Win Prizes Ask an Atheist II

[Gethelred]

Welcome to the Ask an Atheist thread II.

Previous part:

Win Prizes - Ask an Atheist - Shoe's on the other foot now!

Alright, we're going to have a change of tack. As I'm sure you can see, the thread title has been changed to Ask an Atheist. People who have a question to ask of the atheists who populate this thread - more than the christians do - should feel free to ask questions of them. If you've still got...

www.bigfooty.com

Standard board rules apply.

 

[Vdubs]

Awesome, I get the progenitor of Catholic grammar and apologetics, the one the only…
Welcome Vdubs.
Lets play.
You’re entire premise resides on the fact that “man” with aide of the creator, made a mistake because rib girl ate fruit!
Please explain?

My entire premise rests on the saving Grace of having received Jesus Christ as Lord and Saviour of my life.
That is all.
You pick that apart to your heart's content.
GRACE , by the way, is God's Riches At Christ's Expense.

 

[carltonchelsea]

I'm not arguing about a common ancestry. I'm arguing against it being by chance.

Non random mate, it’s self explanatory, just like your mum is the product of her mum, you trog!

 

[sdfc]

Non random mate, it’s self explanatory, just like your mum is the product of her mum, you trog!

I don't know about you but my parents and I are the same species.

 

[carltonchelsea]

My entire premise rests on the saving Grace of having received Jesus Christ as Lord and Saviour of my life.
That is all.
You pick that apart to your heart's content.
GRACE , by the way, is God's Riches At Christ's Expense.

Can you provide some examples of this Yeshua Yahweh intervention?
easy question?

 

[carltonchelsea]

I don't know about you but my parents and I are the same species.

I’d happily question that!

 

[carltonchelsea]

I don't know about you but my parents and I are the same species.

Which species, name it?

 

[Roylion]

Can you explain why the maths prohibit it?

It doesn't.

The basic ingredients of evolution are simple, empirical facts. Genes really do mutate, sometimes leading to new functionalities, and natural selection really can string together several such mutations into directional, evolutionary change. On a small scale, this has all been demonstrated and observed.

Anti-evolutionists and ID proponents such as William Dembski for the past fifteen years or so have sought to cast doubt on evolution by the provision of various mathematical arguments involving probability, or indeed more lately, the branch of mathematics known as 'combinatorial search'. Both have far more to do with ID propaganda than with serious scientific argument. Mathematics is unique in its ability to bamboozle a lay audience, making it well suited to the purposes of ID proponents.

Many of these ID proponents fail to consider the role of natural selection in evolution. Natural selection is a non-random process, and this fundamentally affects the probability of evolving a particular gene. Any anti-evolutionist argument based on probability can simply be dismissed out of hand.

If evolution can produce small changes over short time periods (which it can as we know from direct observation and demonstration), no abstract mathematical principle (as argued by ID / creationist proponents) is going to rule out larger changes over longer time periods where the process is simply repeated millions of times to produce large change.

 

[Vdubs]

Can you provide some examples of this Yeshua Yahweh intervention?
easy question?

Testimonies of those whose lives have been irrevocably affected by Christ are inspirational and personal, but I doubt this is what you are seeking.

 

[carltonchelsea]

My entire premise rests on the saving Grace of having received Jesus Christ as Lord and Saviour of my life.
That is all.
You pick that apart to your heart's content.
GRACE , by the way, is God's Riches At Christ's Expense.

Can you provide me with evidence of such an occurrence?

 

[Vdubs]

Can you provide me with evidence of such an occurrence?

yes

 

[carltonchelsea]

Testimonies of those whose lives have been irrevocably affected by Christ are inspirational and personal, but I doubt this is what you are seeking.

Anecdotal evidence is pointless, what else ya got?

 

[Vdubs]

Anecdotal evidence is pointless, what else ya got?

That is it. I would not be here without it.

 

[sdfc]

It doesn't.

The basic ingredients of evolution are simple, empirical facts. Genes really do mutate, sometimes leading to new functionalities, and natural selection really can string together several such mutations into directional, evolutionary change. On a small scale, this has all been demonstrated and observed.

Anti-evolutionists and ID proponents such as William Dembski for the past fifteen years or so have sought to cast doubt on evolution by the provision of various mathematical arguments involving probability, or indeed more lately, the branch of mathematics known as 'combinatorial search'. Both have far more to do with ID propaganda than with serious scientific argument. Mathematics is unique in its ability to bamboozle a lay audience, making it well suited to the purposes of ID proponents.

Many of these ID proponents fail to consider the role of natural selection in evolution. Natural selection is a non-random process, and this fundamentally affects the probability of evolving a particular gene. Any anti-evolutionist argument based on probability can simply be dismissed out of hand.

If evolution can produce small changes over short time periods (which it can as we know from direct observation and demonstration), no abstract mathematical principle (as argued by ID / creationist proponents) is going to rule out larger changes over longer time periods where the process is simply repeated millions of times to produce large change.

The proteins have to evolve before they naturally select. Which is where the maths problems come in. You're putting the cart before the horse.

 

[SBD Gonzalez]

It’s math, not maths, you incredible imbecile.

In Australian English it's "maths".

Arrogance founded on ignorance is not a good look mate.

 

[carltonchelsea]

Testimonies of those whose lives have been irrevocably affected by Christ are inspirational and personal, but I doubt this is what you are seeking.

Anecdote, what else ya got?

 

[carltonchelsea]

In Australian English it's "maths".

Arrogance founded on ignorance is not a good look mate.

How is the discovery of numbers a grammatica and linguistic
error?

It’s math not maths ya complete nuffies!
Shut up’

 

[carltonchelsea]

In Australian English it's "maths".

Arrogance founded on ignorance is not a good look mate.

Australian English is it?

 

[sdfc]

Australian English is it?

You should really stop now.

 

[western royboy]

This book is astonishing and horrifying and almost surreal in some of the despicable behaviour it reveals, but on the strength of the work of the dogged, heroic campaigners found in this book, there is reason to believe that the Anglican Church is slowly changing its ways.

But FMD they have a lot to atone for. That they would presume to lecture anyone on morality is mind boggling.

Crimes of the Cross by Anne Manne

A searing expose of institutional child abuse, and the remarkable story of the survivors who would not be silenced

www.blackincbooks.com.au

Optics only - they never change

 

[carltonchelsea]

You should really stop now.

I asked you a very specific question,

You should really stop now.

The only reason you exist is because your grandmother rooted a bloke, that rooted another bloke and ejaculated in an another wonan.
Without that, you don’t exist, you utter moron!
You are the slow progressive means iof genetics and DNA, by way of non random mutation.


You are not special!
You are an ape species!
We are pretty ****ing cool!

 

[GrayRanga]

200 amino acids from a pool of 20 types to be arranged in a specific order to make a viable protein that will produce a new body type. There are 20^200 possible combinations compared to a relatively small pool of arrangements that will construct viable proteins. The probability is so low as to be near zero and it has to keep happening.

If you're curious you will do your own research.

It's very accessible.

In other words, you cannot defend your assertion

People that truly understand something can express it in simple concepts that their audience can understand

You can't do it.

"Do your own research" is the catchphrase of a charlatan

 

[Total Power]

Testimonies of those whose lives have been irrevocably affected by Christ are inspirational and personal, but I doubt this is what you are seeking.

Who is saying it isn't? You aren't seeking Islamic conversion stories, like those lives touched by Allah? You aren't seeking stories like mine whose life significantly got better after dumping Christ..you are only seeking what you believe in.

Exactly the same goes for <insert your god> here. Christianity tried to convert half a billion Hindus but failed and it stood a lot longer than any other religion. I can get you hundreds of testimonials from Christian converts into Hinduism/Islam etc. You have no point at all. Maybe learn what an evidence is first outside of Sunday Church echo chambers meeting?

 

[Total Power]

The proteins have to evolve before they naturally select. Which is where the maths problems come in. You're putting the cart before the horse.

The premise is flawed. First of all, your probabilistic argument makes sense only if you tried all possible protein sequences at random until you get the right one. But that would mean that all possible proteins have no value at all but exactly the right one (This is NOT the case, see my post below). That's not how it works -if it were so, evolution simply wouldn't work.

Chemicals do not react by chance.

Individual ion to ion type reactions are random, not the reaction itself.

If I add sodium ions and chloride ion to water, I know exactly what will happen, because chemicals react in known, predictable ways.

I will not know which individual ion will react with what other individual ion, as that is random…but I know I will get salt and water in known proportions, because that is not happening by “chance”. So, by not understanding chemistry or statistics, once can ask the wrong question.

That is what your post is the result of…and why your premise is fatally flawed

Second, that particular protein didn’t have to come together at all for life to exist on Earth. There are many different protein arrangements that can serve the same function. The ones we have are just some of the ones that happen to work.

Finally it's the Weasel program, and it is an extremly simple but illuminating example of evolutionary algorithm.

We have also good proof that such evolutionary paths are possible. For example, proteins which share just 30% or more of their sequence (or even less) are most probably structurally very similar.

The original study, one of the landmarks of structural biochemistry, is this one by Chothia and Lesk, 1986.

 

[Total Power]

200 amino acids from a pool of 20 types to be arranged in a specific order to make a viable protein that will produce a new body type. There are 20^200 possible combinations compared to a relatively small pool of arrangements that will construct viable proteins. The probability is so low as to be near zero and it has to keep happening.

If you're curious you will do your own research.

It's very accessible.

Good ole Fred Hoyle's argument, it's long debunked, i found your source here:

The odds against evolving new proteins

critique of evolution

evolutionunderthemicroscope.com

This is clearly wrong. Hoyle is known as the father of junk science, who made the same argument as you.

There is a difference between what is known as a non functional protein and a functioning one. A functioning protein does need an exactly correct sequence of amino acids to function correctly.

Also Biological systems are not entirely random (this is the false assertion you make in every single post cause you use random mutation literally). There is always selection going on based on the constraints of its environment. The most successful biomolecules are the ones that reproduce better and more efficiently. But your a creationist so your going to look at this and just dismiss it and I’m OK with that, because I understand, because I was in your shoes at one point. It would take years for you to change your mind on this if your going to change your mind at all.

Indications of spontaneous formation of precursor proteins - Innovations Report

Scientists from the Institute of Organic Chemistry at the University of Stuttgart have determined that under certain conditions spontaneous reactions take...

www.innovations-report.com

Proteins are amino acid polymers. The simplest amino acids are abundant even in space. Amino acids can bond readily while losing a water molecule. Two amino acids, such as glycine, will bond readily in dehydrating conditions and even in other situations.

The answer, clearly, is 100%.

Now, that protein won’t do anything, but it is a protein.

More amino acids can tag along, of course, extending the molecule.

In the end, someone asked for it here and i will ask again, can you produce a peer reviewed paper from a 'Scientist' (which means not some YEC or a member of creationist society) which supports your hypothesis?

 

[SBD Gonzalez]

Australian English is it?

Um yes.

Have you been drinking?