Precision in Nature: Evidence of God or Accidents?

Like vegetation? This phony fact of life is just an attitude that leads to being dominated by Nature. It is the duty of the fit to change Nature, which has no right to exist in its hostile form.

In fact, that may be religious. Imposing Promethean values lets God off the hook for allowing "acts of God" that cannot be attributed to man's choice to be evil. Then we would deserve to be punished for not using our minds to prevent Nature's evils. Merely adjusting to them is a dereliction of duty. All catastrophes can be prevented by the fittest if we start treating superior minds like we treat superior athletes from childhood on.
For example, we deserve to die of cancer if we expect an oncologist to spend twelve years working without pay in college. Pay them or they will make you pay. A god who would command that is one I could believe in.

 

duplicate posting

 

Nietzsche basically said the same as do you here, that God was a necessary evil for 13.5 Billion year, until man evolved.
Now God is basically dead and unneeded since man has become a Superman who can engineer his own destiny now.

But even if that view had merit, and we were to ignored the still standing requirement, that men understand the Natural Laws God used/uses to perform the on going unfolding of the next frame of Reality,...

... man would still need the son-of-God, i.e.; Truth, to shed the light on the processes by which to "prevent Nature's evils."

 

God gets 100% ownership of the patents? Once again, you only demonstrate how religion is connected to the Investor Tyranny of capitalism. One case of MBAs playing God was Nobel Prize winner Kary Mullis's invention, for which his corporate slaveowners gave him a $30,000 bonus and then sold the rights to it for $300,000,000!

 

Translation: CD is right and we must all get used to it.

 

ALTER2EGO -to- EVERYONE:

The arguments for the existence of an intelligent Designer/God aka Jehovah are numerous. Below is the first of several.


1. Precision in nature indicates deliberation. Anything deliberately done indicates the presence of an intelligent being who intervened and guided the outcome.

The elements on the Periodic Table is an example of precision.

 

What is so precise about it?

 

What precision in nature indicates deliberation? What is your definition of precision?

 

You keep using the word 'precision'. I do not think it means what you think it means.

 

I would say that the shape of sand dunes is fairly precise; do you know of any creative force that creates sand dunes, or is it just the wind and time?

 

ALTER2EGO -to- PROF SARCASTIC:

I gave the definition of "precision" in my OP, so obviously, I know what it means. I also gave the definitions of "accident" and "law" in my OP so that I could make comparisons. Or didn't you notice that?

 

how did your god come to life from non-life?

 

ALTER2EGO -to- THE LAW:

As soon as you can find credible sources to back up your claim that sand dunes are "fairly precise," we can pursue that argument. Meanwhile, how do you logically explain the precision within the Oxygen-Carbon Dioxide Cycle, as I described at Post 19, Page 2, and at Post 31, Page 4 as being the result of accidents or spontaneous events?
http://www.politicalforum.com/relig...-evidence-god-accidents-2.html#post1061186918

http://www.politicalforum.com/relig...-evidence-god-accidents-4.html#post1061187849


How do you explain away the precision and complexity of the elements on the Periodic Table, as stated in my OP and at Post 29, Page 3 and logically explain how it could be the result of accidents or spontaneous events?
http://www.politicalforum.com/relig...-evidence-god-accidents-3.html#post1061187783



For that matter, how do you explain away the precision in earth's size and its location, and the fact that because of its size and location, earth is able to maintain life--as I demonstrated at Post 59, Page 6? I will watch for your logical explanation how that could be the result of accidents or spontaneous events.
http://www.politicalforum.com/relig...-evidence-god-accidents-6.html#post1061269551


Last, but not least, how do you explain away the DNA Code, as I explained at Post 77, Page 8 and Post 162, Page 17? How is it that all codes require an intelligent being to write them, but by some miracle, the DNA Code--which scientists admit is not the work of humans, and which happens to be the most complex code known to man--did not likewise require someone to write it? Humans did not write it, so who did?
http://www.politicalforum.com/relig...-evidence-god-accidents-8.html#post1061622665

http://www.politicalforum.com/relig...evidence-god-accidents-17.html#post1062136083


As soon as you can logically explain how all of the above could have occurred by accident or spontaneously, I will excuse your atheist viewpoint.


This thread is now at Page 22, and thus far, not one atheist has been able to present a logical explanation for any of the above. Instead, all they could give was their usual OPINION: "I don't believe it's proof of intelligent design/God."


Just so you know, "I don't believe" does not resemble a logical explanation for anything. Skepticism is not an effective rebuttal in the face of scientific evidence, such as I presented in the above examples.

 

Professor Block's claimed calculations are actually wrong, or miss represented. Earth is on the inner edge of the goldilock's zone, and in that direction his 5% is true. Going outwards, life on Earth would not be all that different if the planet was orbiting 50% further out than it is now

 

Similar to their petitio principii proof that "God must exist because one of the attributes of a Perfect Being is existence." The whole universe could be the self-creating god, but they have to have only one entity, for no particular reason. Even if we conceded that, how could they ever prove that God must be moral or have any kind of personality at all? He could be an impersonal creative force, just a force of nature like gravity. He could be an It.

 

The rare true homo sapiens only needs the support of the unevolved majority of mankind. If that's not coming from the ungrateful primates, then he and his kind must destroy their kind and start over. Actually, we only have to destroy the King Apes. One of the weapons that the homo erectus uses to keep the people down and away from their proper destiny is religion.

 

Your definition or precision posted in the OP is simply a tautology, "being precise". How are you defining what is precise and what is not? That is the key to this whole subject.

 

ALTER2EGO -to- EVERYONE:

I have been gone from this forum for some time, and I have yet to see a single skeptic explain how a series of accidents (unguided events) could have produced our universe, which is clearly fine-tuned for life.

 

Why should anyone waste time explaining it to an indoctrinated creationist?

 

sdelsolray:

Another one-liner on your part, with nothing of substance. Your modus operandi, clearly, and a complete waste of my valuable time reading it.

To ensure I do not read anymore of the tripe you keep posting, you are now headed straight for in "Ignore" list. And there you will most likely remain.


Alter2Ego

 

I feel honored anytime a befuddled creationist puts me on ignore.

 

. . . and? That's like saying that, because human-controlled animal husbandry exists, then all animal mating must be directed by an intelligent force.

 

No one knows but that doesn't prove or disprove the existence of a God or many Gods. I don't believe it was some cosmic accident - that, the belief in a primordial soup, requires as much faith as the belief in God. Life may be an element that exists throughout the universe and into it's other dimensions.

 

Isn't the BBT a "poof out of nothing" theory?

 

No, it is not. The original BBT, as well as the current BBT, each contend there was a singularity from which space, time, matter and energy emerged. A singularity is a "something", not a "nothing".