Theodore Dalrymple and Ken Francis on the terror of a materialist atheist’s existence

You never leave me anything to say, BA 77. More power to your armBelfast

October 30, 2018

October

10

Oct

30

30

2018

01:31 PM

1

01

31

PM

PDT

Copy Comment Link

And yet this immaterial information, that Talbott refers to, that is keeping an organism alive “precisely for a lifetime, and not a moment longer” also provides empirical evidence for a transcendent soul that is capable of living beyond the death of our temporal, material, bodies. These following two videos go over some of that evidence.

Information is Physical (but not how Rolf Landauer meant) - video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H35I83y5Uro Darwinian Materialism vs Quantum Biology - video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LHdD2Am1g5Y

Simply put, quantum information, (which is now found to be pervasive within molecular biology and of which classical information is now found to be a subset), is ‘conserved’. Which means, unlike classical information, that quantum information cannot be destroyed,,,

Quantum no-hiding theorem experimentally confirmed for first time – 2011 Excerpt: In the classical world, information can be copied and deleted at will. In the quantum world, however, the conservation of quantum information means that information cannot be created nor destroyed. This concept stems from two fundamental theorems of quantum mechanics: the no-cloning theorem and the no-deleting theorem. A third and related theorem, called the no-hiding theorem, addresses information loss in the quantum world. According to the no-hiding theorem, if information is missing from one system (which may happen when the system interacts with the environment), then the information is simply residing somewhere else in the Universe; in other words, the missing information cannot be hidden in the correlations between a system and its environment. http://www.physorg.com/news/2011-03-quantum-no-hiding-theorem-experimentally.html Quantum no-deleting theorem Excerpt: A stronger version of the no-cloning theorem and the no-deleting theorem provide permanence to quantum information. To create a copy one must import the information from some part of the universe and to delete a state one needs to export it to another part of the universe where it will continue to exist. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_no-deleting_theorem#Consequence

The implication of this is fairly straightforward, as Stuart Hameroff states in the following video, ‘But the quantum information,, isn’t destroyed. It can’t be destroyed.,,, it’s possible that this quantum information can exist outside the body. Perhaps indefinitely as a soul’.

“Let’s say the heart stops beating. The blood stops flowing. The microtubules lose their quantum state. But the quantum information, which is in the microtubules, isn’t destroyed. It can’t be destroyed. It just distributes and dissipates to the universe at large. If a patient is resuscitated, revived, this quantum information can go back into the microtubules and the patient says, “I had a near death experience. I saw a white light. I saw a tunnel. I saw my dead relatives.,,” Now if they’re not revived and the patient dies, then it’s possible that this quantum information can exist outside the body. Perhaps indefinitely as a soul.” – Stuart Hameroff – Quantum Entangled Consciousness – Life After Death – video (5:00 minute mark) https://youtu.be/jjpEc98o_Oo?t=300

Thus ‘immaterial quantum information’, that is now found to be pervasive within molecular biology, provides empirical evidence strongly suggesting that each of us do indeed have a immortal soul that is capable of living beyond the death of our temporal, material, bodies. And thus also provides empirical evidence strongly supporting the Christian's claim that each of our lives do indeed have, very deep, intrinsic meaning and purpose. Many other lines of scientific evidence supporting the fact that our lives do indeed have intrinsic meaning and purpose can be found in the following video and paper:

Atheistic Materialism vs Meaning, Value, and Purpose in Our Lives - video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aqUxBSbFhog Paper: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Hu8PN0cpLbWZyRD9zGbTfcjZAVOBqLJ7ifM_sfTtu9g/edit

Verse and video:

1 Corinthians 2:9 But just as it is written, “Things that no eye has seen, or ear heard, or mind imagined, are the things God has prepared for those who love him.” Quantum Mechanics, Special Relativity, General Relativity and Christianity - video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h4QDy1Soolo

bornagain77

October 29, 2018

October

10

Oct

29

29

2018

04:28 AM

4

04

28

AM

PDT

Copy Comment Link

as to:

The cultural death of God has created a conundrum for intellectuals. How could a life stripped of ultimate meaning be anything but absurd? How was man to live? How could he find direction in a world of no direction? What would be tell his children that could make their lives worthwhile? What is the ground of morality?,,, Francis is a believer, Dalrymple is not, but both empathize with the struggle to find meaning in a seemingly meaningless universe.

One of the main, if not the main, supposed intellectual atheist's arguments that we live in a 'seemingly meaningless world' is the argument from evil. Darwin used the argument from evil in the 'Origin of Species',,,

Charles Darwin, Theologian: Major New Article on Darwin's Use of Theology in the Origin of Species - May 2011 Excerpt: The Origin supplies abundant evidence of theology in action; as Dilley observes: I have argued that, in the first edition of the Origin, Darwin drew upon at least the following positiva theological claims in his case for descent with modification (and against special creation):,,, 9. A 'distant' God is not morally culpable for natural pain and suffering. 10. The God of special creation, who allegedly performed miracles in organic history, is not plausible given the presence of natural pain and suffering. http://www.evolutionnews.org/2011/05/charles_darwin_theologian_majo046391.html

And even today the knee jerk reaction of many supposedly intellectual atheists, that we live in a 'seemingly meaningless world', is not based on any scientific evidence but is based on the, theologically based, argument from evil.

Atheists’ reasons for not believing in God are not scientific Excerpt: What I found was 50 elite scientists expressing their personal opinions, but none had some powerful argument or evidence to justify their opinions. In fact, most did not even cite a reason for thinking atheism was true…. The few that did try to justify their atheism commonly appealed to God of the Gaps arguments (there is no need for God, therefore God does not exist) and the Argument from Evil (our bad world could not have come from an All Loving, All Powerful God). In other words, it is just as I thought it would be. Yes, most elite scientists and scholars are atheists. But their reasons for being atheists and agnostics are varied and often personal. And their typical arguments are rather common and shallow – god of the gaps and the existence of evil. It would seem clear that their expertise and elite status is simply not a causal factor behind their atheism. https://uncommondescent.com/philosophy/film-night-with-philip-cunningham-atheists-reasons-for-not-believing-in-god-are-not-scientific-and-more/

The problem with the argument from evil for atheists is the fact that the argument from evil presupposes the existence of objective morality and thus presupposes the existence of God. Specifically, in the argument from evil atheists hold that “There exist a large number of horrible forms of evil and suffering for which we can see no greater purpose or compensating good.”

The Problem of Evil: Still A Strong Argument for Atheism - 2015 Excerpt:,,, the problem of evil, one of the main arguments against the existence of an all-good and all-knowing God.,,, P1. There exist a large number of horrible forms of evil and suffering for which we can see no greater purpose or compensating good. P2. If an all-powerful, all-good God existed, then such horrific, apparently purposeless evils would not exist. C. Therefore, an all-powerful, all-good God does not exist. https://thegodlesstheist.com/2015/10/13/the-problem-of-evil-still-a-strong-argument-for-atheism/

And yet this is, once again, a self defeating position for the atheist to be in. Specifically on the one hand, Atheistic materialists hold that morality is subjective and illusory.

The moral argument is summed up at the 4:36 minute mark of the video and can be stated as such: Premise 1: If God does not exist, then objective moral values and duties do not exist. Premise 2: Objective moral values and duties do exist. Conclusion: Therefore, God exists. The Moral Argument – drcraigvideos - video https://youtu.be/OxiAikEk2vU?t=276

And yet on the other hand, as David Wood puts it in the following article, "By declaring that suffering is evil, atheists have admitted that there is an objective moral standard by which we distinguish good and evil."

Responding to the Argument From Evil: Three Approaches for the Theist - By David Wood Excerpt: Interestingly enough, proponents of AE grant this premise in the course of their argument. By declaring that suffering is evil, atheists have admitted that there is an objective moral standard by which we distinguish good and evil. Amazingly, then, even as atheists make their case against the existence of God, they actually help us prove that God exists!,,, https://www.namb.net/apologetics/responding-to-the-argument-from-evil-three-approaches-for-the-theist

Thus the atheist's main argument that we live in a 'seemingly meaningless world', i.e. the argument from evil, actually presupposes the existence of objective morality and therefore presupposes the existence of God and therefore, in the end, actually presupposes that we live in a meaningful world. In fact, as CS Lewis has noted, ANY argument that tries to argue that the universe is meaningless must necessarily presuppose the existence of meaning in order for the atheist to be able to make his argument in the first place, and therefore ANY argument an atheist may try to use to argue for a meaningless universe is self-refuting in its basic presuppositions.

“If the whole universe has no meaning, we should never have found out that it has no meaning: just as, if there were no light in the universe and therefore no creatures with eyes, we should never know it was dark. Dark would be without meaning.” - C.S. Lewis, Mere Christianity

Moreover, besides Christians using the atheist's own self-refuting argument from evil against the atheist to prove that we live in a meaningful world, the Christian Theist can also appeal to numerous lines of scientific evidence to prove that we live in a meaningful world. Perhaps the most direct piece of scientific evidence that each of of our lives have intrinsic meaning and purpose in this universe comes from the fact that life itself is now found to be based, not on matter and energy, or on 'merely complex chemistry', as many Darwinian materialists have claimed in the past, but is instead based on immaterial information. As Stephen Talbott states in the following article which happens to be entitled “How Biologists Lost Sight Of The Meaning Of Life And Are Now Staring It In The Face”, “A given cell, typically contains more than a billion protein molecules at any one time. ,,, "The human body is formed by trillions of individual cells.,,, And then we hear that all this meaningful activity is, somehow, meaningless or a product of meaninglessness. This, I believe, is the real issue troubling the majority of the American populace when they are asked about their belief in evolution. They see one thing and then are told, more or less directly, that they are really seeing its denial. Yet no one has ever explained to them how you get meaning from meaninglessness — a difficult enough task once you realize that we cannot articulate any knowledge of the world at all except in the language of meaning.,,,”

HOW BIOLOGISTS LOST SIGHT OF THE MEANING OF LIFE — AND ARE NOW STARING IT IN THE FACE - Stephen L. Talbott - May 2012 Excerpt: “If you think air traffic controllers have a tough job guiding planes into major airports or across a crowded continental airspace, consider the challenge facing a human cell trying to position its proteins”. A given cell, he notes, may make more than 10,000 different proteins, and typically contains more than a billion protein molecules at any one time. “Somehow a cell must get all its proteins to their correct destinations — and equally important, keep these molecules out of the wrong places”. ,,, Further, the billion protein molecules in a cell are virtually all capable of interacting with each other to one degree or another; ,, The same sort of question can be asked of cells, for example in the growing embryo,,,, "The human body is formed by trillions of individual cells. These cells work together with remarkable precision, first forming an adult organism out of a single fertilized egg, and then keeping the organism alive and functional for decades.,,, And then we hear that all this meaningful activity is, somehow, meaningless or a product of meaninglessness. This, I believe, is the real issue troubling the majority of the American populace when they are asked about their belief in evolution. They see one thing and then are told, more or less directly, that they are really seeing its denial. Yet no one has ever explained to them how you get meaning from meaninglessness — a difficult enough task once you realize that we cannot articulate any knowledge of the world at all except in the language of meaning.,,, http://www.netfuture.org/2012/May1012_184.html#2

In the following article, Talbott goes further and reveals that this overwhelming impression of meaning and purpose that is found in life is closely associated with there being immaterial information in life while an organism is alive. Specifically, Talbott states that at the moment of a organism's death "Code, information, and communication, in their biological sense, will have disappeared from the scientist’s vocabulary."

The Unbearable Wholeness of Beings - Stephen L. Talbott - 2010 Excerpt: Virtually the same collection of molecules exists in the canine cells during the moments immediately before and after death. But after the fateful transition no one will any longer think of genes as being regulated, nor will anyone refer to normal or proper chromosome functioning. No molecules will be said to guide other molecules to specific targets, and no molecules will be carrying signals, which is just as well because there will be no structures recognizing signals. Code, information, and communication, in their biological sense, will have disappeared from the scientist’s vocabulary. ,,, the question, rather, is why things don’t fall completely apart — as they do, in fact, at the moment of death. What power holds off that moment — precisely for a lifetime, and not a moment longer? Despite the countless processes going on in the cell, and despite the fact that each process might be expected to “go its own way” according to the myriad factors impinging on it from all directions, the actual result is quite different. Rather than becoming progressively disordered in their mutual relations (as indeed happens after death, when the whole dissolves into separate fragments), the processes hold together in a larger unity. http://www.thenewatlantis.com/publications/the-unbearable-wholeness-of-beings

bornagain77

October 29, 2018

October

10

Oct

29

29

2018

04:27 AM

4

04

27

AM

PDT

Copy Comment Link