| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
JBCuzISaidSo
Jaded Humanist
Joined: 22 Feb 2008
Posts: 2124
Local time: 3:14 PM
Location: South Florida
|
 Posted: Tue Apr 22, 2008 3:48 pm Post subject: Atheists Riddle: |
  |
|
I found this on a google ad I happened to see. 
http://celestialmechanic.com
He claims he stumped IIDB! http://celestialmechanic.com/iidb.htm
| Quote: | | Information Theory and DNA are the strongest argument against Atheism - because the laws of physics and chemistry do not explain the existence of information. |
Read his "If you can read this, I can prove God exists" page, heh.
Tell me this fool's been dealt with already? Apparently he has some email thing going on, starts today. Not joining but maybe somebody else would like to.
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
|
Gerard
Old World Shadow
Joined: 18 Nov 2003
Posts: 3986
Local time: 8:14 PM
Location: Groningen, the Netherlands
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 22, 2008 4:09 pm Post subject: Re: Atheists Riddle: |
|
|
| JBCuzISaidSo wrote: | I found this on a google ad I happened to see.
http://celestialmechanic.com
He claims he stumped IIDB! http://celestialmechanic.com/iidb.htm
| Quote: | | Information Theory and DNA are the strongest argument against Atheism - because the laws of physics and chemistry do not explain the existence of information. |
Read his "If you can read this, I can prove God exists" page, heh.
Tell me this fool's been dealt with already? Apparently he has some email thing going on, starts today. Not joining but maybe somebody else would like to. |
He says:
| Quote: | 1) DNA is not merely a molecule with a pattern; it is a code, a language, and an information storage mechanism.
2) All codes are created by a conscious mind; there is no natural process known to science that creates coded information.
3) Therefore DNA was designed by a mind. |
The assertion that DNA is a code is questionable at least. But even if by some human definition it could be regarded as a code, 2 and 3 still don't follow. Code is just a concept people use to clarify things (much like information). It's not a thing that actually has absolute properties that are always valid beyond the usefullness they have in human communication. It's just another play (ploy??) with words.
A little further down on that page he makes a cute remark:
| Quote: | | In human language, symbols are arbitrary |
He should have thought of that when he started about codes and what they are.
Gerard
_________________
The Historical Atlas of Europe
But as man exists in nature, I am not authorized to say that his formation, is above the power of nature.
Paul Henri Thiry Baron d' Holbach, (1723-1789)
Not collecting stamps is my hobby.
Gerard, (1962-*)
Last edited by Gerard on Tue Apr 22, 2008 6:36 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
baddogma
antitheist
Joined: 01 Feb 2006
Posts: 9233
Local time: 5:14 AM
Location: Colorado
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 22, 2008 4:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Dawkins explains it rather well IMHO.
_________________
Join http://www.sefora.org/
Can omnicient god who knows the future find the omnipotence to change his future mind?
I'm ashamed of what I did for a Klondike bar.... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Moloth
Coin Operated Boy
Joined: 27 Aug 2003
Posts: 23063
Local time: 3:14 PM
Location: Warner Robins, GA
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 22, 2008 4:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| baddogma wrote: | | Dawkins explains it rather well IMHO. |
pfffftt.. what would an evolutionary biologist know about DNA? nigga, please.
_________________
-=The Believer is Happy; the Skeptic is Wise=-
www.Moloth.com
Last edited by Moloth on Tue Feb 30, 2026 13:61 am; edited 426 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JBCuzISaidSo
Jaded Humanist
Joined: 22 Feb 2008
Posts: 2124
Local time: 3:14 PM
Location: South Florida
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 22, 2008 5:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Gerard 
Now, I wonder if he's already thought of that but refuses to acknowledge it? Very likely.
The whole thing frustrates me as much as that Expelled bullshit. How do these people function on excuses and the old "science is wrong all the time" hoopla? I don't get it.
| baddogma wrote: | | Dawkins explains it rather well IMHO. |
What?! An evolutionary biologist knows more than that pseudo-genius? HUH?!
Kinda off topic, but I've always loved the nickname "Darwin's Rottweiler/Bulldog". So fitting. I think Darwin's Watchdog might be even better, given The Blind Watchmaker (and especially given my aversion to naming an entire breed of dog to be mean).
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gerard
Old World Shadow
Joined: 18 Nov 2003
Posts: 3986
Local time: 8:14 PM
Location: Groningen, the Netherlands
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 23, 2008 5:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| JBCuzISaidSo wrote: | Gerard
Now, I wonder if he's already thought of that but refuses to acknowledge it? Very likely.
The whole thing frustrates me as much as that Expelled bullshit. How do these people function on excuses and the old "science is wrong all the time" hoopla? I don't get it. |
Treating linguistical concepts, that are by their very nature ambivalent metaphores, as if they are natural phenomena with physical properties that are valid in any context, is a ploy that is central to the creationist / ID argument. It sounds clever and logical enough to convince people and that's sufficient for them. It scores the desired effect and supports and confirms the beliefs that are already held by people. It's a trick that is used a lot in crummy arguments, not limited to this one. The validity of the argument is secundary. That's not one of the things that makes creationists tick imho. These are basically just soundbites. They work for them in the short term and when they get critiscised by some, that's a problem for later.
Gerard
_________________
The Historical Atlas of Europe
But as man exists in nature, I am not authorized to say that his formation, is above the power of nature.
Paul Henri Thiry Baron d' Holbach, (1723-1789)
Not collecting stamps is my hobby.
Gerard, (1962-*) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Vyrian
Forum Leader
Joined: 03 Nov 2007
Posts: 1063
Local time: 3:14 PM
Location: K-PAX
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 25, 2008 7:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
Theists always find a way to crap on information that have no knowledge about. It's always some raped version that you would expect a child to say. Seriously, creationists don't even know what the fck Evolution is.
"Everlution is when a man is born from a monkey overnight and they thing dat disporoove gawwwwd."
Worthless scums.
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kmisho
Stochastic
Joined: 05 Dec 2005
Posts: 4632
Local time: 6:14 AM
Location: Richmond, Virginia USA
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 25, 2008 7:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
Big red sirens should go off in your head any time a creationist uses the word "information". It's never meant to make sense but merely bedazzle the reader.
_________________
K Michau
Now this religion happens to prevail/Until by that one it is overthrown/Because men dare not live with men alone/But always with another fairy tale.
al-Ma'arri, Syrian Poet, died 1057
You deny the existence of 999 alleged Gods. I merely deny one more - yours.
John MacKinnon Robertson, "Godism" 1896
"Never is a long time." Robert Fripp, 1998
Poetry, Art, Music |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
Live Video and Chat Room
Freethought Videos
FAQ
Search
Usergroups
Register
