| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"IKnowHimDoYou" |
| Date: |
22 May 2004 11:01:05 AM |
| Object: |
Complexitives of Molecular Biology |
Complexitives of Molecular Biology
The fertilized egg cell is the classic specimen of developmental biology.
It contains the full and complete set of genetic instructions to transform
itself into a complex muticellular organism. This is acheived by the
pre-programmed complexities of molecular biology incorporated in the DNA.
The evolutionary religionist fanatics insist that all this comes about
through chance variation and differential transformations. They
neglect(through ignorance or outright deceit) that this developmental
genetic transformation is driven by a finely tuned and designed
intelligent cause. Instructions in the fertilized egg control the
embryonic development from the beginning and direct it to a specific
outcome(it cannot vary outside of certain boundries called "kinds" in
God's Word). This full and complete set of instructions emplys the
material processes of chemistry and physics but is not created by those
processes as claimed by the evolutionary religionist fanatics posting
here.
As a simple example examine the softwre in a computer which uses the
natural processes of chemistry and physics to generate a word processing
document, but the software has to be written by an intelligent agent and
not by random chance(the document production also has to have a simalar
same agent) so this means that information must be apobetic.
.
|
|
| User: "JTEM" |
|
| Title: Re: Complexitives of Molecular Biology |
22 May 2004 08:07:09 PM |
|
|
"IKnowHimDoYou" <IKnowHim@leavingsoon.com> wrote
Complexitives of Molecular Biology
You don't even know the difference between "Evidence" and
"Opinion," yet you want us to read this?
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Thore Schmechtig" |
|
| Title: Re: Complexitives of Molecular Biology |
22 May 2004 02:29:36 PM |
|
|
The evolutionary religionist fanatics insist that all this comes about
through chance variation and differential transformations.
The living chicken tract known as I-know-***** setting up its strawmen
again...
You want to impress anyone, cowardly liar? Then tell us how much 12 - 9
is. You weren't able to tell us half a year ago you know... ;)
--
UNWRITTEN RULES OF (PSEUDO-CHRISTIAN) FUNDAMENTALISM
(Found in alt.bible, authors unknown)
1. "I'm right and you are wrong".
2. Never admit that you are wrong, even if you really are.
3. When you have nothing to say, hurl insults.
4. Regard and portray your own violence, whether physical, psychological,
or verbal, at all times as defensive
4a. Specific example for 4.: Cry for "freedom of religion", but whenever followers of other faiths want the same freedom and courts agree, scream "Persecution!"
5. Be prepared at all times to lie and bluster, particularly when backed
into a corner in an argument
5a. When caught lying, always accuse the opposition of lying rather than be honest and admit the obvious
6. Never accept responsibility for any mess you have personally caused.
7. When you are forced to admit to an error, regard the whole process of
error and correction as part of God's personal plan for you and not as a
something for which you should apologise retract or make amends except
verbally and secretly to God himself
8. Always see yourself and you personal actions as part of God's plans for
the world. Recognise that even your errors are just part of Gods will for
the betterment of mankind.
9.Profess humility but avoid the actual experience of it.
10.Refuse to take in information that differs from your own view and
oppose all such information through classification of such information in
a derogatory and simplistic manner(eg by categorising it as left wing
propaganda)
11.Refuse to accept that truth is not black and white; that reality is
complex and there are shades of grey
12.Refuse to forgive anyone else for anything unless you purport to
forgive on behalf of other people unconnected with you for whom you don't
have that right anyhow.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "John Popelish" |
|
| Title: Re: Complexitives of Molecular Biology |
22 May 2004 11:17:39 AM |
|
|
IKnowHimDoYou wrote:
(snip)
They neglect(through ignorance or outright deceit)
that this developmental genetic transformation is driven
by a finely tuned and designed intelligent cause.
(snip)
This is an unsupported assertion. Care to make an effective argument
to support it?
(it cannot vary outside of certain boundries called "kinds" in
God's Word).
This is an unsupported assertion. Care to make an effective argument
to support it?
This full and complete set of instructions emplys the
material processes of chemistry and physics but is not created by those
processes as claimed by the evolutionary religionist fanatics posting
here.
This is an unsupported assertion. Care to make an effective argument
to support it?
As a simple example examine the softwre in a computer which uses the
natural processes of chemistry and physics to generate a word processing
document, but the software has to be written by an intelligent agent and
not by random chance(the document production also has to have a simalar
same agent) so this means that information must be apobetic.
No one is claiming that the process that caused life to be as it is,
today, is the same process that caused software to be as it is,
today. This is called a red herring.
By the way, what is, "apobetic"? I misspell a lot of words, but I
haven't a clue on this one.
--
John Popelish
.
|
|
|
| User: "+Church of The Painful Truth+" |
|
| Title: Re: Complexitives of Molecular Biology |
22 May 2004 12:21:12 PM |
|
|
"John Popelish" <jpopelish@rica.net> wrote in message
news:40AF7D23.B8F23614@rica.net...
IKnowHimDoYou wrote:
(snip)
They neglect(through ignorance or outright deceit)
that this developmental genetic transformation is driven
by a finely tuned and designed intelligent cause.
(snip)
This is an unsupported assertion. Care to make an effective argument
to support it?
(it cannot vary outside of certain boundries called "kinds" in
God's Word).
This is an unsupported assertion. Care to make an effective argument
to support it?
This full and complete set of instructions emplys the
material processes of chemistry and physics but is not created by those
processes as claimed by the evolutionary religionist fanatics posting
here.
This is an unsupported assertion. Care to make an effective argument
to support it?
As a simple example examine the softwre in a computer which uses the
natural processes of chemistry and physics to generate a word processing
document, but the software has to be written by an intelligent agent and
not by random chance(the document production also has to have a simalar
same agent) so this means that information must be apobetic.
No one is claiming that the process that caused life to be as it is,
today, is the same process that caused software to be as it is,
today. This is called a red herring.
By the way, what is, "apobetic"? I misspell a lot of words, but I
haven't a clue on this one.
--
John Popelish
RULES OF ATHEISM
1. "I'm right and you are wrong".
2. Never admit that you are wrong, even if you really are.
3. When you have nothing to say, hurl insults.
4. Regard and portray your own violence, whether physical, psychological,
or verbal, at all times as defensive
4a. Specific example for 4.: Cry for "freedom from religion", but whenever
followers of other faiths want the same freedom and courts agree, scream
"Persecution!"
5. Be prepared at all times to lie and bluster, particularly when backed
into a corner in an argument
5a. When caught lying, always accuse the opposition of lying rather than
be honest and admit the obvious
6. Never accept responsibility for any mess you have personally caused.
7. When you are forced to admit to an error, regard the whole process of
error and correction as part of atheisms failure for you and not as a
something for which you should apologise retract or make amends except
verbally and secretly to yourself
8. Always see yourself and you personal actions as part of no ones plans
for
the world. Recognise that even your errors are just part of being a
vertabrate monkey out of the premordial slugde
9.Profess humility but avoid the actual experience of it.
10.Refuse to take in information that differs from your own view and
oppose all such information through classification of such information in
a derogatory and simplistic manner(eg by categorising it as right wing
propaganda)
11.Refuse to accept that truth is not black and white; that reality is
complex and there are shades of grey
12.Refuse to forgive anyone else for anything because you have no moral
compass guiding you.
.
|
|
|
| User: "John Popelish" |
|
| Title: Re: Complexitives of Molecular Biology |
22 May 2004 07:00:59 PM |
|
|
+Church of The Painful Truth+ wrote:
"John Popelish" <jpopelish@rica.net> wrote in message
news:40AF7D23.B8F23614@rica.net...
IKnowHimDoYou wrote:
(snip)
They neglect(through ignorance or outright deceit)
that this developmental genetic transformation is driven
by a finely tuned and designed intelligent cause.
(snip)
This is an unsupported assertion. Care to make an effective argument
to support it?
(it cannot vary outside of certain boundries called "kinds" in
God's Word).
This is an unsupported assertion. Care to make an effective argument
to support it?
This full and complete set of instructions emplys the
material processes of chemistry and physics but is not created by those
processes as claimed by the evolutionary religionist fanatics posting
here.
This is an unsupported assertion. Care to make an effective argument
to support it?
As a simple example examine the softwre in a computer which uses the
natural processes of chemistry and physics to generate a word processing
document, but the software has to be written by an intelligent agent and
not by random chance(the document production also has to have a simalar
same agent) so this means that information must be apobetic.
No one is claiming that the process that caused life to be as it is,
today, is the same process that caused software to be as it is,
today. This is called a red herring.
By the way, what is, "apobetic"? I misspell a lot of words, but I
haven't a clue on this one.
--
John Popelish
RULES OF ATHEISM
1. "I'm right and you are wrong".
2. Never admit that you are wrong, even if you really are.
3. When you have nothing to say, hurl insults.
4. Regard and portray your own violence, whether physical, psychological,
or verbal, at all times as defensive
4a. Specific example for 4.: Cry for "freedom from religion", but whenever
followers of other faiths want the same freedom and courts agree, scream
"Persecution!"
5. Be prepared at all times to lie and bluster, particularly when backed
into a corner in an argument
5a. When caught lying, always accuse the opposition of lying rather than
be honest and admit the obvious
6. Never accept responsibility for any mess you have personally caused.
7. When you are forced to admit to an error, regard the whole process of
error and correction as part of atheisms failure for you and not as a
something for which you should apologise retract or make amends except
verbally and secretly to yourself
8. Always see yourself and you personal actions as part of no ones plans
for
the world. Recognise that even your errors are just part of being a
vertabrate monkey out of the premordial slugde
9.Profess humility but avoid the actual experience of it.
10.Refuse to take in information that differs from your own view and
oppose all such information through classification of such information in
a derogatory and simplistic manner(eg by categorising it as right wing
propaganda)
11.Refuse to accept that truth is not black and white; that reality is
complex and there are shades of grey
12.Refuse to forgive anyone else for anything because you have no moral
compass guiding you.
Thank you for posting this list as an answer to my challenges.
It shows all who are reading that you are unable or unwilling to
answer even my simple arguments with anything at all persuasive.
In other words, you are just whining. I had hopes for a discussion.
Oh well.
--
John Popelish
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Sara Brum" |
|
| Title: Re: Complexitives of Molecular Biology |
22 May 2004 04:37:25 PM |
|
|
"John Popelish" <jpopelish@rica.net> wrote in message
news:40AF7D23.B8F23614@rica.net...
IKnowHimDoYou wrote:
<snip>
As a simple example examine the softwre in a computer which uses the
natural processes of chemistry and physics to generate a word processing
document, but the software has to be written by an intelligent agent and
not by random chance(the document production also has to have a simalar
same agent) so this means that information must be apobetic.
<snip>
By the way, what is, "apobetic"? I misspell a lot of words, but I
haven't a clue on this one.
It appears to be a word coined by a proponent of intelligent design by the
name of Werner Gitt. So far, I've only seen it used to describe Gitt's "5th
level of information", the "apobotic" level, to wit: the intended purpose,
or goal of information. So I'd guess that IKnowShit is trying to say that
"information must have a purpose".
.
|
|
|
| User: "IKnowHimDoYou" |
|
| Title: Re: Complexitives of Molecular Biology |
23 May 2004 11:00:29 AM |
|
|
In article <2h9vhpFagkdmU1@uni-berlin.de>, "Sara Brum"
<sarabrum@medulla.com> wrote:
"John Popelish" <jpopelish@rica.net> wrote in message
news:40AF7D23.B8F23614@rica.net...
IKnowHimDoYou wrote:
<snip>
As a simple example examine the softwre in a computer which uses the
natural processes of chemistry and physics to generate a word processing
document, but the software has to be written by an intelligent agent and
not by random chance(the document production also has to have a simalar
same agent) so this means that information must be apobetic.
<snip>
By the way, what is, "apobetic"? I misspell a lot of words, but I
haven't a clue on this one.
It appears to be a word coined by a proponent of intelligent design by the
name of Werner Gitt. So far, I've only seen it used to describe Gitt's "5th
level of information", the "apobotic" level, to wit: the intended purpose,
or goal of information. So I'd guess that IKnowHimDoYou is trying to say that
"information must have a purpose".
__________________________________________________________
Yes, that is correct Sara(Princess). And you proved it by writing a
paragraph trying to convey the apobetic level of information, right?
BTW, Sare, the Lord Jesus Christ is still calling you and He wants you for
His own.
Won't you consider Him? He can give you real peace and purpose which your
apobetic communication seems to be seeking...
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "John Popelish" |
|
| Title: Re: Complexitives of Molecular Biology |
22 May 2004 06:56:17 PM |
|
|
Sara Brum wrote:
"John Popelish" <jpopelish@rica.net> wrote in message
news:40AF7D23.B8F23614@rica.net...
IKnowHimDoYou wrote:
<snip>
As a simple example examine the softwre in a computer which uses the
natural processes of chemistry and physics to generate a word processing
document, but the software has to be written by an intelligent agent and
not by random chance(the document production also has to have a simalar
same agent) so this means that information must be apobetic.
<snip>
By the way, what is, "apobetic"? I misspell a lot of words, but I
haven't a clue on this one.
It appears to be a word coined by a proponent of intelligent design by the
name of Werner Gitt. So far, I've only seen it used to describe Gitt's "5th
level of information", the "apobotic" level, to wit: the intended purpose,
or goal of information. So I'd guess that IKnowShit is trying to say that
"information must have a purpose".
Thanks for the explanation. I don't feel so bad for not knowing that
word.
--
John Popelish
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "johac" |
|
| Title: Re: Complexitives of Molecular Biology |
23 May 2004 02:42:43 AM |
|
|
In article <IKnowHim-2205040901050001@pm1-23.kalama.com>,
(IKnowHimDoYou) wrote:
Complexitives of Molecular Biology
Perhaps it would help if you guys learned some.
The fertilized egg cell is the classic specimen of developmental biology.
It contains the full and complete set of genetic instructions to transform
itself into a complex muticellular organism. This is acheived by the
pre-programmed complexities of molecular biology incorporated in the DNA.
So?
The evolutionary religionist fanatics insist that all this comes about
through chance variation and differential transformations. They
neglect(through ignorance or outright deceit) that this developmental
genetic transformation is driven by a finely tuned and designed
intelligent cause.
Evidence for the existence of an intelligent cause?
Instructions in the fertilized egg control the
embryonic development from the beginning and direct it to a specific
outcome(it cannot vary outside of certain boundries called "kinds" in
God's Word). This full and complete set of instructions emplys the
material processes of chemistry and physics but is not created by those
processes as claimed by the evolutionary religionist fanatics posting
here.
So? You seem to be agreeing that embryonic development occurs by
completely natural processes.
As a simple example examine the softwre in a computer which uses the
natural processes of chemistry and physics to generate a word processing
document, but the software has to be written by an intelligent agent and
not by random chance(the document production also has to have a simalar
same agent) so this means that information must be apobetic.
A cell is not a computer. Hint: computers do not reproduce.
--
John Hachmann aa #1782
"Men become civilized not in their willingness to believe, but in
proportion to their readiness to doubt." - H. L. Mencken
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mark K. Bilbo" |
|
| Title: Re: Complexitives of Molecular Biology |
22 May 2004 11:21:12 AM |
|
|
On Sat, 22 May 2004 09:01:05 -0700 in episode
<IKnowHim-2205040901050001@pm1-23.kalama.com> we saw our hero
IKnowHim@leavingsoon.com (IKnowHimDoYou):
Complexitives of Molecular Biology
As if you know anything about such.
--
Mark K. Bilbo - a.a. #1423
EAC Department of Linguistic Subversion
Finally, we're reaching true equality in our schools.
NOBODY is getting an education...
.
|
|
|
| User: "+Church of The Painful Truth+" |
|
| Title: Re: Complexitives of Molecular Biology |
22 May 2004 12:21:20 PM |
|
|
"Mark K. Bilbo" <y@hoo.com-amikchi> wrote in message
news:pan.2004.05.22.16.21.11.720479@hoo.com-amikchi...
On Sat, 22 May 2004 09:01:05 -0700 in episode
<IKnowHim-2205040901050001@pm1-23.kalama.com> we saw our hero
IKnowHim@leavingsoon.com (IKnowHimDoYou):
Complexitives of Molecular Biology
As if you know anything about such.
--
Mark K. Bilbo - a.a. #1423
EAC Department of Linguistic Subversion
Finally, we're reaching true equality in our schools.
NOBODY is getting an education...
RULES OF ATHEISM
1. "I'm right and you are wrong".
2. Never admit that you are wrong, even if you really are.
3. When you have nothing to say, hurl insults.
4. Regard and portray your own violence, whether physical, psychological,
or verbal, at all times as defensive
4a. Specific example for 4.: Cry for "freedom from religion", but whenever
followers of other faiths want the same freedom and courts agree, scream
"Persecution!"
5. Be prepared at all times to lie and bluster, particularly when backed
into a corner in an argument
5a. When caught lying, always accuse the opposition of lying rather than
be honest and admit the obvious
6. Never accept responsibility for any mess you have personally caused.
7. When you are forced to admit to an error, regard the whole process of
error and correction as part of atheisms failure for you and not as a
something for which you should apologise retract or make amends except
verbally and secretly to yourself
8. Always see yourself and you personal actions as part of no ones plans
for
the world. Recognise that even your errors are just part of being a
vertabrate monkey out of the premordial slugde
9.Profess humility but avoid the actual experience of it.
10.Refuse to take in information that differs from your own view and
oppose all such information through classification of such information in
a derogatory and simplistic manner(eg by categorising it as right wing
propaganda)
11.Refuse to accept that truth is not black and white; that reality is
complex and there are shades of grey
12.Refuse to forgive anyone else for anything because you have no moral
compass guiding you.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Another Apostate" |
|
| Title: Re: IKnowHimInTheBiblicalSense |
22 May 2004 05:18:44 PM |
|
|
Why are you posting in this newsgroup, you moronic wanker?
"IKnowHimDoYou" <IKnowHim@leavingsoon.com> wrote in message
news:IKnowHim-2205040901050001@pm1-23.kalama.com...
Complexitives of Molecular Biology
The fertilized egg cell is the classic specimen of developmental biology.
It contains the full and complete set of genetic instructions to transform
itself into a complex muticellular organism. This is acheived by the
pre-programmed complexities of molecular biology incorporated in the DNA.
The evolutionary religionist fanatics insist that all this comes about
through chance variation and differential transformations. They
neglect(through ignorance or outright deceit) that this developmental
genetic transformation is driven by a finely tuned and designed
intelligent cause. Instructions in the fertilized egg control the
embryonic development from the beginning and direct it to a specific
outcome(it cannot vary outside of certain boundries called "kinds" in
God's Word). This full and complete set of instructions emplys the
material processes of chemistry and physics but is not created by those
processes as claimed by the evolutionary religionist fanatics posting
here.
As a simple example examine the softwre in a computer which uses the
natural processes of chemistry and physics to generate a word processing
document, but the software has to be written by an intelligent agent and
not by random chance(the document production also has to have a simalar
same agent) so this means that information must be apobetic.
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
