Reason to Believe’s Fuz Rana on the logic of life

_{Denyse O'Leary

October 26, 2014

Intelligent Design, News, Origin Of Life}

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

Because of my responsibilities at Reasons to Believe, I spend a lot of time reading scientific magazines and journals. While I can make my way quickly through most of the articles, sometimes it takes me hours—even days—to read and process a single item published in a scientific journal, including those that are just a few pages long. And it’s not just the article length that determines my reading speed. The subject matter and organization of the piece make a difference, too.

Similar constraints confront the cell’s machinery when it reads, copies, and processes the information housed in genes. The rate of transcription depends on gene length. Longer genes take more time to transcribe than shorter ones. But researchers from Portugal have just discovered that genes’ content and organization also influence their transcription rate.

This new insight provides researchers with a better understanding of how gene expression occurs in the early stages of embryo development. It also highlights the elegant design and exquisite molecular logic of biological systems—a feature that reflects the work of a Mind.

See also: The Science Fictions series at your fingertips (origin of life)

Follow UD News at Twitter!

Comments

Atheism stunts Science, Theism inspires Science. Making a claim like "Einstein was NOT thinking about God as he was theorizing" is downright incorrect. The Scientific Awesomeness of God inspires so deeply. Maxwell used specific God Inspiration to invent. Larry Krauss is Atheist Inspired Science. "Something from"Nothing"". Gee Lar, thanks. Tyson is Atheist Science. Maybe he will write a Science Paper someday. Bill Nye can peer review. Atheist Science is a joke.ppolish_{October 28, 2014
October
10
Oct
28
28
2014
08:38 AM
8
08
38
AM
PDT}

Moreover, atheists trying to use math to try prove that God does not exist is a bit like a fish trying to prove that water does not exist An Interview with David Berlinski – Jonathan Witt Berlinski: There is no argument against religion that is not also an argument against mathematics. Mathematicians are capable of grasping a world of objects that lies beyond space and time …. Interviewer:… Come again(?) … Berlinski: No need to come again: I got to where I was going the first time. The number four, after all, did not come into existence at a particular time, and it is not going to go out of existence at another time. It is neither here nor there. Nonetheless we are in some sense able to grasp the number by a faculty of our minds. Mathematical intuition is utterly mysterious. So for that matter is the fact that mathematical objects such as a Lie Group or a differentiable manifold have the power to interact with elementary particles or accelerating forces. But these are precisely the claims that theologians have always made as well – that human beings are capable by an exercise of their devotional abilities to come to some understanding of the deity; and the deity, although beyond space and time, is capable of interacting with material objects. http://tofspot.blogspot.com/2013/10/found-upon-web-and-reprinted-here.html i.e. atheists sit in God’s lap in order to be able to slap him,, “Hawking’s entire argument is built upon theism. He is, as Cornelius Van Til put it, like the child who must climb up onto his father’s lap into order to slap his face. Take that part about the “human mind” for example. Under atheism there is no such thing as a mind. There is no such thing as understanding and no such thing as truth. All (Stephen) Hawking is left with is a box, called a skull, which contains a bunch of molecules. Hawking needs God in order to deny Him.” - Cornelius Hunter – picture https://fbcdn-sphotos-c-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-xpa1/v/t1.0-9/10344804_736790473055959_5027794313726938258_n.png?oh=32dcc64a81815fd8fbf5884ea44490ed&oe=548E8745&__gda__=1418537725_911886dd89430d275c0e393a46afdb55 The Atheist’s Guide to Intellectual Suicide – James N. Anderson, PhD – video https://vimeo.com/75897668 “Either mathematics is too big for the human mind or the human mind is more than a machine.” - Kurt Gödelbornagain77_{October 28, 2014
October
10
Oct
28
28
2014
08:17 AM
8
08
17
AM
PDT}

A Quantum Hologram of Christ's Resurrection? by Chuck Missler Excerpt: “You can read the science of the Shroud, such as total lack of gravity, lack of entropy (without gravitational collapse), no time, no space—it conforms to no known law of physics.” The phenomenon of the image brings us to a true event horizon, a moment when all of the laws of physics change drastically. Dame Piczek created a one-fourth size sculpture of the man in the Shroud. When viewed from the side, it appears as if the man is suspended in mid air (see graphic, below), indicating that the image defies previously accepted science. The phenomenon of the image brings us to a true event horizon, a moment when all of the laws of physics change drastically. http://www.khouse.org/articles/2008/847 THE EVENT HORIZON (Space-Time Singularity) OF THE SHROUD OF TURIN. - Isabel Piczek - Particle Physicist Excerpt: We have stated before that the images on the Shroud firmly indicate the total absence of Gravity. Yet they also firmly indicate the presence of the Event Horizon. These two seemingly contradict each other and they necessitate the past presence of something more powerful than Gravity that had the capacity to solve the above paradox. http://shroud3d.com/findings/isabel-piczek-image-formation That gravity, (i.e. General Relativity), was defied in the resurrection of Christ is verified in more detail here: Particle Radiation from the Body - July 2012 - M. Antonacci, A. C. Lind Excerpt: The Shroud’s frontal and dorsal body images are encoded with the same amount of intensity, independent of any pressure or weight from the body. The bottom part of the cloth (containing the dorsal image) would have born all the weight of the man’s supine body, yet the dorsal image is not encoded with a greater amount of intensity than the frontal image. Radiation coming from the body would not only explain this feature, but also the left/right and light/dark reversals found on the cloth’s frontal and dorsal body images. http://www.academicjournals.org/sre/PDF/pdf2012/30JulSpeIss/Antonacci.pdf That Quantum Mechanics was involved in the resurrection of Christ is verified here: The absorbed energy in the Shroud body image formation appears as contributed by discrete values - Giovanni Fazio, Giuseppe Mandaglio - 2008 Excerpt: This result means that the optical density distribution,, can not be attributed at the absorbed energy described in the framework of the classical physics model. It is, in fact, necessary to hypothesize a absorption by discrete values of the energy where the 'quantum' is equal to the one necessary to yellow one fibril. http://cab.unime.it/journals/index.php/AAPP/article/view/C1A0802004/271 Shroud Of Turin Is Authentic, Italian Study Suggests - December 2011 Excerpt: Last year scientists were able to replicate marks on the cloth using highly advanced ultraviolet techniques that weren’t available 2,000 years ago — nor during the medieval times, for that matter.,,, Since the shroud and “all its facets” still cannot be replicated using today’s top-notch technology, researchers suggest it is impossible that the original image could have been created in either period. http://www.thegopnet.com/shroud-of-turin-is-authentic-italian-study-suggests-87037 Scientific hypotheses on the origin of the body image of the Shroud - 2010 Excerpt: for example, if we consider the density of radiation that we used to color a single square centimeter of linen, to reproduce the entire image of the Shroud with a single flash of light would require fourteen thousand lasers firing simultaneously each on a different area of linen. In other words, it would take a laser light source the size of an entire building. http://www.30giorni.it/articoli_id_22597_l3.htm Scientists say Turin Shroud is supernatural - December 2011 Excerpt: After years of work trying to replicate the colouring on the shroud, a similar image has been created by the scientists. However, they only managed the effect by scorching equivalent linen material with high-intensity ultra violet lasers, undermining the arguments of other research, they say, which claims the Turin Shroud is a medieval hoax. Such technology, say researchers from the National Agency for New Technologies, Energy and Sustainable Economic Development (Enea), was far beyond the capability of medieval forgers, whom most experts have credited with making the famous relic. "The results show that a short and intense burst of UV directional radiation can colour a linen cloth so as to reproduce many of the peculiar characteristics of the body image on the Shroud of Turin," they said. And in case there was any doubt about the preternatural degree of energy needed to make such distinct marks, the Enea report spells it out: "This degree of power cannot be reproduced by any normal UV source built to date." http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/scientists-say-turin-shroud-is-supernatural-6279512.html Thus, in so far as empirical science is concerned, and considering the abject failure of sting/M theory to provide a coherent 'theory of everything', and also considering that there very well may be 'no viable alternative to string/M-theory', and despite the rebellion of many scientists against the Christian foundation of modern science, the resurrection of Christ provides us a very credible, empirically backed, even 'predicted', unification of General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics into the much sought after 'theory of everything', i.e. into 'The Truth' that all these physicists and mathematicians are looking for: Verses and Music: John 14:6 Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me. Matthew 28:18 Then Jesus came to them and said, "All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Colossians 1:16-19 For by Him were all things created that are in heaven and that are on earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones or dominions or principalities or powers: all things were created by Him and for Him. And He is before all things, and by Him all things consist. And He is the head of the body, the church. He is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, that in all things He might have the preeminence. For it pleased the Father that in Him should all fullness dwell, Chris Tomlin - Indescribable http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7PTvr755V8sbornagain77_{October 28, 2014
October
10
Oct
28
28
2014
08:10 AM
8
08
10
AM
PDT}

But alas, since the time of the founding of modern science, modern science has all but lost its Judeo-Christian moorings that had laid the foundation for modern science: A Heavyweight Look at the Negative Impact of Modern and Postmodern Philosophies - Casey Luskin April 22, 2014 Excerpt: (Paul Gosselin, Flight from the Absolute: Cynical Observations on the Postmodern West) ,,,He concludes: "Before the twentieth-century, this symbiotic relationship between science and Christianity was the norm, but since then the Enlightenment and modern propaganda have 'buried' it, keeping such facts out of view." (p. 122) According to Gosselin, this is just another way that modernist philosophy has engaged in a form of intellectual fracking, trying to destroy the theological, philosophical, and other intellectual foundations that built the West. http://www.evolutionnews.org/2014/04/flight_from_the084581.html Moreover, as foreign as it may sound to people who have indoctrinated by the deception that Christianity and science are at war with each other, the fact of the matter is that Christianity, besides providing the necessary epistemological basis in which to practice modern science, Christianity also provides a empirically backed reconcilliation of General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics into the much sought out 'theory of everything'. In other words, Christianity provides a 'viable alternative to string/M-theory'. Psalm 118:22 The stone which the builders rejected Has become the chief corner stone. of note: Kurt Godel, who proved you cannot have a mathematical ‘Theory of Everything’, without allowing God to bring completeness to the 'Theory of Everything', also had this to say: The God of the Mathematicians – Goldman Excerpt: As Gödel told Hao Wang, “Einstein’s religion [was] more abstract, like Spinoza and Indian philosophy. Spinoza’s god is less than a person; mine is more than a person; because God can play the role of a person.” Kurt Gödel – (Gödel is considered one of the greatest logicians who ever existed) http://www.firstthings.com/article/2010/07/the-god-of-the-mathematicians The main problem with trying to unify General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics into a 'theory of everything' is known as the zero/infinity problem,,, THE MYSTERIOUS ZERO/INFINITY Excerpt: The biggest challenge to today's physicists is how to reconcile general relativity and quantum mechanics. However, these two pillars of modern science were bound to be incompatible. "The universe of general relativity is a smooth rubber sheet. It is continuous and flowing, never sharp, never pointy. Quantum mechanics, on the other hand, describes a jerky and discontinuous universe. What the two theories have in common - and what they clash over - is zero.",, "The infinite zero of a black hole -- mass crammed into zero space, curving space infinitely -- punches a hole in the smooth rubber sheet. The equations of general relativity cannot deal with the sharpness of zero. In a black hole, space and time are meaningless.",, "Quantum mechanics has a similar problem, a problem related to the zero-point energy. The laws of quantum mechanics treat particles such as the electron as points; that is, they take up no space at all. The electron is a zero-dimensional object,,, According to the rules of quantum mechanics, the zero-dimensional electron has infinite mass and infinite charge. http://www.fmbr.org/editoral/edit01_02/edit6_mar02.htm Quantum Mechanics and Relativity – The Collapse Of Physics? – video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wHHz4mB9GKY Of related note: General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics are both ‘higher dimensional’ in their mathematical formulation: The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural Sciences – Eugene Wigner – 1960 Excerpt: We now have, in physics, two theories of great power and interest: the theory of quantum phenomena and the theory of relativity.,,, The two theories operate with different mathematical concepts: the four dimensional Riemann space and the infinite dimensional Hilbert space, http://www.dartmouth.edu/~matc/MathDrama/reading/Wigner.html The Mathematics Of Higher Dimensionality – Gauss & Riemann https://vimeo.com/98188985 Dr. William Dembski in this following comment, though not directly addressing the Zero/Infinity conflict in General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics, offers insight into how this Zero/Infinity conflict between General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics may be dealt with Theologically: The End Of Christianity - Finding a Good God in an Evil World - Pg.31 William Dembski PhD. Mathematics Excerpt: "In mathematics there are two ways to go to infinity. One is to grow large without measure. The other is to form a fraction in which the denominator goes to zero. The Cross is a path of humility in which the infinite God becomes finite and then contracts to zero, only to resurrect and thereby unite a finite humanity within a newfound infinity." http://www.designinference.com/documents/2009.05.end_of_xty.pdf And, contrary to string/M theory, which has no empirical support, Christianity does have empirical support for its contention that Jesus Christ is 'The Truth' which unifies all of reality. Specifically, the resurrection of Christ, as is portrayed on the Shroud of Turin, offers evidence that both Quantum Mechanics and General Relativity were brought together into a 'new singularity', i.e. into a 'theory of everything': Turin shroud – ( Particle Physicist explains event horizon) - video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HHVUGK6UFK8bornagain77_{October 28, 2014
October
10
Oct
28
28
2014
08:09 AM
8
08
09
AM
PDT}

"Show me in their scientific work where God is included anywhere in the calculations." Peter Woit, Professor at Colombia University asks: "Are there any plausible alternatives to string/M-theory as a fundamental theory of physics? Does string theory make any cosmological predictions? Does it exclude anything? As far as I can tell, there’s an odd consensus set of answers to these two questions among string theorists. No, string theory makes no predictions about cosmology, but also no, there are no alternatives." Contrary to what Professor Woit, and other theoretical physicists, may believe, I firmly believe that there is a very viable alternative to string/M-theory. First, in laying this 'viable alternative' case out, it is important to note that even if there were a mathematically unified theory of everything, such as string/M-theory, that that mathematical theory would still would be incomplete. Kurt Gödel - Incompleteness Theorem – video https://vimeo.com/92387853 In other words, Godel has shown, (by studying the 'logic of infinity'), that the truthfulness of any equation that is precise enough to have counting numbers within itself is not derived from within the mathematical equation itself, but the truthfulness of the mathematical equation is reliant on something outside the equation in order for the equation to derive whatever truthfulness about the world it is said to be describing. Taking God Out of the Equation - Biblical Worldview - by Ron Tagliapietra - January 1, 2012 Excerpt: Kurt Gödel (1906–1978) proved that no logical systems (if they include the counting numbers) can have all three of the following properties. 1. Validity ... all conclusions are reached by valid reasoning. 2. Consistency ... no conclusions contradict any other conclusions. 3. Completeness ... all statements made in the system are either true or false. The details filled a book, but the basic concept was simple and elegant. He (Godel) summed it up this way: “Anything you can draw a circle around cannot explain itself without referring to something outside the circle—something you have to assume but cannot prove.” For this reason, his proof is also called the Incompleteness Theorem. http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/am/v7/n1/equation# Godel and Physics - John D. Barrow Excerpt (page 5-6): "Clearly then no scientific cosmology, which of necessity must be highly mathematical, can have its proof of consistency within itself as far as mathematics go. In absence of such consistency, all mathematical models, all theories of elementary particles, including the theory of quarks and gluons...fall inherently short of being that theory which shows in virtue of its a priori truth that the world can only be what it is and nothing else. This is true even if the theory happened to account for perfect accuracy for all phenomena of the physical world known at a particular time." Stanley Jaki - Cosmos and Creator - 1980, pg. 49 http://arxiv.org/pdf/physics/0612253.pdf In other words, if physicists and mathematicians want to find 'The Truth' that unifies all of reality into a coherent whole then they must ultimately look outside mathematics to find 'The Truth': Even Hawking himself at one time admitted, (and apparently subsequently forgot), that there cannot be a mathematical theory of everything that is 'complete' within itself. The nature and significance of Gödel’s incompleteness theorems - Princeton - 2006 Excerpt: ,,Stephen Hawking and Freeman Dyson, among others, have come to the conclusion that Gödel’s theorem implies that there can’t be a (mathematical) Theory of Everything.,, http://math.stanford.edu/~feferman/papers/Godel-IAS.pdf The main reason that mathematics, by itself, cannot explain why the universe is as it it is is best summed up in these following articles by George Ellis and Dr. Bruce Gordon: Physicist George Ellis Knocks Physicists for Knocking Philosophy, Falsification, Free Will - July 22, 2014 Excerpt: "As I stated above, mathematical equations only represent part of reality, and should not be confused with reality. A specific related issue: there is a group of people out there writing papers based on the idea that physics is a computational process. But a physical law is not an algorithm. So who chooses the computational strategy and the algorithms that realize a specific physical law? (Finite elements perhaps?) What language is it written in? (Does Nature use Java or C++? What machine code is used?) Where is the CPU? What is used for memory, and in what way are read and write commands executed? Additionally if it’s a computation, how does Nature avoid the halting problem? It’s all a very bad analogy that does not work." http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/cross-check/2014/07/22/physicist-george-ellis-knocks-physicists-for-knocking-philosophy-free-will/ "to say that a stone falls to earth because it's obeying a law, makes it a man and even a citizen" - CS Lewis BRUCE GORDON: Hawking’s irrational arguments – October 2010 Excerpt: ,,,The physical universe is causally incomplete and therefore neither self-originating nor self-sustaining. The world of space, time, matter and energy is dependent on a reality that transcends space, time, matter and energy. This transcendent reality cannot merely be a Platonic realm of mathematical descriptions, for such things are causally inert abstract entities that do not affect the material world,,, Rather, the transcendent reality on which our universe depends must be something that can exhibit agency – a mind that can choose among the infinite variety of mathematical descriptions and bring into existence a reality that corresponds to a consistent subset of them. This is what “breathes fire into the equations and makes a universe for them to describe.” Anything else invokes random miracles as an explanatory principle and spells the end of scientific rationality.,,, Universes do not “spontaneously create” on the basis of abstract mathematical descriptions, nor does the fantasy of a limitless multiverse trump the explanatory power of transcendent intelligent design. What Mr. Hawking’s contrary assertions show is that mathematical savants can sometimes be metaphysical simpletons. Caveat emptor. http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/oct/1/hawking-irrational-arguments/ The Christian founders of modern science understood this distinction between law and law giver, who 'breathed fire into the equations', very well The God Particle: Not the God of the Gaps, But the Whole Show - John Lennox - Monday, Aug. 2012 Excerpt: C. S. Lewis put it this way: "Men became scientific because they expected law in nature and they expected law in nature because they believed in a lawgiver." http://www.christianpost.com/news/the-god-particle-not-the-god-of-the-gaps-but-the-whole-show-80307/ "This most beautiful system of the sun, planets, and comets, could only proceed from the counsel and dominion of an intelligent and powerful Being.,,, This Being governs all things, not as the soul of the world, but as Lord over all; and on account of his dominion he is wont to be called Lord God pantokrator, or Universal Ruler;,,, Sir Isaac Newton - Quoted from what many consider the greatest science masterpiece of all time, his book "Principia" http://gravitee.tripod.com/genschol.htm The Genius and Faith of Faraday and Maxwell - Ian H. Hutchinson - 2014 Conclusion: Lawfulness was not, in their thinking, inert, abstract, logical necessity, or complete reducibility to Cartesian mechanism; rather, it was an expectation they attributed to the existence of a divine lawgiver. These men’s insights into physics were made possible by their religious commitments. For them, the coherence of nature resulted from its origin in the mind of its Creator. http://www.thenewatlantis.com/publications/the-genius-and-faith-of-faraday-and-maxwellbornagain77_{October 28, 2014
October
10
Oct
28
28
2014
08:08 AM
8
08
08
AM
PDT}

thorton, all of the scientists mentioned used science as a way of understanding God's Creation. OTOH no one is doing any blind watchmaker research nor using that for any guidance.Joe_{October 28, 2014
October
10
Oct
28
28
2014
08:07 AM
8
08
07
AM
PDT}

Axel
Try and get something right, Thorton, there’s a good chap.
Why don't you demonstrate what I got wrong? Or you could just keep up the empty bluster like the rest of the Creationists here. You guys are sure good at it.Thorton_{October 28, 2014
October
10
Oct
28
28
2014
07:50 AM
7
07
50
AM
PDT}

Andre
What was that Thornton?
That was some scientists expressing their personal believe in a God. Show me in their scientific work where God is included anywhere in the calculations.Thorton_{October 28, 2014
October
10
Oct
28
28
2014
07:47 AM
7
07
47
AM
PDT}

Try and get something right, Thorton, there's a good chap. They'll be missing you at that Panda's Thumb place - they even managed to make fools of themselves via the name they chose for themselves, I believe! I sometimes wonder if you keep misspelling your name. The evidence mounts....Axel_{October 28, 2014
October
10
Oct
28
28
2014
07:40 AM
7
07
40
AM
PDT}

Extreme Software Design In Cells – Stephen Meyer - video https://vimeo.com/110179934bornagain77_{October 28, 2014
October
10
Oct
28
28
2014
06:37 AM
6
06
37
AM
PDT}

Extreme Software Design In Cells - Stephen Meyer - video http://www.metacafe.com/watch/5495397/ The handwriting in our DNA - December 27, 2013 Excerpt: Stephen C. Meyer,, told cnsnews.com the story of a former Microsoft software engineer: "He walks into my office one day, throws a book down on the table. It's called Design Patterns -- standard textbook for computer design engineers -- and he says, 'I get the eerie feeling, when I'm looking at what's going on in the cell, that's somebody's figured this out before us.' And I said, 'What do you mean?' And he says, 'Well, it's the design patterns,' and then he points to the book. . . . 'We've got design logic for processing information, for doing error correction, for doing distributed data retrieval and reassembly, and for hierarchical organization -- we've got files within folders, like on your desktop, you know, in the hierarchical filing system.' And he says, 'All those design patterns are inside the cell, except they're using a design logic that's like an 8.0, 9.0, 10.0 version of ours. It's the same basic logic, but it's more elegantly executed,' and he says, 'It gives me an eerie feeling.'" http://www.newsday.com/opinion/oped/o-reilly-the-handwriting-in-our-dna-1.6683000 Human DNA is like a computer program but far, far more advanced than any software we've ever created. Bill Gates, The Road Ahead, 1996, p. 188 Second, third, fourth… genetic codes - One spectacular case of code crowding - Edward N. Trifonov - video https://vimeo.com/81930637 In the preceding video, Trifonov elucidates codes that are, simultaneously, in the same sequence, coding for DNA curvature, Chromatin Code, Amphipathic helices, and NF kappaB. In fact, at the 58:00 minute mark he states, "Reading only one message, one gets three more, practically GRATIS!". And please note that this was just an introductory lecture in which Trifinov just covered the very basics and left many of the other codes out of the lecture. Codes which code for completely different, yet still biologically important, functions. In fact, at the 7:55 mark of the video, there are 13 codes that are listed on a powerpoint, although the writing was too small for me to read. Design In DNA – Alternative Splicing, Duons, and Dual coding genes – video (5:05 minute mark) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bm67oXKtH3s#t=305 'It's becoming extremely problematic to explain how the genome could arise and how these multiple levels of overlapping information could arise, since our best computer programmers can't even conceive of overlapping codes. The genome dwarfs all of the computer information technology that man has developed. So I think that it is very problematic to imagine how you can achieve that through random changes in the code.,,, and there is no Junk DNA in these codes. More and more the genome looks likes a super-super set of programs.,, More and more it looks like top down design and not just bottom up chance discovery of making complex systems.' - Dr. John Sanford http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=YemLbrCdM_s#t=31sbornagain77_{October 27, 2014
October
10
Oct
27
27
2014
08:55 AM
8
08
55
AM
PDT}

"All matter originates and exists only by virtue of a force... We must assume behind this force the existence of a conscious and intelligent Mind. This Mind is the matrix of all matter." Max Planck “This most beautiful system of the sun, planets and comets, could only proceed from the counsel and dominion of an intelligent and powerful Being.” Isaac Newton "A little philosophy inclineth man's mind to atheism, but depth in philosophy bringeth men's minds about to religion." Francis Bacon I want to know how God created this world. I am not interested in this or that phenomenon, in the spectrum of this or that element. I want to know his thoughts. The rest are details. Albert Einstein What was that Thornton?Andre_{October 27, 2014
October
10
Oct
27
27
2014
12:53 AM
12
12
53
AM
PDT}

“God has, in fact, written two books, not just one. Of course, we are all familiar with the first book he wrote, namely Scripture. But he has written a second book called creation.” ? Francis Bacon "This most beautiful system of the sun, planets, and comets, could only proceed from the counsel and dominion of an intelligent and powerful Being.,, This Being governs all things, not as the soul of the world, but as Lord over all; and on account of his dominion he is wont to be called Lord God pantokrator, or Universal Ruler;,,," Sir Isaac Newton - Quoted from what many consider the greatest science masterpiece of all time, his book "Principia" http://gravitee.tripod.com/genschol.htm “All matter originates and exists only by virtue of a force which brings the particle of an atom to vibration and holds this most minute solar system of the atom together. We must assume behind this force the existence of a conscious and intelligent mind. This mind is the matrix of all matter.” ? Max Planck “I want to know God's thoughts - the rest are mere details.” ? Albert Einsteinbornagain77_{October 26, 2014
October
10
Oct
26
26
2014
04:04 PM
4
04
04
PM
PDT}

ppolish
Thornton, I think Bacon, Newton, Planck, Einstein, and a multitude of other Great Scientists would have disagreed with your assessment. Darwin invoked the Creator in the last sentence of Origins even. Wake up and smell that coffee Thorton.
Nope. Not a single one of those men invoked a God in any of their scientific research or discoveries. Sure they were all religious men but they all took great pains to keep their personal religious beliefs out of the laboratory. That's a matter of record. Science just doesn't do the supernatural.Thorton_{October 26, 2014
October
10
Oct
26
26
2014
03:05 PM
3
03
05
PM
PDT}

contrary to what Thorton falsely claims, modern science was born out of, and is STILL very much dependent on, Theistic presuppositions.
The Threat to the Scientific Method that Explains the Spate of Fraudulent Science Publications – Calvin Beisner | Jul 23, 2014 Excerpt: It is precisely because modern science has abandoned its foundations in the Biblical worldview (which holds, among other things, that a personal, rational God designed a rational universe to be understood and controlled by rational persons made in His image) and the Biblical ethic (which holds, among other things, that we are obligated to tell the truth even when it inconveniences us) that science is collapsing. As such diverse historians and philosophers of science as Alfred North Whitehead, Pierre Duhem, Loren Eiseley, Rodney Stark, and many others have observed, and as I pointed out in two of my talks at the Ninth International Conference on Climate Change (ICCC), science—not an occasional flash of insight here and there, but a systematic, programmatic, ongoing way of studying and controlling the world—arose only once in history, and only in one place: medieval Europe, once known as “Christendom,” where that Biblical worldview reigned supreme. That is no accident. Science could not have arisen without that worldview. http://townhall.com/columnists/calvinbeisner/2014/07/23/the-threat-to-the-scientific-method-that-explains-the-spate-of-fraudulent-science-publications-n1865201/page/full Several other resources backing up this claim are available, such as Thomas Woods, Stanley Jaki, David Linberg, Edward Grant, J.L. Heilbron, and Christopher Dawson. Presuppositional Apologetics – easy to use interactive website http://www.proofthatgodexists.org/index.php The Great Debate: Does God Exist? – Justin Holcomb – audio of the 1985 Greg Bahnsen debate available at the bottom of the site Excerpt: The transcendental proof for God’s existence is that without Him it is impossible to prove anything. The atheist worldview is irrational and cannot consistently provide the preconditions of intelligible experience, science, logic, or morality. The atheist worldview cannot allow for laws of logic, the uniformity of nature, the ability for the mind to understand the world, and moral absolutes. In that sense the atheist worldview cannot account for our debate tonight.,,, http://justinholcomb.com/2012/01/17/the-great-debate-does-god-exist/
Moreover, Darwinism is far more dependent on its faulty Theological presuppositions than ID is dependent on its proper Theological presuppositions.,,, ID makes the minimal, and simple, claim the Intelligence exists, whereas core Darwinian arguments are reliant upon far more Theistic presupposition, including 'sectarian claims about God’s nature, actions, purposes, or duties.’
Nothing in biology makes sense except in light of theology? – Dilley S. – 2013 Abstract This essay analyzes Theodosius Dobzhansky’s famous article, “Nothing in Biology Makes Sense Except in the Light of Evolution,” in which he presents some of his best arguments for evolution. I contend that all of Dobzhansky’s arguments hinge upon sectarian claims about God’s nature, actions, purposes, or duties. Moreover, Dobzhansky’s theology manifests several tensions, both in the epistemic justification of his theological claims and in their collective coherence. I note that other prominent biologists–such as Mayr, Dawkins, Eldredge, Ayala, de Beer, Futuyma, and Gould–also use theology-laden arguments. I recommend increased analysis of the justification, complexity, and coherence of this theology. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23890740 Methodological Naturalism: A Rule That No One Needs or Obeys – Paul Nelson – September 22, 2014 Excerpt: It is a little-remarked but nonetheless deeply significant irony that evolutionary biology is the most theologically entangled science going. Open a book like Jerry Coyne’s Why Evolution is True (2009) or John Avise’s Inside the Human Genome (2010), and the theology leaps off the page. A wise creator, say Coyne, Avise, and many other evolutionary biologists, would not have made this or that structure; therefore, the structure evolved by undirected processes. Coyne and Avise, like many other evolutionary theorists going back to Darwin himself, make numerous “God-wouldn’t-have-done-it-that-way” arguments, thus predicating their arguments for the creative power of natural selection and random mutation on implicit theological assumptions about the character of God and what such an agent (if He existed) would or would not be likely to do.,,, ,,,with respect to one of the most famous texts in 20th-century biology, Theodosius Dobzhansky’s essay “Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution” (1973). Although its title is widely cited as an aphorism, the text of Dobzhansky’s essay is rarely read. It is, in fact, a theological treatise. As Dilley (2013, p. 774) observes: “Strikingly, all seven of Dobzhansky’s arguments hinge upon claims about God’s nature, actions, purposes, or duties. In fact, without God-talk, the geneticist’s arguments for evolution are logically invalid. In short, theology is essential to Dobzhansky’s arguments.”,, http://www.evolutionnews.org/2014/09/methodological_1089971.html
bornagain77_{October 26, 2014
October
10
Oct
26
26
2014
02:50 PM
2
02
50
PM
PDT}

Thornton, I think Bacon, Newton, Planck, Einstein, and a multitude of other Great Scientists would have disagreed with your assessment. Darwin invoked the Creator in the last sentence of Origins even. Wake up and smell that coffee Thorton.ppolish_{October 26, 2014
October
10
Oct
26
26
2014
02:50 PM
2
02
50
PM
PDT}

ppolish
Thornton, you just made that up, right? Very far from reality. Made up make believe.
Not made up. The scientific method is non-religious. It has to be because all of science is non-religious. Another reason that what Creationists push isn't science.Thorton_{October 26, 2014
October
10
Oct
26
26
2014
02:40 PM
2
02
40
PM
PDT}

tkeithlu as to:
"or is the product of supernatural intervention"
definition:
su·per·nat·u·ral 1: of or relating to an order of existence beyond the visible observable universe;,,
That something beyond the observable space-time, matter-energy of the universe, i.e. that something 'supernatural', resides in the cell is now established with the finding of 'non-local' quantum entanglement in the cell. Quantum entanglement, which Einstein termed 'spooky action at a distance', is now found in every DNA and protein molecule of the cell.
Quantum entanglement holds together life’s blueprint – 2010 Excerpt: When the researchers analysed the DNA without its helical structure, they found that the electron clouds were not entangled. But when they incorporated DNA’s helical structure into the model, they saw that the electron clouds of each base pair became entangled with those of its neighbours. “If you didn’t have entanglement, then DNA would have a simple flat structure, and you would never get the twist that seems to be important to the functioning of DNA,” says team member Vlatko Vedral of the University of Oxford. http://neshealthblog.wordpress.com/2010/09/15/quantum-entanglement-holds-together-lifes-blueprint/ Quantum Information/Entanglement In DNA - short video https://vimeo.com/92405752 Coherent Intrachain energy migration at room temperature – Elisabetta Collini and Gregory Scholes – University of Toronto – Science, 323, (2009), pp. 369-73 Excerpt: The authors conducted an experiment to observe quantum coherence dynamics in relation to energy transfer. The experiment, conducted at room temperature, examined chain conformations, such as those found in the proteins of living cells. Neighbouring molecules along the backbone of a protein chain were seen to have coherent energy transfer. Where this happens quantum decoherence (the underlying tendency to loss of coherence due to interaction with the environment) is able to be resisted, and the evolution of the system remains entangled as a single quantum state. http://www.scimednet.org/quantum-coherence-living-cells-and-protein/ etc.. etc..
And quantum entanglement does indeed fit the definition of 'supernatural'
Looking beyond space and time to cope with quantum theory – 29 October 2012 Excerpt: “Our result gives weight to the idea that quantum correlations somehow arise from outside spacetime, in the sense that no story in space and time can describe them,” http://www.quantumlah.org/highlight/121029_hidden_influences.php
And although Naturalists have proposed various, far fetched, scenarios to try to get around the Theistic implications of quantum non-locality, none of the far fetched 'non-Theistic' solutions to quantum non-locality, in themselves, are compatible with the reductive materialism that is foundational to neo-Darwinian thought.
"[while a number of philosophical ideas] may be logically consistent with present quantum mechanics, ...materialism is not." Eugene Wigner Quantum Physics Debunks Materialism - video playlist https://www.youtube.com/watch?list=PL1mr9ZTZb3TViAqtowpvZy5PZpn-MoSK_&v=4C5pq7W5yRM
Perhaps the clearest way to get this incompatibility between non-local quantum entanglement and reductive materialism across is to show that physicists have reduced energy to quantum information.
How Teleportation Will Work - Excerpt: In 1993, the idea of teleportation moved out of the realm of science fiction and into the world of theoretical possibility. It was then that physicist Charles Bennett and a team of researchers at IBM confirmed that quantum teleportation was possible, but only if the original object being teleported was destroyed. — As predicted, the original photon no longer existed once the replica was made. http://science.howstuffworks.com/science-vs-myth/everyday-myths/teleportation1.htm Quantum Teleportation – IBM Research Page Excerpt: “it would destroy the original (photon) in the process,,” http://researcher.ibm.com/view_project.php?id=2862 First Teleportation Of Multiple Quantum Properties Of A Single Photon - Oct 7, 2014 To truly teleport an object, you have to include all its quantum properties. Excerpt: ,,,It is these properties— the spin angular momentum and the orbital angular momentum?(of a photon)—?that Xi-Lin and co have teleported together for the first time.,,, https://medium.com/the-physics-arxiv-blog/first-teleportation-of-multiple-quantum-properties-of-a-single-photon-7c1e61598565
In fact an entire human can, theoretically, be reduced to quantum information and teleported to another location in the universe:
Quantum Teleportation Of A Human? – video https://vimeo.com/75163272 Will Human Teleportation Ever Be Possible? As experiments in relocating particles advance, will we be able to say, "Beam me up, Scotty" one day soon? By Corey S. Powell|Monday, June 16, 2014 Excerpt: "Note a fascinating common thread through all these possibilities. Whether you regard yourself as a pile of atoms, a DNA sequence, a series of sensory inputs or an elaborate computer file, in all of these interpretations you are nothing but a stack of data. According to the principle of unitarity, quantum information is never lost. Put them together, and those two statements lead to a staggering corollary: At the most fundamental level, the laws of physics say you are immortal." - per discover magazine
Thus not only is information not reducible to a energy-matter basis, as is presupposed in Darwinism, but in actuality energy (and matter) both ultimately reduce to a information basis as is presupposed in Christian Theism (John1:1).
John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
bornagain77_{October 26, 2014
October
10
Oct
26
26
2014
02:39 PM
2
02
39
PM
PDT}

Cosmologist Creationist Dr Ross is founder of the website listed in OP I think. Cool Dude. Knows his stuff: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d4EaWPIlNYY&feature=youtube_gdata_playerppolish_{October 26, 2014
October
10
Oct
26
26
2014
02:31 PM
2
02
31
PM
PDT}

Thornton, you just made that up, right? Very far from reality. Made up make believe.ppolish_{October 26, 2014
October
10
Oct
26
26
2014
02:26 PM
2
02
26
PM
PDT}

ppolish
Scientific Method created by Theists. Christian Scientists mostly. Makes perfect sense really.
The biggest, most critical thing they did was to make the scientific method non-religious and to ensure their religious biases were kept out of their results. Pity the ID-Creationists have never learned that lesson.Thorton_{October 26, 2014
October
10
Oct
26
26
2014
02:05 PM
2
02
05
PM
PDT}

Scientific Method created by Theists. Christian Scientists mostly. Makes perfect sense really.ppolish_{October 26, 2014
October
10
Oct
26
26
2014
01:46 PM
1
01
46
PM
PDT}

"RTB's mission is to spread the Christian Gospel by demonstrating that sound reason and scientific research—including the very latest discoveries—consistently support, rather than erode, confidence in the truth of the Bible and faith in the personal, transcendent God revealed in both Scripture and nature."rich_{October 26, 2014
October
10
Oct
26
26
2014
01:39 PM
1
01
39
PM
PDT}

You are standing in awe of the complexity and beauty of life; something we should all do. But learning more about the mechanisms of gene expression really doesn't speak to whether that mechanism evolved by being an advantageous mutation in an organism long, long ago, or is the product of supernatural intervention. I very much doubt that the discovery changed the conclusions of the authors regarding natural selection in either direction. To them, working in a very narrow area, it is what it is - a better understanding of the mechanism of gene expression.tkeithlu_{October 26, 2014
October
10
Oct
26
26
2014
01:35 PM
1
01
35
PM
PDT}

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Leave a Reply