happiness of the community and quality of transcendent pleasure in beauty, sophistication of artifice, and mutually beneficial industry; rather than whatever I can filch from my immediate vicinity. However, it would seem that my ability to value such would be in line with having a designer with a view for the greater scale of things; and the Cyrenaic school would be quite a befitting result to a blind, purposeless, "kill, eat, breed!" contingency.LocalMinimum_{April 3, 2018
April
04
Apr
3
03
2018
08:14 AM
8
08
14
AM
PDT}

LocalMinimum as to this claim you made:
"Additionally, I could still please myself with utterly pointless morality; my personal experience would remain unharmed in my ignorance."
And you would be wrong in your belief that you would 'remain unharmed' if you 'please myself with utterly pointless morality' i.e. with hedonism The genetic responses of humans are designed in a very sophisticated way so as to differentiate between hedonic and ‘noble’ moral happiness:
Human Cells Respond in Healthy, Unhealthy Ways to Different Kinds of Happiness - July 29, 2013 Excerpt: Human bodies recognize at the molecular level that not all happiness is created equal, responding in ways that can help or hinder physical health,,, The sense of well-being derived from “a noble purpose” may provide cellular health benefits, whereas “simple self-gratification” may have negative effects, despite an overall perceived sense of happiness, researchers found.,,, But if all happiness is created equal, and equally opposite to ill-being, then patterns of gene expression should be the same regardless of hedonic or eudaimonic well-being. Not so, found the researchers. Eudaimonic well-being was, indeed, associated with a significant decrease in the stress-related CTRA gene expression profile. In contrast, hedonic well-being was associated with a significant increase in the CTRA profile. Their genomics-based analyses, the authors reported, reveal the hidden costs of purely hedonic well-being.,, “We can make ourselves happy through simple pleasures, but those ‘empty calories’ don’t help us broaden our awareness or build our capacity in ways that benefit us physically,” she said. “At the cellular level, our bodies appear to respond better to a different kind of well-being, one based on a sense of connectedness and purpose.” http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/07/130729161952.htm
Thus, it is simply untrue that you would 'remain unharmed' by 'completely pointless morality'. And again as mentioned in post 139, the harmful effect of living a life of 'completely pointless morality', i.e. hedonism, is revealed in psychology:
“I maintain that whatever else faith may be, it cannot be a delusion. The advantageous effect of religious belief and spirituality on mental and physical health is one of the best-kept secrets in psychiatry and medicine generally. If the findings of the huge volume of research on this topic had gone in the opposite direction and it had been found that religion damages your mental health, it would have been front-page news in every newspaper in the land.” – Professor Andrew Sims former President of the Royal College of Psychiatrists – Is Faith Delusion?: Why religion is good for your health – preface “In the majority of studies, religious involvement is correlated with well-being, happiness and life satisfaction; hope and optimism; purpose and meaning in life; higher self-esteem; better adaptation to bereavement; greater social support and less loneliness; lower rates of depression and faster recovery from depression; lower rates of suicide and fewer positive attitudes towards suicide; less anxiety; less psychosis and fewer psychotic tendencies; lower rates of alcohol and drug use and abuse; less delinquency and criminal activity; greater marital stability and satisfaction… We concluded that for the vast majority of people the apparent benefits of devout belief and practice probably outweigh the risks.” – Professor Andrew Sims former President of the Royal College of Psychiatrists – Is Faith Delusion?: Why religion is good for your health – page 100 https://books.google.com/books?id=PREdCgAAQBAJ&pg=PA100#v=onepage&q&f=false Is Christianity Evil? (Mental Benefits of Christianity – Meta-analysis, 8:24 minute mark) – 2014 video https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=dgESPmh-TxY#t=504
Humans simply are moral creatures through and through,,,
The Moral Life of Babies – May 2010 Excerpt: From Sigmund Freud to Jean Piaget to Lawrence Kohlberg, psychologists have long argued that we begin life as amoral animals.,,, A growing body of evidence, though, suggests that humans do have a rudimentary moral sense from the very start of life. With the help of well-designed experiments, you can see glimmers of moral thought, moral judgment and moral feeling even in the first year of life. Some sense of good and evil seems to be bred in the bone.,,, Despite their overall preference for good actors over bad, then, babies are drawn to bad actors when those actors are punishing bad behavior. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/09/magazine/09babies-t.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0 Moral evaluations of harm are instant and emotional, brain study shows – November 29, 2012 Excerpt: People are able to detect, within a split second, if a hurtful action they are witnessing is intentional or accidental, new research on the brain at the University of Chicago shows. http://medicalxpress.com/news/2012-11-moral-instant-emotional-brain.html
Moreover, the following studies actually show that our moral intuition itself transcends space and time:
Quantum Consciousness – Time Flies Backwards? – Stuart Hameroff MD Excerpt: Dean Radin and Dick Bierman have performed a number of experiments of emotional response in human subjects. The subjects view a computer screen on which appear (at randomly varying intervals) a series of images, some of which are emotionally neutral, and some of which are highly emotional (violent, sexual….). In Radin and Bierman’s early studies, skin conductance of a finger was used to measure physiological response They found that subjects responded strongly to emotional images compared to neutral images, and that the emotional response occurred between a fraction of a second to several seconds BEFORE the image appeared! Recently Professor Bierman (University of Amsterdam) repeated these experiments with subjects in an fMRI brain imager and found emotional responses in brain activity up to 4 seconds before the stimuli. Moreover he looked at raw data from other laboratories and found similar emotional responses before stimuli appeared. http://www.quantumconsciousness.org/views/TimeFlies.html Can Your Body Sense Future Events Without Any External Clue? (meta-analysis of 26 reports published between 1978 and 2010) - (Oct. 22, 2012) Excerpt: "But our analysis suggests that if you were tuned into your body, you might be able to detect these anticipatory changes between two and 10 seconds beforehand,,, This phenomenon is sometimes called "presentiment," as in "sensing the future," but Mossbridge said she and other researchers are not sure whether people are really sensing the future. "I like to call the phenomenon 'anomalous anticipatory activity,'" she said. "The phenomenon is anomalous, some scientists argue, because we can't explain it using present-day understanding about how biology works; though explanations related to recent quantum biological findings could potentially make sense. It's anticipatory because it seems to predict future physiological changes in response to an important event without any known clues, and it's an activity because it consists of changes in the cardiopulmonary, skin and nervous systems." - per science daily
Also of interest, social isolation is also found to be harmful:
Social isolation and its health implications January 2012 Excerpt: Studies show that social isolation and/or loneliness predict morbidity and mortality from cancer, cardiovascular disease, and a host of other diseases. In fact, the body perceives loneliness as a threat. Research from the University of California suggests that loneliness or lack of social support could triple the odds of being diagnosed with a heart condition. Redford Williams and his colleagues at Duke University directed a study in 1992 on heart patients and their relationships. They discovered that 50% of patients with heart disease who did not have a spouse or someone to confide in died within five years, while only 17% of those who did have a confidante died in the same time period.12 http://www.how-to-be-healthy.org/social-isolation-and-its-health-implications/ ABC News - The Science Behind the Healing Power of Love - video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6t1p-PwGgE4
As well, solitary confinement is considered to be an 'extra' punishment in prison! Thus, apparently the Christian ethic of 'loving others as you love yourself' is also built into us at a very fundamental level. Thus in conclusion, the belief that one can just make up ones own meaning and morality for life as one goes along, or the belief that one can 'please myself with utterly pointless morality', i.e. with hedonism, is simply untrue. As Martin Luther King Jr. stated, 'we live in a moral universe'
“The first principle of value that we need to rediscover is this: that all reality hinges on moral foundations. In other words, that this is a moral universe, and that there are moral laws of the universe just as abiding as the physical laws.” - Martin Luther King Jr., A Knock at Midnight: Inspiration from the Great Sermons of Reverend Martin Luther King, Jr.
To claim you can live a life of 'pointless morality' is to ignore the fact we live in a 'moral universe'! Also of note, since atheists deny they have a soul, it is simply impossible for atheists to derive any true meaning and value for human life in the first place. Just how do you derive true meaning and value for a person from a materialistic philosophy that maintains transcendent values are illusory? Under materialism, your resale value is about one dollar?
How much is my body worth? Excerpt: The U.S. Bureau of Chemistry and Soils invested many a hard-earned tax dollar in calculating the chemical and mineral composition of the human body,,,,Together, all of the above (chemicals and minerals) amounts to less than one dollar! http://www.coolquiz.com/trivia/explain/docs/worth.asp
I would like to think, despite the atheistic atrocities of abortion, euthanasia, Nazism and Communism, that most people intuitively know that they are worth far more value than a dollar?!? Atheists simply have no way to derive any true meaning or value for human life. Whereas in Theism, particularly in Christianity, there is no trouble whatsoever figuring out how much humans are really worth, since infinite Almighty God himself, through Jesus Christ, redeemed our souls: Thus our souls, i.e. our very lives, are of infinite worth!
1 Corinthians 6:20 For ye are bought with a price: therefore glorify God in your body, and in your spirit, which are God’s. Matthew 16:26 And what do you benefit if you gain the whole world but lose your own soul? Is anything worth more than your soul? John 3:16 “For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. 1 Corinthians 2:9 But as it is written: “Eye has not seen, nor ear heard, Nor have entered into the heart of man The things which God has prepared for those who love Him.”
bornagain77_{April 3, 2018
April
04
Apr
3
03
2018
03:21 AM
3
03
21
AM
PDT}

I'm going to risk a rock to the head to say this: given consciousness, the experience is sufficiently enjoyable even if it's ultimately meaningless to just appreciate it. Additionally, I could still please myself with utterly pointless morality; my personal experience would remain unharmed in my ignorance. But, I would find that prohibitively difficult with Nietzsche; who pretty well pegged what materialism offers. Even reduced to felicific calculus, Christianity clearly has more utility than materialism. However, to consider my pursuit of morality I either have to deny materialism, or consider conscious experience and the emergence of creatures capable of chasing even imaginary morality possible within it; I can't support the latter. I mean, such mental function operates an uncounted number of degrees past the the immediate options that natural selection could punish less against. Never mind that materialism readily eats itself with its simultaneous demands of both the Copernican principle and the incredibly anthropocentric reduction of reality to human understanding.LocalMinimum_{April 2, 2018
April
04
Apr
2
02
2018
08:21 PM
8
08
21
PM
PDT}

Besides physics and chemistry revealing purpose for humanity, and to further drive the point home that Atheists, (i.e. neuronal illusions), are deluding themselves with their claim that "our self-admitted made up and imaginary purposes for our lives are just as real as the real purposes Christian's hold that they have for their lives",,, in regards to that false claim from atheists, it is good to note that psychology itself reveals that atheists are deluding themselves with their belief that their 'made up and imaginary purposes' are just as good, and 'real', as the Christian's purposes. The destructive effects of the hopeless nihilism inherent in the atheistic worldview is not to be warded off by such made up 'imaginary purposes' of atheists: Specifically,,,
“ I maintain that whatever else faith may be, it cannot be a delusion. The advantageous effect of religious belief and spirituality on mental and physical health is one of the best-kept secrets in psychiatry and medicine generally. If the findings of the huge volume of research on this topic had gone in the opposite direction and it had been found that religion damages your mental health, it would have been front-page news in every newspaper in the land.” - Professor Andrew Sims former President of the Royal College of Psychiatrists - Is Faith Delusion?: Why religion is good for your health - preface https://books.google.com/books?id=PREdCgAAQBAJ&pg=PR11#v=onepage&q&f=false “In the majority of studies, religious involvement is correlated with well-being, happiness and life satisfaction; hope and optimism; purpose and meaning in life; higher self-esteem; better adaptation to bereavement; greater social support and less loneliness; lower rates of depression and faster recovery from depression; lower rates of suicide and fewer positive attitudes towards suicide; less anxiety; less psychosis and fewer psychotic tendencies; lower rates of alcohol and drug use and abuse; less delinquency and criminal activity; greater marital stability and satisfaction… We concluded that for the vast majority of people the apparent benefits of devout belief and practice probably outweigh the risks.” - Professor Andrew Sims former President of the Royal College of Psychiatrists - Is Faith Delusion?: Why religion is good for your health – page 100 https://books.google.com/books?id=PREdCgAAQBAJ&pg=PA100#v=onepage&q&f=false Is Christianity Evil? (Mental Benefits of Christianity - Meta-analysis, 8:24 minute mark) - 2014 video https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=dgESPmh-TxY#t=504 Lack of ultimate meaning in life associated with alcohol abuse, drug addiction and other mental health problems - August 2015 http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/08/150813092911.htm Of snakebites and suicide - February 18, 2014 RESULTS: Religiously unaffiliated subjects had significantly more lifetime suicide attempts and more first-degree relatives who committed suicide than subjects who endorsed a religious affiliation. https://uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/of-snakebites-and-suicide/ Knowledge of the afterlife deters suicide. Lessons From the Light by Kenneth Ring and Evelyn Elsaesser p.257-258: As far as I know, the first clinician to make use of NDE material in this context was a New York psychologist named John McDonagh. In 1979, he presented a paper at a psychological convention that described his success with several suicidal patients using a device he called “NDE bibliotherapy.” His “technique” was actually little more than having his patients read some relevant passages from Raymond Moody’s book, Reflections on Life after Life, after which the therapist and his patient would discuss its implications for the latter’s own situation. McDonagh reports that such an approach was generally quite successful not only in reducing suicidal thoughts but also in preventing the deed altogether. … Since McDonagh’s pioneering efforts, other clinicians knowledgeable about the NDE who have had the opportunity to counsel suicidal patients have also reported similar success. Perhaps the most notable of these therapists is Bruce Greyson, a psychiatrist now at the University of Virginia, whose specialty as a clinician has been suicidology. He is also the author of a classic paper on NDEs and suicide which the specialist may wish to consult for its therapeutic implications. (14) Quite apart from the clinicians who have developed this form of what we might call “NDE-assisted therapy,” I can draw upon my own personal experience here to provide additional evidence of how the NDE has helped to deter suicide. The following case,,, http://ncu9nc.blogspot.com/2015/03/video-lecture-by-john-lennox-explains.html
One final note, choosing to believe in imaginary purposes so as to avoid dealing forthrightly with the devastating nihilistic implications inherent in their chosen worldview, is called 'living in denial'. Denialism is a mental illness in itself. But alas, atheists have a long history of choosing to believe in imaginary things rather than ever believing in God who is the source of all of reality: i.e. Atheists have a long history of 'living in denial'. Basically the atheist claims he is merely a ‘neuronal illusion’ (Coyne, Dennett), who has the illusion of free will (Harris), who has illusory perceptions of reality (Hoffman), who, since he has no real time empirical evidence substantiating his grandiose claims, must make up illusory “just so stories” with the illusory, and impotent, ‘designer substitute’ of natural selection (Behe, Gould, Sternberg), so as to ‘explain away’ the appearance (i.e. illusion) of design (Crick, Dawkins), and who must make up illusory meanings and purposes for his life since the reality of the nihilism inherent in his atheistic worldview is too much for him to bear (atheists in present thread). https://uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/the-ubiquitin-system-functional-complexity-and-semiosis-joined-together/#comment-655355 Bottom line, nothing is real in the atheists worldview, least of all, meaning and purposes for life. Verse:
2 Corinthians 10:5 Casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ;
bornagain77_{April 2, 2018
April
04
Apr
2
02
2018
04:29 PM
4
04
29
PM
PDT}

"Thick as a brick" JT Anywho- the point is under the ID scenario there is a reason for our existence. That means there is a greater purpose than just our own personal, mundane world. Some of that has been teased out in "The Privileged Planet" and subsequent work (Denton). And guess what? We get to have that personal purpose too! Under materialism we are nothing more than lucky accidents (SJ Gould). Anything we do and feel is OK. That we can do and feel is a miracle beyond miracles that we are unable to comprehend. So of course we would be forced to focus on the limited and mundane (never mind the fact that we wouldn't exist)ET_{April 2, 2018
April
04
Apr
2
02
2018
02:06 PM
2
02
06
PM
PDT}

Moreover, in 2013 Michael Denton's wrote a paper detailing the fact that chemistry itself is of maximum benefit 'for warm-blooded, air-breathing organisms such as ourselves'.
The Place of Life and Man in Nature: Defending the Anthropocentric Thesis - Michael J. Denton - February 25, 2013 Summary (page 11) Many of the properties of the key members of Henderson’s vital ensemble —water, oxygen, CO2, HCO3 —are in several instances fit specifically for warm-blooded, air-breathing organisms such as ourselves. These include the thermal properties of water, its low viscosity, the gaseous nature of oxygen and CO2 at ambient temperatures, the inertness of oxygen at ambient temperatures, and the bicarbonate buffer, with its anomalous pKa value and the elegant means of acid-base regulation it provides for air-breathing organisms. Some of their properties are irrelevant to other classes of organisms or even maladaptive. It is very hard to believe there could be a similar suite of fitness for advanced carbon-based life forms. If carbon-based life is all there is, as seems likely, then the design of any active complex terrestrial being would have to closely resemble our own. Indeed the suite of properties of water, oxygen, and CO2 together impose such severe constraints on the design and functioning of the respiratory and cardiovascular systems that their design, even down to the details of capillary and alveolar structure can be inferred from first principles. For complex beings of high metabolic rate, the designs actualized in complex Terran forms are all that can be. There are no alternative physiological designs in the domain of carbon-based life that can achieve the high metabolic activity manifest in man and other higher organisms. http://bio-complexity.org/ojs/index.php/main/article/view/BIO-C.2013.1/BIO-C.2013.1
In 2015, a video was made which highlighted Michael Denton's preceding paper
Privileged Species – How the cosmos is designed for human life - video (2015) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VoI2ms5UHWg
And again in 2016, Michael Denton's work was further highlighted in another video entitled 'Fire Maker”
Fire-Maker – Michael Denton - video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=an98jVCyApo A Reasonable, but Incomplete, Account of How Humans Mastered Fire - Michael Denton - August 4, 2016 In short, the discovery of fire, our subsequent mastery of it, and the road it opened up to an advanced technology were only possible because of our inhabiting a world almost exactly like planet earth, complete with atmospheric conditions exactly as they are, along with the properties of carbon and oxygen atoms (and indeed many of the other atoms of the periodic table), and because we possessed a unique anatomical design (including the hand) uniquely fit for fire-making. http://www.evolutionnews.org/2016/08/a_reasonable_bu103048.html
In this 2017 video, Michael Denton further elucidated that water has some properties that are of maximum benefit for humans in particular:
Water, Ultimate Giver of Life, Points to Intelligent Design https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e2i0g1sL-X4
And although the purported evidence for human evolution is far weaker and illusory than most people realize, as this following video and papers briefly highlight,,,
"Contested Bones" (Part 1 - Prologue and Chapter 1 "Power of the Paradigm") 1-27-2018 by Paul Giem https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e6ZOKj-YaHA&list=PLHDSWJBW3DNU_twNBjopIqyFOwo_bTkXm (March 2018) 1. The DNA similarity (between chimps and humans) is not nearly as close to 99% as Darwinists have falsely portrayed it to be. 2. Even if DNA were as similar as Darwinists have falsely portrayed it to be, the basic ‘form’ that any organism may take is not reducible to DNA, (nor is the basic ‘form’ reducible to any other material particulars in molecular biology, (proteins, RNAs, etc.. etc.. ,,), that Darwinists may wish to invoke. That is to say, ‘you can mutate DNA til the cows come home’ and you will still not achieve a fundamental change in the basic form of an organism. And since the basic ‘form’ of an organism is forever beyond the explanatory power of Darwinian mechanisms, then any belief that Darwinism explains the ‘transformation of forms’ for all of life on earth is purely a pipe dream that has no experimental basis in reality. 3. To further drive this point home, Dolphins and Kangaroos, although being very different morphologically from humans, are found to have very similar DNA sequences. 4. Where differences are greatest between chimps and humans are in alternative splicing patterns. In fact ., due to alternative slicing, “Alternatively spliced isoforms,,, appear to behave as if encoded by distinct genes rather than as minor variants of each other.,,,” and “As many as 100,000 distinct isoform transcripts could be produced from the 20,000 human protein-coding genes (Pan et al., 2008), collectively leading to perhaps over a million distinct polypeptides obtained by post-translational modification of products of all possible transcript isoforms,,” 5. Although the behavioral differences between man and apes are far greater than many Darwinists are willing to concede, the one difference that most dramatically separates man from apes, i.e. our ability to speak, is the one unique attribute that leading Darwinists themselves admit that they have no clue how it could have possibly evolved, and is also the one attribute that most distinctly indicates that we are indeed ‘made in the image of God’. https://uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/comparing-human-and-chimp-dna-using-a-software-analogy/#comment-654633
Although the purported evidence for human evolution is far weaker and illusory than most people realize, it is interesting to note that leading Darwinists themselves admit that they have no clue how evolution could have produced the particular trait of language in humans.
Leading Evolutionary Scientists Admit We Have No Evolutionary Explanation of Human Language – December 19, 2014 Excerpt: Understanding the evolution of language requires evidence regarding origins and processes that led to change. In the last 40 years, there has been an explosion of research on this problem as well as a sense that considerable progress has been made. We argue instead that the richness of ideas is accompanied by a poverty of evidence, with essentially no explanation of how and why our linguistic computations and representations evolved.,,, (Marc Hauser, Charles Yang, Robert Berwick, Ian Tattersall, Michael J. Ryan, Jeffrey Watumull, Noam Chomsky and Richard C. Lewontin, “The mystery of language evolution,” Frontiers in Psychology, Vol 5:401 (May 7, 2014).) Casey Luskin added: “It’s difficult to imagine much stronger words from a more prestigious collection of experts.” http://www.evolutionnews.org/2014/12/leading_evoluti092141.html
In other words, although humans are fairly defenseless creatures in the wild compared to other creatures, such as lions, bears, and sharks, etc.., nonetheless, humans have, completely contrary to Darwinian ‘survival of the fittest’ thinking, managed to become masters of the planet, not by brute force, but simply by our unique ability to communicate information and, more specifically, infuse information into material substrates,, What is more interesting still, besides the fact that humans have a unique ability to understand and create information and have become 'masters of the planet' through the ‘top-down’ infusion of information into material substrates, is the fact that, due to advances in science, both the universe and life itself are now found to be ‘information theoretic’ in their foundational basis. It is hard to imagine a more convincing scientific proof that we are made ‘in the image of God’ than finding both the universe, and life itself, are both ‘information theoretic’ in their foundational basis, and that we, of all the creatures on earth, uniquely possess an ability to understand and create information, and, moreover, have come to ‘master the planet’ precisely because of our unique ability infuse information into material substrates. Verses:
Genesis 1:26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. John 1:1-4 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by Him, and without Him was not anything made that was made. In Him was life, and that life was the Light of men.
Moreover, since the ability to assign meaning must preexist the creation of functional information, then finding functional information to be foundational to life is almost directly equivalent to finding that there must be a far deeper meaning for life
What Does "Life's Conservation Law" Actually Say? - Winston Ewert - December 3, 2015 Excerpt: All information must eventually derive from a source external to the universe, http://www.evolutionnews.org/2015/12/what_does_lifes101331.html
bornagain77_{April 2, 2018
April
04
Apr
2
02
2018
02:04 PM
2
02
04
PM
PDT}

jdk: Just FYI and FTR: Your last sentence, Origenes, makes the same mistake that ba77 does.
Just FYI and FTR: There is no mistake, jdk.Origenes_{April 2, 2018
April
04
Apr
2
02
2018
01:59 PM
1
01
59
PM
PDT}

In relation to photons from the CMB being 'such as to maximize the intensity of the CMB as observed by typical observers.', in the Privileged Planet video and book we find that "The very conditions that make Earth hospitable to intelligent life also make it well suited to viewing and analyzing the universe as a whole."
"The very conditions that make Earth hospitable to intelligent life also make it well suited to viewing and analyzing the universe as a whole." - Jay Richards - The Privileged Planet – video playlist https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ohuG3Vj_48&list=PLbzQ4aXdqWD-9kjFsSm-cxNlzgrkJuko7
Moreover, in the following video, astrophysicist Dr. Hugh Ross reveals that We Live At The Right Time In Cosmic History to see the Cosmic Background Radiation, or as he put it in the video, we live at the right time to see 'God creating the universe':
We Live At The Right Time In Cosmic History to see the Cosmic Background Radiation - Hugh Ross – video (7:12 minute mark) https://youtu.be/MxOGeqVOsvc?t=431
As well, in relation to living at the right time in cosmic history to see God creating the universe, in the following article Dr. Hugh Ross, via Brandon Carter and the anthropic inequality, reveals that we also just so happen live in the narrow window of what he termed to be the human habitability time
Anthropic Principle: A Precise Plan for Humanity By Hugh Ross Excerpt: Brandon Carter, the British mathematician who coined the term “anthropic principle” (1974), noted the strange inequity of a universe that spends about 15 billion years “preparing” for the existence of a creature that has the potential to survive no more than 10 million years (optimistically).,, Carter and (later) astrophysicists John Barrow and Frank Tipler demonstrated that the inequality exists for virtually any conceivable intelligent species under any conceivable life-support conditions. Roughly 15 billion years represents a minimum preparation time for advanced life: 11 billion toward formation of a stable planetary system, one with the right chemical and physical conditions for primitive life, and four billion more years toward preparation of a planet within that system, one richly layered with the biodeposits necessary for civilized intelligent life. Even this long time and convergence of “just right” conditions reflect miraculous efficiency. Moreover the physical and biological conditions necessary to support an intelligent civilized species do not last indefinitely. They are subject to continuous change: the Sun continues to brighten, Earth’s rotation period lengthens, Earth’s plate tectonic activity declines, and Earth’s atmospheric composition varies. In just 10 million years or less, Earth will lose its ability to sustain human life. In fact, this estimate of the human habitability time window may be grossly optimistic. In all likelihood, a nearby supernova eruption, a climatic perturbation, a social or environmental upheaval, or the genetic accumulation of negative mutations will doom the species to extinction sometime sooner than twenty thousand years from now. http://christiangodblog.blogspot.com/2006_12_01_archive.html
Moreover, although atheists assume that planets that are able to support intelligent life are fairly common in the universe, the fact of the matter is the probability of finding another planet that is able to support life in this universe is virtually impossible. These following videos and article drive this point home:
The Probability of Life's Existence Elsewhere in the Universe - Dr. Hugh Ross - (1 in 10^239) - (19:16 minute mark) https://youtu.be/B3TghMIVjvc?t=1156 On the Origin and Design of the Universe – Dr. Michael Strauss – video (privileged planet 37:30 minute mark) https://vimeo.com/9031779 Linked from Appendix C from Dr. Ross's book, 'Why the Universe Is the Way It Is'; Probability Estimates for the Features Required by Various Life Forms: Excerpt: Requirements to sustain intelligent physical life: Probability for occurrence of all 816 parameters approx. 10^-1333 dependency factors estimate approx. 10^-324 longevity requirements estimate approx. 10^45 Probability for occurrence of all 816 parameters approx. 10^-1054 Maximum possible number of life support bodies in observable universe approx. 10^22 Thus, less than 1 chance in 10^1032 exists that even one such life-support body would occur anywhere in the universe without invoking divine miracle http://www.reasons.org/files/compendium/compendium_part3.pdf
In further establishing our centrality in this vast universe, in the following video, physicist Neil Turok states that we live in the middle, or at the geometric mean, between the largest scale in physics and the smallest scale in physics:
“So we can go from 10 to the plus 25 to 10 to the minus 35. Now where are we? Well the size of a living cell is about 10 to the minus 5. Which is halfway between the two. In mathematical terms, we say it is the geometric mean. We live in the middle between the largest scale in physics,,, and the tiniest scale [in physics].” - Neil Turok as quoted at the 14:40 minute mark The Astonishing Simplicity of Everything - Neil Turok Public Lecture – video (12:00 minute mark, we live in the geometric mean, i.e. the middle, of the universe) https://youtu.be/f1x9lgX8GaE?t=715
Here is a picture that gets his point across very clearly:
The Scale: 10^-35m to 10^-5m to 10^25m - picture http://www.timeone.ca/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/Robbert-Dijkgraaf-Planck-scale.jpg
The following interactive graph is also very interesting to the topic of geometric ‘centrality in the universe’:
The Scale of The Universe - Part 2 - interactive graph (updated in 2012 with cool features) http://htwins.net/scale2/scale2.swf?bordercolor=white
As you can see, the preceding interactive graph pegs the geometric mean at 10^-4 meters , which just so happens to correspond to the limits to human vision as well as the size of the human egg. This is very interesting for, as far as I can tell, the limits to human vision as well as the size of the human egg could have, theoretically, been at very different positions than directly at the geometric mean.bornagain77_{April 2, 2018
April
04
Apr
2
02
2018
01:56 PM
1
01
56
PM
PDT}

Moreover, there are Anomalies in the Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation that strangely line up with the solar system and earth.
Why is the solar system cosmically aligned? BY Dragan Huterer - 2007 The solar system seems to line up with the largest cosmic features. Is this mere coincidence or a signpost to deeper insights? Caption under figure on page 43: ODD ALIGNMENTS hide within the multipoles of the cosmic microwave background. In this combination of the quadrupole and octopole, a plane bisects the sphere between the largest warm and cool lobes. The ecliptic — the plane of Earth’s orbit projected onto the celestial sphere — is aligned parallel to the plane between the lobes. http://www-personal.umich.edu/~huterer/PRESS/CMB_Huterer.pdf
Here is the graph of the alignment of the CMB with the plane of the earth’s orbit from the Huterer 2007 paper:
Here is the actual graph of the alignment from the Huterer 2007 paper (worth a thousand words): http://i44.servimg.com/u/f44/16/14/18/96/axis_o10.jpg
The following study indicated that the observed alignments are with the ecliptic plane, with the equinox, or with the CMB dipole, and not with the Galactic plane:
Large-Angle Anomalies in the CMB - 2010 Excerpt Our studies (see [14]) indicate that the observed alignments are with the ecliptic plane, with the equinox, or with the CMB dipole, and not with the Galactic plane: the alignments of the quadrupole and octopole planes with the equinox/ecliptic/dipole directions are much more significant than those for the Galactic plane. Moreover, it is remarkably curious that it is precisely the ecliptic alignment that has been found on somewhat smaller scales using the power spectrum analyses of statistical isotropy, http://www.hindawi.com/journals/aa/2010/847541/
Here is a 2013 Planck papers which further confirmed Huterer's 2007 paper:
Large-scale alignments from WMAP and Planck – 2013 We revisit the alignments of the largest structures observed in the cosmic microwave background (CMB) using the seven and nine-year WMAP and first-year Planck data releases. The observed alignments — the quadrupole with the octopole and their joint alignment with the direction of our motion with respect to the CMB (the dipole direction) and the geometry of the Solar System (defined by the Ecliptic plane) — are generally in good agreement with results from the previous WMAP data releases.,,, both the WMAP and Planck data confirm the alignments of the largest observable CMB modes in the Universe. http://arxiv.org/abs/1311.4562
The Anomalies in the CMB that correlate back to the solar system and the earth were dubbed the Axis of Evil because of the damage it does to current theories
What Is Evil About The Axis Of Evil? - February 17, 2015 Excerpt: The Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB) Radiation contains small temperature fluctuations. When these temperature fluctuations are analyzed using image processing techniques (specifically spherical harmonics), they indicate a special direction in space, or, in a sense, an axis through the universe. This axis is correlated back to us, and causes many difficulties for the current big bang and standard cosmology theories. What has been discovered is shocking. Two scientists, Kate Land and João Magueijo, in a paper in 2005 describing the axis, dubbed it the “Axis of Evil” because of the damage it does to current theories, and (tongue in cheek) as a response to George Bush’ Axis of Evil speech regarding Iraq, Iran and, North Korea. (Youtube clip on site) In the above video, Max Tegmark describes in a simplified way how spherical harmonics analysis decomposes the small temperature fluctuations into more averaged and spatially arranged temperature components, known as multipoles. The “Axis of Evil” correlates to the earth’s ecliptic and equinoxes, and this represents a very unusual and unexpected special direction in space, a direct challenge to the Copernican Principle. http://www.theprinciplemovie.com/evil-axis-evil/
And at the 13:55 minute mark of this following video, Max Tegmark, an atheist, finally admits, post Planck 2013, that the CMB anomalies do indeed line up with the earth and solar system
"Thoughtcrime: The Conspiracy to Stop The Principle" - video https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=0eVUSDy_rO0#t=832
Moreover besides the earth and solar system lining up with the anomalies in the Cosmic Background Radiation, Radio Astronomy now reveals a surprising rotational coincidence for Earth in relation to the quasar and radio galaxy distributions in the universe:
Is there a violation of the Copernican principle in radio sky? - Ashok K. Singal - May 17, 2013 Abstract: Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation (CMBR) observations from the WMAP satellite have shown some unexpected anisotropies (directionally dependent observations), which surprisingly seem to be aligned with the ecliptic\cite {20,16,15}. The latest data from the Planck satellite have confirmed the presence of these anisotropies\cite {17}. Here we report even larger anisotropies in the sky distributions of powerful extended quasars and some other sub-classes of radio galaxies in the 3CRR catalogue, one of the oldest and most intensively studies sample of strong radio sources\cite{21,22,3}. The anisotropies lie about a plane passing through the two equinoxes and the north celestial pole (NCP). We can rule out at a 99.995% confidence level the hypothesis that these asymmetries are merely due to statistical fluctuations. Further, even the distribution of observed radio sizes of quasars and radio galaxies show large systematic differences between these two sky regions. The redshift distribution appear to be very similar in both regions of sky for all sources, which rules out any local effects to be the cause of these anomalies. Two pertinent questions then arise. First, why should there be such large anisotropies present in the sky distribution of some of the most distant discrete sources implying inhomogeneities in the universe at very large scales (covering a fraction of the universe)? What is intriguing even further is why such anisotropies should lie about a great circle decided purely by the orientation of earth's rotation axis and/or the axis of its revolution around the sun? It looks as if these axes have a preferential placement in the larger scheme of things, implying an apparent breakdown of the Copernican principle or its more generalization, cosmological principle, upon which all modern cosmological theories are based upon. http://arxiv.org/pdf/1305.4134.pdf
Moreover, in the following paper, Robin Collins found that photons coming from the CMB are 'such as to maximize the intensity of the CMB as observed by typical observers.'
The Fine-Tuning for Discoverability - Robin Collins - March 22, 2014 Excerpt: Predictive and Explanatory Power of Discoverability - Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation ,,, The most dramatic confirmation of the discoverability/livability optimality thesis (DLO) is the dependence of the Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation (CMB) on the baryon to photon ratio.,,, ,,, The only livability effect this ratio has is on whether or not galaxies can form that have near - optimally livability zones. As long as this condition is met, the value of this ratio has no further effects on livability. Hence, the DLO predicts that within this range, the value of this ratio will be such as to maximize the intensity of the CMB as observed by typical observers. According to my calculations – which have been verified by three other physicists -- to within the margin of error of the experimentally determined parameters (~20%), the value of the photon to baryon ratio is such that it maximizes the CMB. This is shown in Figure 1 below. (pg. 13) This is a case of a teleological thesis serving both a predictive and an ultimate explanatory role.,,, http://home.messiah.edu/~rcollins/Fine-tuning/Greer-Heard%20Forum%20paper%20draft%20for%20posting.pdf
bornagain77_{April 2, 2018
April
04
Apr
2
02
2018
01:54 PM
1
01
54
PM
PDT}

“The human race is just a chemical scum on a moderate-sized planet, orbiting around a very average star in the outer suburb of one among a hundred billion galaxies. We are so insignificant that I can't believe the whole universe exists for our benefit.,,,” - Stephen Hawking - 1995 TV show, Reality on the Rocks: Beyond Our Ken, “human life has no more meaning than that of slime mould.” John Gray - Straw Dogs: Thoughts on Humans and Other Animals - page 33 - 2002
"If God does not exist, then life is futile. If the God of the Bible does exist, then life is meaningful. Only the second of these two alternatives enables us to live happily and consistently." - William Lane Craig
The Absurdity of Life Without God - William Lane Craig Conclusion Now I want to make it clear that I have not yet shown biblical Christianity to be true. But what I have done is clearly spell out the alternatives. If God does not exist, then life is futile. If the God of the Bible does exist, then life is meaningful. Only the second of these two alternatives enables us to live happily and consistently. Therefore, it seems to me that even if the evidence for these two options were absolutely equal, a rational person ought to choose biblical Christianity. It seems to me positively irrational to prefer death, futility, and destruction to life, meaningfulness, and happiness. As Pascal said, we have nothing to lose and infinity to gain. https://www.bethinking.org/is-there-meaning-to-life/the-absurdity-of-life-without-god
Moreover, science itself now refutes the atheistic claim that “human life has no more meaning than that of slime mould.” Contrary to what is believed by the vast majority of people today about the Copernican Principle, apparently by both Christians and atheists alike, recent advances in science have restored the earth and humanity to a special, even central, position within the universe. First off, in the 4 dimensional spacetime of Einstein's General Relativity, we find that each 3-Dimensional point in the universe is central to the expansion of the universe,,,
Where is the centre of the universe?: Excerpt: There is no centre of the universe! According to the standard theories of cosmology, the universe started with a "Big Bang" about 14 thousand million years ago and has been expanding ever since. Yet there is no centre to the expansion; it is the same everywhere. The Big Bang should not be visualized as an ordinary explosion. The universe is not expanding out from a centre into space; rather, the whole universe is expanding and it is doing so equally at all places, as far as we can tell. http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/GR/centre.html
,,, and since any 3-Dimensional point can be considered central in the 4-Dimensional space time of General Relativity, then it is now left completely open to whomever is making a model of the universe to decide for themselves what is to be considered central in the universe,,,
How Einstein Revealed the Universe’s Strange “Nonlocality” – George Musser | Oct 20, 2015 Excerpt: Under most circumstances, we can ignore this nonlocality. You can designate some available chunk of matter as a reference point and use it to anchor a coordinate grid. You can, to the chagrin of Santa Barbarans, take Los Angeles as the center of the universe and define every other place with respect to it. In this framework, you can go about your business in blissful ignorance of space’s fundamental inability to demarcate locations.,, In short, Einstein’s theory is nonlocal in a more subtle and insidious way than Newton’s theory of gravity was. Newtonian gravity acted at a distance, but at least it operated within a framework of absolute space. Einsteinian gravity has no such element of wizardry; its effects ripple through the universe at the speed of light. Yet it demolishes the framework, violating locality in what was, for Einstein, its most basic sense: the stipulation that all things have a location. General relativity confounds our intuitive picture of space as a kind of container in which material objects reside and forces us to search for an entirely new conception of place. http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-einstein-revealed-the-universe-s-strange-nonlocality/
Einstein himself stated, The two sentences: “the sun is at rest and the earth moves” or “the sun moves and the earth is at rest” would simply mean two different conventions concerning two different CS [coordinate systems].”
“Can we formulate physical laws so that they are valid for all CS [coordinate systems], not only those moving uniformly, but also those moving quite arbitrarily, relative to each other? […] The struggle, so violent in the early days of science, between the views of Ptolemy and Copernicus would then be quite meaningless. Either CS could be used with equal justification. The two sentences: “the sun is at rest and the earth moves” or “the sun moves and the earth is at rest” would simply mean two different conventions concerning two different CS.” Einstein, A. and Infeld, L. (1938) The Evolution of Physics, p.212 (p.248 in original 1938 ed.);
Fred Hoyle and George Ellis add their considerable weight here in these following two quotes:
“The relation of the two pictures [geocentrism and geokineticism] is reduced to a mere coordinate transformation and it is the main tenet of the Einstein theory that any two ways of looking at the world which are related to each other by a coordinate transformation are entirely equivalent from a physical point of view…. Today we cannot say that the Copernican theory is ‘right’ and the Ptolemaic theory ‘wrong’ in any meaningful physical sense.” Hoyle, Fred. Nicolaus Copernicus. London: Heinemann Educational Books Ltd., 1973. “People need to be aware that there is a range of models that could explain the observations… For instance, I can construct you a spherically symmetrical universe with Earth at its center, and you cannot disprove it based on observations… You can only exclude it on philosophical grounds… What I want to bring into the open is the fact that we are using philosophical criteria in choosing our models. A lot of cosmology tries to hide that.” – George Ellis – W. Wayt Gibbs, “Profile: George F. R. Ellis,” Scientific American, October 1995, Vol. 273, No.4, p. 55
As Einstein himself notes, there simply is no test that can be performed that can prove the earth is not the center of the universe:
“One need not view the existence of such centrifugal forces as originating from the motion of K’ [the Earth]; one could just as well account for them as resulting from the average rotational effect of distant, detectable masses as evidenced in the vicinity of K’ [the Earth], whereby K’ [the Earth] is treated as being at rest.” –Albert Einstein, quoted in Hans Thirring, “On the Effect of Distant Rotating Masses in Einstein’s Theory of Gravitation”, Physikalische Zeitschrift 22, 29, 1921 “If one rotates the shell *relative to the fixed stars* about an axis going through its center, a Coriolis force arises in the interior of the shell, *that is, the plane of a Foucault pendulum is dragged around*” –Albert Einstein, cited in “Gravitation”, Misner Thorne and Wheeler pp. 544-545.
Here are a few more references that drives this point home:
"We can't feel our motion through space, nor has any physical experiment ever proved that the Earth actually is in motion.,,, If all the objects in space were removed save one, then no one could say whether that one remaining object was at rest or hurtling through the void at 100,000 miles per second" Historian Lincoln Barnett - "The Universe and Dr. Einstein" - pg 73 (contains a foreword by Albert Einstein) “…Thus we may return to Ptolemy’s point of view of a ‘motionless earth’… One has to show that the transformed metric can be regarded as produced according to Einstein’s field equations, by distant rotating masses. This has been done by Thirring. He calculated a field due to a rotating, hollow, thick-walled sphere and proved that inside the cavity it behaved as though there were centrifugal and other inertial forces usually attributed to absolute space. Thus from Einstein’s point of view, Ptolemy and Copernicus are equally right.” Born, Max. “Einstein’s Theory of Relativity”, Dover Publications,1962, pgs 344 & 345:
Even Stephen Hawking himself, who claimed that we are just chemical scum on an insignificant planet, stated that it is not true that Copernicus proved Ptolemy wrong,,, the real advantage of the Copernican system is simply that the equations of motion are much simpler in the frame of reference in which the sun is at rest.”
“So which is real, the Ptolemaic or Copernican system? Although it is not uncommon for people to say that Copernicus proved Ptolemy wrong, that is not true. As in the case of our normal view versus that of the goldfish, one can use either picture as a model of the universe, for our observations of the heavens can be explained by assuming either the earth or the sun to be at rest. Despite its role in philosophical debates over the nature of our universe, the real advantage of the Copernican system is simply that the equations of motion are much simpler in the frame of reference in which the sun is at rest.” Stephen Hawking – The Grand Design – pages 39 – 2010
Even individual people can be considered to be central in the universe according to the four-dimensional space-time of General Relativity,,,
You Technically Are the Center of the Universe – May 2016 Excerpt: (due to the 1 in 10^120 finely tuned expansion of the 4-D space-time of General Relativity) no matter where you stand, it will appear that everything in the universe is expanding around you. So the center of the universe is technically — everywhere. The moment you pick a frame of reference, that point becomes the center of the universe. Here's another way to think about it: The sphere of space we can see around us is the visible universe. We're looking at the light from stars that's traveled millions or billions of years to reach us. When we reach the 13.8 billion-light-year point, we're seeing the universe just moments after the Big Bang happened. But someone standing on another planet, a few light-years to the right, would see a different sphere of the universe. It's sort of like lighting a match in the middle of a dark room: Your observable universe is the sphere of the room that the light illuminates. But someone standing in a different spot in the room will be able to see a different sphere. So technically, we are all standing at the center of our own observable universes. https://mic.com/articles/144214/you-technically-are-the-center-of-the-universe-thanks-to-a-wacky-physics-quirk
,,, In fact, when Einstein's formulated both Special and General relativity, he gave a hypothetical observer a privileged frame of reference in which to make measurements in the universe.
Introduction to special relativity Excerpt: Einstein's approach was based on thought experiments, calculations, and the principle of relativity, which is the notion that all physical laws should appear the same (that is, take the same basic form) to all inertial observers.,,, Each observer has a distinct "frame of reference" in which velocities are measured,,,, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Introduction_to_special_relativity The happiest thought of my life. Excerpt: In 1920 Einstein commented that a thought came into his mind when writing the above-mentioned paper he called it “the happiest thought of my life”: “The gravitational field has only a relative existence… Because for an observer freely falling from the roof of a house – at least in his immediate surroundings – there exists no gravitational field.” http://physics.ucr.edu/~wudka/Physics7/Notes_www/node85.html
Whereas, on the other hand, in Quantum Mechanics it is the measurement itself that gives each observer a privileged frame of reference in the universe.
Experiment confirms quantum theory weirdness - May 27, 2015 Excerpt: Common sense says the object is either wave-like or particle-like, independent of how we measure it. But quantum physics predicts that whether you observe wave like behavior (interference) or particle behavior (no interference) depends only on how it is actually measured at the end of its journey. This is exactly what the ANU team found. "It proves that measurement is everything. At the quantum level, reality does not exist if you are not looking at it," said Associate Professor Andrew Truscott from the ANU Research School of Physics and Engineering. http://phys.org/news/2015-05-quantum-theory-weirdness.html
In fact, in quantum mechanics humans are brought into the laws of physics at the most fundamental level instead of humans being a result of the laws of physics as Darwinists had falsely imagined us to be.
The Trouble with Quantum Mechanics - Steven Weinberg - January 19, 2017 Excerpt: The instrumentalist approach,, (the) wave function,, is merely an instrument that provides predictions of the probabilities of various outcomes when measurements are made.,, In the instrumentalist approach,,, humans are brought into the laws of nature at the most fundamental level. According to Eugene Wigner, a pioneer of quantum mechanics, “it was not possible to formulate the laws of quantum mechanics in a fully consistent way without reference to the consciousness.”11 Thus the instrumentalist approach turns its back on a vision that became possible after Darwin, of a world governed by impersonal physical laws that control human behavior along with everything else. It is not that we object to thinking about humans. Rather, we want to understand the relation of humans to nature, not just assuming the character of this relation by incorporating it in what we suppose are nature’s fundamental laws, but rather by deduction from laws that make no explicit reference to humans. We may in the end have to give up this goal,,, Some physicists who adopt an instrumentalist approach argue that the probabilities we infer from the wave function are objective probabilities, independent of whether humans are making a measurement. I don’t find this tenable. In quantum mechanics these probabilities do not exist until people choose what to measure, such as the spin in one or another direction. Unlike the case of classical physics, a choice must be made,,, http://www.nybooks.com/articles/2017/01/19/trouble-with-quantum-mechanics/
Richard Conn Henry who is Professor of Physics at John Hopkins University states “It is more than 80 years since the discovery of quantum mechanics gave us the most fundamental insight ever into our nature: the overturning of the Copernican Revolution, and the restoration of us human beings to centrality in the Universe.”
"It is more than 80 years since the discovery of quantum mechanics gave us the most fundamental insight ever into our nature: the overturning of the Copernican Revolution, and the restoration of us human beings to centrality in the Universe. And yet, have you ever before read a sentence having meaning similar to that of my preceding sentence? Likely you have not, and the reason you have not is, in my opinion, that physicists are in a state of denial, and have fears and agonies that are very similar to the fears and agonies that Copernicus and Galileo went through with their perturbations of society." Richard Conn Henry - Professor of Physics - John Hopkins University http://henry.pha.jhu.edu/quantum.enigma.html
bornagain77_{April 2, 2018
April
04
Apr
2
02
2018
01:51 PM
1
01
51
PM
PDT}

Just FYI and FTR: Your last sentence, Origenes, makes the same mistake that ba77 does.jdk_{April 2, 2018
April
04
Apr
2
02
2018
01:51 PM
1
01
51
PM
PDT}

jdk @
jdk: As I have said before, in different ways, ba77 and others who believe as he does do not get to define unilaterally what “real” meaning is.
You were wrong then and you are wrong now. As per usual jdk, you do not understand. Nowhere does BA77 define what real meaning is — nor does he need to. Read the sentences you quoted again, this time with understanding:
BA77: … it is not a matter of me ‘making up my mind’ as to whether or not real meaning and purpose can be derived from a worldview that denies real meaning and purpose exists in the first place. It simply follows straightforwardly from the law of non-contradiction.

jdk: The quoted sentence is a tautology wherein the premise includes the conclusion.
No, it is not. It does not say what you think it says.
jdk: It says that a worldview that doesn’t agree with him about what “real” meaning is can’t have any “real”” meaning …
Not at all, jdk. Not at all. It says that one (obviously) cannot derive real meaning and purpose from a worldview (materialism) that denies the existence of real meaning and purpose.Origenes_{April 2, 2018
April
04
Apr
2
02
2018
01:43 PM
1
01
43
PM
PDT}

Allan Keith:
More small minded than those who rely on others to tell them what meaning and purpose their lives have?
Small minded enough to make up stupid stuff like that
Then it should be perfect for you
Fortunately I am too smart to accept materialism as anything but a failed philosophy
So, the purpose and meaning that your life has comes from a grand designer, but he doesn’t tell you what it is.
Wrong again. That seems to be your specialty.
Your designer is a jerk.
Not when compared to youET_{April 2, 2018
April
04
Apr
2
02
2018
12:59 PM
12
12
59
PM
PDT}

ET,
Right, the small-minded kind unable to grasp the larger purpose.
More small minded than those who rely on others to tell them what meaning and purpose their lives have?
Simplicity for the simple minded.
Then it should be perfect for you. :)
Strawman. No one is telling us. The mere fact that we are part of a grand intelligent design says it all.
So, the purpose and meaning that your life has comes from a grand designer, but he doesn’t tell you what it is. Your designer is a jerk.Allan Keith_{April 2, 2018
April
04
Apr
2
02
2018
12:56 PM
12
12
56
PM
PDT}

jdk:
As I have said before, in different ways, ba77 and others who believe as he does do not get to define unilaterally what “real” meaning is.
You do not get to tell us what we can define. :razz:
The quoted sentence is a tautology wherein the premise includes the conclusion.
That doesn't make it false or untrue.ET_{April 2, 2018
April
04
Apr
2
02
2018
12:51 PM
12
12
51
PM
PDT}

Allan Keith:
Whatever meaning and purpose my life has is what I chose it to have.
Right, the small-minded kind unable to grasp the larger purpose.
It’s easy to do if you are capable of reasoning.
Simplicity for the simple minded
But if you need someone else to tell you the purpose and meaning of your life, go for it.
Strawman. No one is telling us. The mere fact that we are part of a grand intelligent design says it all.ET_{April 2, 2018
April
04
Apr
2
02
2018
12:49 PM
12
12
49
PM
PDT}

ba77 writes,
Actually Allan Keith it is not a matter of me ‘making up my mind’ as to whether or not real meaning and purpose can be derived from a worldview that denies real meaning and purpose exists in the first place.
As I have said before, in different ways, ba77 and others who believe as he does do not get to define unilaterally what "real" meaning is. The quoted sentence is a tautology wherein the premise includes the conclusion. It says that a worldview that doesn't agree with him about what "real" meaning is can't have any "real"" meaning, because the only kind of "real" meaning that exists is "real" meaning as ba77 defines it. Totally circular.jdk_{April 2, 2018
April
04
Apr
2
02
2018
12:46 PM
12
12
46
PM
PDT}

BA77,
Here is a hint to your fundamental problem with logic AK, something cannot be both real and unreal at the same time. Think about that. Take as long as you need.
I don’t need to think about it. Whatever meaning and purpose my life has is what I chose it to have. It’s easy to do if you are capable of reasoning. But if you need someone else to tell you the purpose and meaning of your life, go for it.Allan Keith_{April 2, 2018
April
04
Apr
2
02
2018
12:33 PM
12
12
33
PM
PDT}

Wow, Allan Keith really told me! I am devastatedET_{April 2, 2018
April
04
Apr
2
02
2018
11:59 AM
11
11
59
AM
PDT}

Actually Allan Keith it is not a matter of me 'making up my mind' as to whether or not real meaning and purpose can be derived from a worldview that denies real meaning and purpose exists in the first place. It simply follows straightforwardly from the law of non-contradiction. The law of non-contradiction is pretty much like breathing for humans. No thinking is required. It happens automatically, even for infants.
Babies have logical reasoning before age one Deductive problem solving was previously thought to be beyond the reach of infants - November 18, 2015 https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/11/151118131813.htm Deductive_Logic - The most certain of all basic principles is that contradictory propositions are not true simultaneously. ... This principle forms the foundation of reason, and especially of deductive logic. The goal of deductive logic is to derive the most powerful claims possible within the law of non-contradiction. https://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Deductive_Logic
Here is a hint to your fundamental problem with logic AK, something cannot be both real and unreal at the same time. Think about that. Take as long as you need. :)bornagain77_{April 2, 2018
April
04
Apr
2
02
2018
11:27 AM
11
11
27
AM
PDT}

ET,
Translation- Allan Keith doesn’t have a clue and doesn’t want people to see it is a poseur.
Says the person who doesn’t post under his real name. Meh.Allan Keith_{April 2, 2018
April
04
Apr
2
02
2018
10:27 AM
10
10
27
AM
PDT}

Translation- Allan Keith doesn't have a clue and doesn't want people to see it is a poseurET_{April 2, 2018
April
04
Apr
2
02
2018
09:33 AM
9
09
33
AM
PDT}

BA77,
But anyways, please do elaborate on how one derives real meaning and purpose from a worldview that denies any real meaning and purpose exists.
No. I would rather not waste my time explaining something that you have already made up your mind about.Allan Keith_{April 2, 2018
April
04
Apr
2
02
2018
09:29 AM
9
09
29
AM
PDT}

Water Is 'Designer Fluid' That Helps Proteins Change Shape - 2008 Excerpt: "When bound to proteins, water molecules participate in a carefully choreographed ballet that permits the proteins to fold into their functional, native states. This delicate dance is essential to life." http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/08/080806113314.htm Scientists glimpse why life can't happen without water - June 20, 2016 Water molecules control protein motion, study finds Excerpt: Water molecules typically flow around each other at picosecond speeds, while proteins fold at nanosecond speeds--1,000 times slower. Previously, Zhong's group demonstrated that water molecules slow down when they encounter a protein. Water molecules are still moving 100 times faster than a protein when they connect with it, however. In the new study, the researchers were able to determine that the water molecules directly touched the protein's "side chains," the portions of the protein molecule that bind and unbind with each other to enable folding and function. The researchers were also able to note the timing of movement in the molecules. Computer simulations at the Ohio Supercomputer Center (OSC) helped the researchers visualize what was going on: where the water moved a certain way, the protein folded nanoseconds later, as if the water molecules were nudging the protein into shape. https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/06/160620160214.htm "If the earth were slightly larger, it of course would have slightly larger gravity, which has interesting implications. It's not just that a person who weighs 150 pounds would weigh more. It's that if the earth had slightly more gravity than it now has, methane and ammonia gas, which have molecular weights of sixteen and seventeen, respectfully, would remain close to our surface. Since we cannot breathe methane and ammonia, which are toxic, we would die. More to the point, we would have never come into existence in the first place.,,, On the other hand, if earth were just a tiny bit smaller and had a bit less gravity, water vapor, which has a molecular weight of 18, would not stay down here close to the planet's surface but would instead dissipate into the planets atmosphere. Obviously, without water we could not exist." Eric Metaxas - Miracles - pages 38-39 Rains On Different Worlds - info graphic (sulfuric acid rain, glass rain, diamond rain, iron rain, methane rain) http://tehgeektive.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/rain-on-different-planets.jpg The Place of Life and Man in Nature: Defending the Anthropocentric Thesis - Michael J. Denton - February 25, 2013 Summary (page 11) Many of the properties of the key members of Henderson’s vital ensemble —water, oxygen, CO2, HCO3 —are in several instances fit specifically for warm-blooded, air-breathing organisms such as ourselves. These include the thermal properties of water, its low viscosity, the gaseous nature of oxygen and CO2 at ambient temperatures, the inertness of oxygen at ambient temperatures, and the bicarbonate buffer, with its anomalous pKa value and the elegant means of acid-base regulation it provides for air-breathing organisms. Some of their properties are irrelevant to other classes of organisms or even maladaptive. It is very hard to believe there could be a similar suite of fitness for advanced carbon-based life forms. If carbon-based life is all there is, as seems likely, then the design of any active complex terrestrial being would have to closely resemble our own. Indeed the suite of properties of water, oxygen, and CO2 together impose such severe constraints on the design and functioning of the respiratory and cardiovascular systems that their design, even down to the details of capillary and alveolar structure can be inferred from first principles. For complex beings of high metabolic rate, the designs actualized in complex Terran forms are all that can be. There are no alternative physiological designs in the domain of carbon-based life that can achieve the high metabolic activity manifest in man and other higher organisms. http://bio-complexity.org/ojs/index.php/main/article/view/BIO-C.2013.1/BIO-C.2013.1 Privileged Species – Michael Denton - video (2015) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VoI2ms5UHWg
Thus contrary to what Seversky and AK would prefer to believe, water gives every indication of being designed for a purpose. And that purpose, according to research done by Michael Denton, especially includes us!bornagain77_{April 1, 2018
April
04
Apr
1
01
2018
04:58 PM
4
04
58
PM
PDT}

To elaborate on ET's 'Privileged Planet' comment at 111,,
The purpose of the rivers is to move and dissolve minerals and nutrients. To irrigate the lands.
If any molecule ever gave evidence of being designed, it is the water molecule: When we look at water, the most common substance on earth (covering 71% of the surface) and in our bodies, (averaging around 57-60% for adults), we find many odd characteristics which clearly appear to be designed. These oddities are absolutely essential for life on earth. Some simple life can exist without the direct energy of sunlight, some simple life can exist without oxygen; but no life can exist without water. Water is called a universal solvent because it has the unique ability to dissolve a far wider range of substances than any other solvent. This 'universal solvent' ability of water is essential to dissolve minerals and nutrients in the first place and also for the cells of living organisms to process the wide range of substances necessary for life. Another oddity is water expands as it becomes ice, by an increase of about 9% in volume. Thus, water floats when it becomes a solid instead of sinking. This is an exceedingly rare ability. Water is the only non-metallic substance on Earth with this property. Yet if it were not for this fact, lakes and oceans would freeze from the bottom up. The earth would be a frozen wasteland, and human life would not be possible. Water also has the unusual ability to pull itself into very fine tubes and small spaces, defying gravity. This is called capillary action. This action is essential for the breakup of mineral bearing rocks into soil. Water pulls itself into tiny spaces on the surface of a rock and freezes; it expands and breaks the rock into tinier pieces, thus producing soil. Capillary action is also essential for the movement of water through soil to the roots of plants. It is also essential for the movement of water from the roots to the tops of the plants, even to the tops of the mighty redwood trees,,,
Prometheus Unbound: The Fitness of Nature for Large Trees - Michael Denton March 27, 2015 Excerpt: Many conditions must be met if large woody trees are to be possible.,,, (evaporative cooling, slow breakdown of lignin, and viscosity of water, are discussed),,, Concluding paragraph: Without the ensemble of unique fitness that raises water in trees there would be no wood, fire, metallurgy, or modern technology. Nor would you be reading these paragraphs; nature would not be properly fit for mankind to utilize his cognitive powers to understand the world. It is wonderfully fitting that this unique and stunningly elegant mechanism is intimately related to our role as explorers and manipulators of the world, providing a further indicator supportive of the anthropocentric notion of a world order focused on our being. http://www.evolutionnews.org/2015/03/prometheus_unbo094751.html
,,,Capillary action is also essential for the circulation of the blood in our very own capillary blood vessels. Water's melting and boiling point are not where common sense would indicate they should be when we look at its molecular weight. The three sister compounds of water all behave as would be predicted by their molecular weight. Oddly, water just happens to have melting and boiling points that are of optimal biological utility. The other properties of water we measure, like its specific slipperiness (viscosity) and its ability to absorb and release more heat than any other natural substance, have to be as they are in order for life to be possible on earth. Even the oceans have to be the size they are in order to stabilize the temperature of the earth so human life may be possible.
Oceans vital for possibility for alien life - July 20, 2014 Excerpt: "Oceans have an immense capacity to control climate. They are beneficial because they cause the surface temperature to respond very slowly to seasonal changes in solar heating. And they help ensure that temperature swings across a planet are kept to tolerable levels. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/07/140720203459.htm Water-Land Ratio of Habitable Planets - 2015 Excerpt: In addition, recent studies on habitability of planets suggest that the water-land ratio must be similar to the Earth. That is, the water mass fraction should not be far from that of the Earth’s (~0.01wt%): planets with too much water (> 1 wt%)-“ocean planets”-lead to an unstable climate and lack of nutrient supply; and water-poor planets like Venus -“dune planets”-become too arid for inhabiting. https://uncommondescent.com/extraterrestrial-life/water-land-ratio-of-habitable-planets/ Study: Deep beneath the earth, more water than in all the oceans combined - June 16, 2014 Excerpt: And its a good thing, too, Jacobsen told New Scientist: “We should be grateful for this deep reservoir. If it wasn’t there, it would be on the surface of the Earth, and mountain tops would be the only land poking out.” https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2014/06/16/study-deep-beneath-north-america-theres-more-water-than-in-all-the-oceans-combined/
On and on through each characteristic we can possibly measure water with, it turns out to be required to be exactly or almost exactly as it is for complex life on this earth to be possible. No other liquid in the universe comes anywhere near matching water in its fitness for life (Denton: Nature's Destiny). Here are more notes on the wondrous life enabling properties of water:
Multiple ‘anomalous’ life enabling properties of water http://www.lsbu.ac.uk/water/anmlies.html Water, Ultimate Giver of Life, Points to Intelligent Design – (Michael Denton 2017) video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e2i0g1sL-X4 The Wonder of Water at the Nanoscale - December 21, 2017 https://evolutionnews.org/2017/12/the-wonder-of-water-at-the-nanoscale/ Water's remarkable capabilities - December 2010 - Peer Reviewed Excerpt: All these traits are contained in a simple molecule of only three atoms. One of the most difficult tasks for an engineer is to design for multiple criteria at once. ... Satisfying all these criteria in one simple design is an engineering marvel. Also, the design process goes very deep since many characteristics would necessarily be changed if one were to alter fundamental physical properties such as the strong nuclear force or the size of the electron. http://www.evolutionnews.org/2010/12/pro-intelligent_design_peer_re042211.html Water's quantum weirdness makes life possible - October 2011 Excerpt: WATER'S life-giving properties exist on a knife-edge. It turns out that life as we know it relies on a fortuitous, but incredibly delicate, balance of quantum forces.,,, They found that the hydrogen-oxygen bonds were slightly longer than the deuterium-oxygen ones, which is what you would expect if quantum uncertainty was affecting water’s structure. “No one has ever really measured that before,” says Benmore. We are used to the idea that the cosmos’s physical constants are fine-tuned for life. Now it seems water’s quantum forces can be added to this “just right” list. http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg21228354.900-waters-quantum-weirdness-makes-life-possible.html
bornagain77_{April 1, 2018
April
04
Apr
1
01
2018
04:58 PM
4
04
58
PM
PDT}

Allan Keith:
Except that the drinking water testing methods can’t detect it when it is present.
Right, they detect for E coli and then clean it all up. The bad E coli is part of that.
Any good for what?
The intelligent design of the earth.
Why would bacteria care if their waste products can be used by something else?
What does it matter what they care about?ET_{April 1, 2018
April
04
Apr
1
01
2018
04:43 PM
4
04
43
PM
PDT}

The same question is for you Seversky, might as well crack to nuts with one stone.bornagain77_{April 1, 2018
April
04
Apr
1
01
2018
04:30 PM
4
04
30
PM
PDT}

Just today's purpose. And just a squirrel cracking a Darwinian NUT! But purpose it is! But anyways, please do elaborate on how one derives real meaning and purpose from a worldview that denies any real meaning and purpose exists. Perhaps you can go back to the beginning of your worldview, i.e. of you being a neuronal illusion with illusory free will, and then work out from there to derive 'real' meaning and purpose. This should be interesting. I'll go get the popcorn: https://gifer.com/en/5gqbornagain77_{April 1, 2018
April
04
Apr
1
01
2018
04:23 PM
4
04
23
PM
PDT}

BA77,
Thus since you are hopeless, my goal, and purpose, has been to expose you for the fraud you are. Thanks for cooperating so magnanimously in this endeavor! ????
That seems like an awfully small and meaningless goal and purpose to have in life. But if my existence is required to bring meaning to your life, I am more than happy to serve that purpose. :)Allan Keith_{April 1, 2018
April
04
Apr
1
01
2018
04:10 PM
4
04
10
PM
PDT}

ET,
Right, rogue E coli is such a pathogen.
Except that the drinking water testing methods can’t detect it when it is present.
It’s part of the design. Inert dirt isn’t any good.
Any good for what? Why would bacteria care if their waste products can be used by something else?Allan Keith_{April 1, 2018
April
04
Apr
1
01
2018
04:06 PM
4
04
06
PM
PDT}

1 2 3 … 5 Next

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Leave a Reply