| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"IKnowHimDoYou" |
| Date: |
31 May 2004 11:46:00 AM |
| Object: |
Ordered vs Random Complexity |
Ordered vs Random Complexity
When one observes reality in the world around us the thought comes that
this could in no way be due to radomness or only matter in motion. The
evolutionist religion uses the following translation of God's Word:
In the beginning were the particles;
And the particles became complex living stuff;
and the stuff imangined God;
But then diescovered Evolution.
Real observation shows a very sophisticated order to everything around and
within us. The proper metaphysical basis for true science is not
naturalism(particles coming into being by themselves) or materialism but
the fact that the Creator of the cosmos not only created an intelligible
universe but also created the powers of reasoning which enable us to
conduct scientific investigations in that universe. Sir Frances Crick
warns evolutionary biologists that
"biologists must constantly keep in mind that what they see was not
designed, but rather evolved."
This is their mantra that must be said over and over again trying to
instill matter in motion as the supreme god of evolution. As Phillip
Johnson said:
"Reality is simply too rational and beautiful ever to be forced into the
narrow catagories that materialism can comprehend or present. "
Darwinian pseudo-science has come to a dead end after seeing that trying
to build everything on a foundation of matter has led into a blind ally
with no way of escape. All the pseudo-sciences such as Marxism,
Freudianism and Darwinism have suffered the same outcome of failure for
when their cultural power base collapsed they were left with nothing but
chaos and dispair.
.
|
|
| User: "Denis Loubet" |
|
| Title: Re: Ordered vs Random Complexity |
31 May 2004 12:01:40 PM |
|
|
"IKnowHimDoYou" <IKnowHim@leavingsoon.com> wrote in message
news:IKnowHim-3105040946000001@pm8-15.kalama.com...
Ordered vs Random Complexity
When one observes reality in the world around us the thought comes that
this could in no way be due to radomness or only matter in motion. The
evolutionist religion uses the following translation of God's Word:
In the beginning were the particles;
And the particles became complex living stuff;
and the stuff imangined God;
But then diescovered Evolution.
Real observation shows a very sophisticated order to everything around and
within us.
Ok, why is that sand grain in the precise place it is?
Or are you a lying sack of *****?
--
Denis Loubet
dloubet@io.com
http://www.io.com/~dloubet
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Billy Goat" |
|
| Title: Re: Ordered vs Random Complexity |
31 May 2004 07:43:36 PM |
|
|
(IKnowHimDoYou) wrote in message news:<IKnowHim-3105040946000001@pm8-15.kalama.com>...
Ordered vs Random Complexity
When one observes reality in the world around us the thought comes that
this could in no way be due to radomness or only matter in motion.
Do you see anything else besides matter in motion?
The
evolutionist religion uses the following translation of God's Word:
<snip>
Why would an evolutionist, or anyone trying to learn about reality,
use God's Word at all?
--Billy
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Josef Balluch" |
|
| Title: Re: Ordered vs Random Complexity |
31 May 2004 06:58:50 PM |
|
|
In a message sent 'round the world, IKnowHimDoYou poured fuel on the
fire with the following:
Ordered vs Random Complexity
When one observes reality in the world around us ...
LOL !!
Do you write this bumph yourself?
... the thought comes ...
If so, then that would be a first for you.
... that
this could in no way be due to radomness or only matter in motion.
No doubt. Has anyone suggested otherwise?
[ snip some twaddle ]
Real observation shows a very sophisticated order to everything around and
within us.
Please describe the "sophisticated order" found in the microwave
background radiation and the quantum foam.
The proper metaphysical basis for true science is not
naturalism(particles coming into being by themselves) or materialism but
the fact that the Creator of the cosmos not only created an intelligible
universe but also created the powers of reasoning which enable us to
conduct scientific investigations in that universe.
Unsupported assertion.
[ snip some more twaddle ]
Darwinian pseudo-science has come to a dead end after seeing that trying
to build everything on a foundation of matter has led into a blind ally
with no way of escape.
All the pseudo-sciences such as Marxism,
Freudianism and Darwinism have suffered the same outcome of failure for
when their cultural power base collapsed they were left with nothing but
chaos and dispair.
Keep dreaming.
Regards,
Josef
Religion is a cage made from other men's thoughts.
-- Duane Alan Hahn
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Silver Blaze" |
|
| Title: Re: Ordered vs Random Complexity |
01 Jun 2004 06:00:36 PM |
|
|
In article <IKnowHim-3105040946000001@pm8-15.kalama.com>,
IKnowHim@leavingsoon.com (IKnowHimDoYou) wrote:
All the pseudo-sciences such as Marxism,
Freudianism and Darwinism have suffered the same outcome of failure for
when their cultural power base collapsed they were left with nothing but
chaos and dispair.
Again you demonstrate your appalling ignorance
Marxism is not a science it is a form of political philosophy. "Political
science" is not science in the true sense. The attempts to make science
out of politics and economics have always ended up being as laughable as
attempts to present theology as science or even as an attempt to present
simple reality, rather than imagery.
Freudianism is a school of psychology. The science involved is medicine.
Freudianism is not a science in itself. It does not seek to present
itself as the only true way (we leave that sort of nonsense to
Fundamentalist Christians who having supposedly found the way the truth
and the life meander in ever decreasing circles as lost souls).
The cultural base of both Marxism and Freudianism is in fact Western
Christianity and Judaism tinged with Greek Philosophy and Roman Law.
Contrary to your claims this cultural foundation is mostly in quite good
order. It is the Christian segment that is rather weak at the moment due
to its having a theology stymied through Fundamentalism.
Darwinism barely exists other than as a historical entity. We long ago
moved on from there to a far deeper understanding of evolution and of
heredity. Darwinism was never a science in itself but rather was a
contribution to science that brought us enormous insight into, and
understanding of, the development of life. We have now advanced to the
point where we can understand the role performed by bacteria in the
building of the genetic code
But then you don't want to know about that
You remain an intellectual ostrich with its head in the sand and
displaying a swastika on its bum.
A VERY silly person indeed.
+++++++++++++++++++
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mark K. Bilbo" |
|
| Title: Re: Ordered vs Random Complexity |
31 May 2004 01:25:37 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 31 May 2004 09:46:00 -0700 in episode
<IKnowHim-3105040946000001@pm8-15.kalama.com> we saw our hero
IKnowHim@leavingsoon.com (IKnowHimDoYou):
Darwinian pseudo-science has come to a dead end
Except it's not and you're a liar.
--
Mark K. Bilbo - a.a. #1423
EAC Department of Linguistic Subversion
"I think it's the worst kept secret in Washington.
That everybody - everybody I talk to in Washington
has known and fully knows what [the neo-conservative]
agenda was and what they were trying to do."
[Retired General Anthony Zinni]
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Earl Camembert" |
|
| Title: Re: Ordered vs Random Complexity |
31 May 2004 06:02:12 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 31 May 2004 09:46:00 -0700,
(IKnowHimDoYou) wrote:
Ordered vs Random Complexity
When one observes reality in the world around us the thought comes that
this could in no way be due to radomness or only matter in motion. The
evolutionist religion uses the following translation of God's Word:
The more I learn the more I realize there is so much more to learn.
This is science, answer a question and two more unknowns present them
selves. With you people all learning stops. You have the answer no
need to ask questions. Does science have all the answers by no means
and they will admit as much. You people (believers in Yahweh-Allah)
have all the answers and will kill any body that disagrees.
.
|
|
|
| User: "bardi" |
|
| Title: Re: Ordered vs Random Complexity |
31 May 2004 06:13:38 PM |
|
|
"Earl Camembert" <nospam@forme.org> wrote in message
news:12enb0ts1m61pfnekal4ob14fspgnhj8vr@4ax.com...
On Mon, 31 May 2004 09:46:00 -0700,
(IKnowHimDoYou) wrote:
Ordered vs Random Complexity
When one observes reality in the world around us the thought comes that
this could in no way be due to radomness or only matter in motion. The
evolutionist religion uses the following translation of God's Word:
The more I learn the more I realize there is so much more to learn.
This is science, answer a question and two more unknowns present them
selves. With you people all learning stops. You have the answer no
need to ask questions. Does science have all the answers by no means
and they will admit as much. You people (believers in Yahweh-Allah)
have all the answers and will kill any body that disagrees.
Rather large assumption to make. Granted, I can see why you would make it
but still. I not only do not claim to have the answers..I have barely made a
dent in the questions.
dnp
bardi
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Stranger" |
|
| Title: Re: Ordered vs Random Complexity |
01 Jun 2004 03:29:01 PM |
|
|
"Earl Camembert" <nospam@forme.org> wrote in message
news:12enb0ts1m61pfnekal4ob14fspgnhj8vr@4ax.com...
On Mon, 31 May 2004 09:46:00 -0700,
(IKnowHimDoYou) wrote:
Ordered vs Random Complexity
When one observes reality in the world around us the thought comes that
this could in no way be due to radomness or only matter in motion. The
evolutionist religion uses the following translation of God's Word:
First of all, Evolution is not a religioun, that only fly's in your
indoctrinine bases... aka church.
It is the randomness that makes Evolution, however here is the trick! The
randomness makes much more useless complexity then usefull complexity.
With humans and animals we have to deal with natural selection
ofcourse....something you might want to look up.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Karl von Laudermann" |
|
| Title: AQOTM nomination, Was: Re: Ordered vs Random Complexity |
04 Jun 2004 08:48:16 AM |
|
|
Earl Camembert <nospam@forme.org> wrote in message news:<12enb0ts1m61pfnekal4ob14fspgnhj8vr@4ax.com>...
On Mon, 31 May 2004 09:46:00 -0700,
(IKnowHimDoYou) wrote:
Ordered vs Random Complexity
When one observes reality in the world around us the thought comes that
this could in no way be due to radomness or only matter in motion. The
evolutionist religion uses the following translation of God's Word:
The more I learn the more I realize there is so much more to learn.
This is science, answer a question and two more unknowns present them
selves. With you people all learning stops. You have the answer no
need to ask questions. Does science have all the answers by no means
and they will admit as much. You people (believers in Yahweh-Allah)
have all the answers and will kill any body that disagrees.
Seconds?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Carol Lee Smith" |
|
| Title: Re: AQOTM nomination, Was: Re: Ordered vs Random Complexity |
04 Jun 2004 09:28:45 AM |
|
|
On 4 Jun 2004, Karl von Laudermann wrote:
The more I learn the more I realize there is so much more to learn.
This is science, answer a question and two more unknowns present them
selves. With you people all learning stops. You have the answer no
need to ask questions. Does science have all the answers by no means
and they will admit as much. You people (believers in Yahweh-Allah)
have all the answers and will kill any body that disagrees.
Seconds?
I second the nomination.
Can I do that?
I have an atheist number!! Is that good for voter registration?
Carol Smith
AA #1570
"Without faith we might relapse into scientific or rational thinking,
which leads by a slippery slope toward constitutional democracy."
-- Robert Anton Wilson
.
|
|
|
| User: "*nemo*" |
|
| Title: Re: AQOTM nomination, Was: Re: Ordered vs Random Complexity |
05 Jun 2004 05:01:27 AM |
|
|
In article
<Pine.OSF.3.96.1040604092719.10831P-100000@alpha1.csd.uwm.edu>,
Carol Lee Smith <human@csd.uwm.edu> wrote:
On 4 Jun 2004, Karl von Laudermann wrote:
The more I learn the more I realize there is so much more to learn.
This is science, answer a question and two more unknowns present them
selves. With you people all learning stops. You have the answer no
need to ask questions. Does science have all the answers by no means
and they will admit as much. You people (believers in Yahweh-Allah)
have all the answers and will kill any body that disagrees.
Seconds?
I second the nomination.
Can I do that?
I have an atheist number!! Is that good for voter registration?
Carol Smith
AA #1570
"Without faith we might relapse into scientific or rational thinking,
which leads by a slippery slope toward constitutional democracy."
-- Robert Anton Wilson
Recorded. Extra groups removed.
--
Nemo - EAC Commissioner for Bible Belt Underwater Operations.
Atheist #1331 (the Palindrome of doom!)
BAAWA Knight! - One of those warm Southern Knights, y'all!
Charter member, SMASH!!
http://home.earthlink.net/~jehdjh/Relpg.html
Draco Dormiens Nunquam Titillandus
Quotemeister since March 2002
.
|
|
|
| User: "Michelle Malkin" |
|
| Title: Re: AQOTM nomination, Was: Re: Ordered vs Random Complexity |
05 Jun 2004 05:44:23 AM |
|
|
"*nemo*" <nemo0037@earthlink.dieSPAM.net> wrote in message
news:nemo0037-6BA548.06012705062004@news03.east.earthlink.net...
In article
<Pine.OSF.3.96.1040604092719.10831P-100000@alpha1.csd.uwm.edu>,
Carol Lee Smith <human@csd.uwm.edu> wrote:
On 4 Jun 2004, Karl von Laudermann wrote:
The more I learn the more I realize there is so much more to learn.
This is science, answer a question and two more unknowns present
them
selves. With you people all learning stops. You have the answer no
need to ask questions. Does science have all the answers by no means
and they will admit as much. You people (believers in Yahweh-Allah)
have all the answers and will kill any body that disagrees.
Seconds?
I second the nomination.
Can I do that?
I have an atheist number!! Is that good for voter registration?
Carol Smith
AA #1570
"Without faith we might relapse into scientific or rational thinking,
which leads by a slippery slope toward constitutional democracy."
-- Robert Anton Wilson
Recorded. Extra groups removed.
Nemo, could you send me your e-mail address, please?
I'm not getting your mail in the newsgroup again.
--
^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^
Michelle Malkin (Mickey) aa list#1
alt.atheism atheist/agnostic list name collector
BAAWA Knight & EAC Bible thumper thumper
http://questioner.www2.50megs.com
^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^
--
Nemo - EAC Commissioner for Bible Belt Underwater Operations.
Atheist #1331 (the Palindrome of doom!)
BAAWA Knight! - One of those warm Southern Knights, y'all!
Charter member, SMASH!!
http://home.earthlink.net/~jehdjh/Relpg.html
Draco Dormiens Nunquam Titillandus
Quotemeister since March 2002
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Puck Greenman" |
|
| Title: Re: Ordered vs Random Complexity |
31 May 2004 06:18:18 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 31 May 2004 09:46:00 -0700,
(IKnowHimDoYou) wrote:
Real observation shows a very sophisticated order to everything around and
within us. The proper metaphysical basis for true science is not
naturalism(particles coming into being by themselves) or materialism but
the fact that the Creator
Why do you think that order necessitates a creator?
Puck Greenman
#162
BAAWA Knight.
Blesed is the self righteous xtian,
for his is the sure and certain knowledge
that no matter what load of tripe he
comes out with:
God told him to say it.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "raven1" |
|
| Title: Re: Ordered vs Random Complexity |
31 May 2004 12:01:52 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 31 May 2004 09:46:00 -0700,
(IKnowHimDoYou) wrote:
Real observation shows a very sophisticated order to everything around and
within us. The proper metaphysical basis for true science is not
naturalism(particles coming into being by themselves) or materialism but
the fact that the Creator of the cosmos not only created an intelligible
universe but also created the powers of reasoning which enable us to
conduct scientific investigations in that universe
So in essence, the proper basis for science should be an appeal to
magic, which is, of course, at its core, the abandoning of the very
thing you're postulating it as a basis for in the first place?
Brilliant!
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "MarkA" |
|
| Title: Re: Ordered vs Random Complexity |
01 Jun 2004 06:50:37 AM |
|
|
On Mon, 31 May 2004 09:46:00 -0700, IKnowHimDoYou wrote:
Ordered vs Random Complexity
When one observes reality in the world around us the thought comes that
this could in no way be due to radomness or only matter in motion. The
evolutionist religion uses the following translation of God's Word:
<snip>
Do you even know what the term, "cognitive illusion" means? The human
mind is very good at finding meaning and patterns, even when the signal is
completely random. The reason that science works so well is that it
recognizes that even though something *seems* right, it must still be
rigorously tested. Aristotle claimed that heavy things fall faster than
lighter things. It took 1,800 years before Galileo showed that to be
false.
I would certainly agree that the Universe around us *seems* to be
carefully built for our convenience. But there is no *evidence* that is
the case. The best argument the IDers can come up with is, "How could it
be otherwise?"
If you are going to accept what "seems" right, with no supporting
evidence, and requiring the existence of a magical super-being that has
been "seen" only in ancient myths of questionable origin and dubious
reliability, while discounting the well documented discontinuity between
what seems right and what actually IS right, then you are squandering all
of the advances in understanding that have occurred over the centuries,
and clinging to the traditions of ignorance and superstition that would
still have us treating diseases by burning incense and begging our
protector spirits to cast out the demons.
--
MarkA
(still caught in the maze of twisty little passages, all different)
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
