2009-8-3 04:55:00
[Compiler's Note: The "Local Posts" series of articles found here in "The Archives" are a collection of exchanges between JJ Dewey and others participating on a local online newspaper blog. These exchanges were subsequently re-posted by JJ Dewey on The Keys Of Knowledge discussion group prior to being archived here.]
"Kliphy" wrote:
"It must be comforting to have all of the answers. Many of us are fine with just holding all of the questions, however, realizing that all of the answers are beyond our grasp.
"BTW, the attitude of superiority is generally a manifestation of feelings of inferiority. Requiring answers to the unanswerable is a manifestation of insecurity."
JJ:
Sounds like you would have sided with the church authorities that put Galileo in prison.
I'm glad the likes of him, Newton, Tesla, Einstein, and many other "greats" did not think as you. They sought answers that others thought we should not seek. All knowledge is attainable to those who seek.
"ConservoDem" wrote:
"Actually, it's not depressing at all (to not believe in God or an afterlife). Quite the opposite. Once set free from the irrational rules of religion, one's imagination is free to soar."
JJ:
I believe in God and an afterlife and am not subject to any irrational rules. My imagination is soaring just fine.
"Grandjester" wrote:
"Jesus Christ!
"Can we go one day without the God stuff (and be assured, I don't mean 'stuff')? It's bad enough that we have the Ranchers of the world trying to inject it into everything but every flippin' day in the Statesman too?"
JJ:
Take this up with the Statesman. They want us to comment on the letters they publish.
"Larnewoman" wrote:
"God bless you...."
JJ:
That would be impossible if there is no God as you seem to be purporting.
"Larnewoman":
"I don't know why, that the DNA molecule proves God [exists] (still waiting for any scientifically rational explanation, as opposed to an argument from credulity)."
JJ:
Entropy explains it; but the truth is so obvious that even questioning a creator is illogical. If you stumble across a computer just lying in the road, it is its own proof that an intelligence was behind its creation. No one in their right mind would doubt such a thing.
"Kliphy" wrote:
"For me, the ability to say 'I don't know the answer to that,' is important."
JJ:
No one is saying that we should not admit to that which we do not know. I am saying that the unknown can be discovered. There is no limit to discovery.
"Grandjester" (GJ) wrote:
"DNA is proof of evolution, not any God."
JJ:
And evolution is proof of God.
Quoting JJ from an earlier post, "Grandjester" (GJ) wrote:
"And evolution is proof of God."
GJ then wrote:
"Care to explain that one, Joe?"
JJ:
The year is 1950 and three scientists are walking through a field. One of them stumbles across something. They look down and discover it is a Macintosh 512 [personal computer]. They look around and wonder where it came from. Obviously it did not create itself.
They take it home and plug it in and it works perfectly. They take it apart and conclude the technology is beyond anything they have. They take another walk in the field and this time discover a Mac Plus. They examine this and find the technology is even more overwhelming.
Then they go for additional walks and discover a Mac SE, then a Mac IIcx, followed by a Quadra, an iBook, a G3, a G4 and finally an Mac Book Air.
"This is fantastic," said one. The first computer was amazing, but this last one is mind-boggling. How in the world did these machines get here in good working order?
"Obviously a superior intelligence created them," said the second scientist.
"I'm not so sure,' said the third. Notice that these machines have evolved. The last is much more evolved than the first. There seems to be some process of evolution going on."
The second scientist agrees, and adds, "Indeed, but some intelligence had to create each one of these generations of computers."
"I don't think so," said the third. "Since we have looked everywhere and found no evidence of a creator then the only explanation is that these computers have evolved by themselves through some natural process without the aid of any intelligent life."
"You can't be serious," said the other two. "These computers could not have evolved with no guiding intelligence. It is not statistically possible."
"But you cannot produce the creator,' said the third, "so I'm going with the belief that spontaneous forces put together the first one and the rest just evolved.
Just as the third scientist makes no sense even so do those who believe in creation through evolution with no guiding intelligence follow the path of zero reason.
"TheAntiSavior" wrote:
"Even if god did create DNA, Joe (no proof whatsoever, but a guess), there is no reason it should have been the god of the Bible. And there is no proof that it is the god of the Bible instead of the Hindu god or the Muslim god or the magic turtle god or maybe even a god nobody even knows about."
JJ:
There's one God, but many interpretations just as all of us receive life from the one sun. Calling the sun by different names does not turn it into the moon. A rose by any other name is still a rose.
"Grandjester" wrote:
"Yeah Joseph,
"That is a nice little story... Unfortunately it has no bearing on the question I asked.
"And you are making an argument for Intelligent Design, not Evolution, which is disingenuous."
JJ:
Did you miss the evolution of the computers in the story which corresponds roughly to the evolution of humans?
"ConservoDem" wrote:
"All this statement demonstrates is that Joe is proceeding from the assumption that all DNA was created instantly from whole cloth (no doubt during that first week 6,000 years ago) as stated in the Bible rather than developing over time, as evolutionary science proves."
JJ:
The earth is billions of years old in case you did not know, Was the Macintosh 512 created instantly? No it was created by thousands of years of human evolutionary thought? No one but you is talking about instant creation.
"ConservoDem"
"Besides, there were clearly no scientists involved in the story."
JJ:
And if they were not scientists, what would they have done differently? Worshipped the Macs?
"Grandjester":
"I don't think that the Creationists and the ID advocates can quite grasp how science has so completely outrun them. Last year the Human Genome Project identified over 700 instances of selection in DNA over the last 10,000 years."
JJ:
And where did that power of selection come from?
"Larnewoman":
"At least most of the old school creationist canards ('Joseph732's' entropy argument for example) have been left behind."
JJ:
So, if I build a sand castle, entropy no longer causes it to disintegrate? And you think creationists are illogical.
It sounds that if you were one of the three who found the Macs you would have thought they evolved without intelligent assistance.
Am I in kindergarten here? Am I the only adult in the room?
GJ:
"Secondly, even if we were to take your little story as analogous (make no mistake, it's not), the example you provided do not correlate to evolution for quite a number of reasons, the fact that it is not NATURAL selection being just one."
JJ:
And how can there be selection without intelligence?
Quote Of The Day
"A very rough extrapolation from an estimate of the federal regulatory enterprise by economist Mark Crain estimates that regulatory compliance costs hit $1.172 trillion in 2008."
(Source: http://cei.org/issue-analysis/2009/05/28/ten-thousand-commandments)
-- End Of Part Two --
Go To:
Next article in series: Local Posts #28, Part One
Previous article in series: Local Posts #27, Part One
Copyright © 2009 by J.J. Dewey, All Rights Reserved