Ex-AtheistMuslims.com - No biological man-made life yet – Science is decades behind..

[observer]

Yes I insist you do hence the PDF file I enclosed above. Please do read it before you next write!

Well, there are 47 pages of text there so it'll take a while! But having a (very) quick skim of it, it seems to conclude that there must have been fine tuning to our genetic code in order for it to have been able to propagate in a hostile environment.

I could equally give you a link to a large document showing that that is not the case.

Again, I think it's clear that ToE is not complete, but I believe that one day it will be as close to complete as we can hope for.

 

[Independent]

Excellent article on the matter:

I think you posted this before and I read it then. You are still trying to pick holes in TOE but that's not my question - so that's not the answer.

Perhaps someone else could answer from a Creationist point of view?

 

[جوري]

Well, there are 47 pages of text there so it'll take a while! But having a (very) quick skim of it, it seems to conclude that there must have been fine tuning to our genetic code in order for it to have been able to propagate in a hostile environment.

I could equally give you a link to a large document showing that that is not the case.

Again, I think it's clear that ToE is not complete, but I believe that one day it will be as close to complete as we can hope for.

That's not what it concludes in fact it concludes nothing at all and leaves you to make that decision, by assigning laws of physics and probability to consider how a single celled organism become complex beings across species without a host organism using the smallest number of functional amino acids even though combining amino acids in and of itself doesn't mean we'd have a functional protein and using the proposed methods of 'evolution' which you yourself are yet to define but he has defined them for you. In fact it is generous at all to even have that starting point if we consider that life came from nothing, which it did at least according to your atheist pal above who so much as admitted that life as we know it didn't always exist. And if it exists then that is the process based on the laws of this universe that made it come together.

What does it mean to you that you can give me volumes of literature? Is it verbiage we're after or science, palpable defined investigative science? Please don't waste my time simply because the content doesn't agree with your life style choices. There's not much out there that I haven't read when it comes to science or philosophy or religion- it isn't an arbitrary choice that I am a Muslim! It also isn't about how much we read at the end of the day, it is about what we understand using reason not faith in what someone wrote!

I don't care for 'hopes and dreams' otherwise when it comes to science!

best,

 

[جوري]

I think you posted this before and I read it then. You are still trying to pick holes in TOE but that's not my question - so that's not the answer.

I don't need to try- the task is accomplished. Stringing words together doesn't a question make when you yourself don't even understand what it means to have a 'fossil record' a fossil record that something existed doesn't mean that a rock one day sprouted wings and took flight by some magic.. means just that, a creature that we so named existed! These are the building blocks of life on earth in whatever form.. not much difference goes between our genetic makeup or anything else even fruits!

Perhaps someone else could answer from a Creationist point of view?

I have already replied to that before using the noble Quran chapter 18.

18:51 to top

I did not make them witness to the creation of the heavens and the earth or to the creation of themselves,


tell me how it is that you expect people to tell you how or why God did it? ​

 

[Independent]

you yourself don't even understand what it means to have a 'fossil record' a fossil record that something existed doesn't mean that a rock one day sprouted wings and took flight by some magic.. means just that, a creature that we so named existed

The fossil record and other evidences do not prove TOE, but are consistent with it. My question remains: from a Creationist point of view, why is this? Please allow someone else to answer.

 

[جوري]

The fossil record and other evidences do not prove TOE, but are consistent with it. My question remains: from a Creationist point of view, why is this? Please allow someone else to answer.

In what way are they 'and other evidences' consistent with it?

 

[Independent]

In what way are they 'and other evidences' consistent with it?

Please read previous posts.

Please allow someone else to answer.

 

[جوري]

Please read previous posts.

Please allow someone else to answer.

I have read previous and already stated stringing words together doesn't an argument or question make. Fossil records of species exists yes.. what does that mean would you like to fill in the blanks by way of mechanism?
by the way I am not withholding anyone from replying to you, perhaps others are simply gracious enough not to point out the folly in your alleged queries.

best,

 

[Iceee]

by the way I am not withholding anyone from replying to you, perhaps others are simply gracious enough not to point out the folly in your alleged queries.

Nobody else talk in this thread, I want the answer to the following:

We believe we know why our sight is how it is

Evolution.

:skeleton:

Like what's the point of replying? They think they know everything. Excuses, lies, "more evidence needed..,"
In school, they have the best excuses for not doing homework.

 

[Independent]

would you like to fill in the blanks by way of mechanism?

This is where you misunderstand and repeat answers you have given before. I'm not talking about the mechanisms suggested for TOE. I'm interested in a Creationist account that includes all the evidences that we have (incomplete as they are). For instance, a single one off creation moment, day or week does not fit the evidence. Also, we see species appearing in an order consistent with TOE, but not described in scriptures. I am interested in hearing a Creationist account that is capable of including all the evidence we have in a structure that appears logical and consistent.

 

[جوري]

This is where you misunderstand and repeat answers you have given before. I'm not talking about the mechanisms suggested for TOE. I'm interested in a Creationist account that includes all the evidences that we have (incomplete as they are). For instance, a single one off creation moment, day or week does not fit the evidence. Also, we see species appearing in an order consistent with TOE, but not described in scriptures. I am interested in hearing a Creationist account that is capable of including all the evidence we have in a structure that appears logical and consistent.

lol I love that you speak of 'misunderstanding' when I have already quoted you from the book itself what the creationist account is.
Otherwise I am not sure what 'order consistent with TOE' means and as opposed to what exactly? the way you write dismissing the finite details only describes what we see nothing more nothing less there's nothing to justify or make consistent with or not consistent with. It is as if someone states she has eyes and a nose and a mouth and ears on the side.. yes that's how faces look like, that is the baseline and anything that deviates from that isn't normal based on observation.

 

[Pygoscelis]

Whatever we see around us, yes, God intended it that way. But why are you looking at this one sidedly, choosing to focus only on suffering in life, and drawing conclusions from this? Surely, a fair approach is to look at the whole picture.

Yes. Look at the whole picture, realize you are claiming God to be all powerful, and realize that he must intend the horrible suffering in this world to exist. Sure, there is good as well, so maybe he is a little benevolent, but that doesn't change all the nasty stuff he made for us and subjects us to. A perfect creator could have avoided the sadistic diseases that face us.

You speak of disease and parasites, yet you ignore the fact that God also sent down their cure.

Did he? Last I checked we had lots of incurable diseases. And last I checked it was human scientists that came up with the cures we do have. And even if he did send both the problem and the cure, what does that tell us exactly? That he wanted to make us suffer, but only for a while? If he wanted to cure disease, then why did he put it on us in the first place?

Some questions are unanswerable. God, by definition, is greater than all of His creation. His knowledge and wisdom is beyond all of us. We can ask thousands of questions about why did He choose to do this or that, but we already know that there is a limit to our understanding, so it is pointless to go down that road.

No. These are perfectly fair questions. They are all we have to go by to judge this creator you claim to exist. We don't know exactly what his reasoning was that led him to make innocent children suffer through disease, but we do know he did that, if we presume he exists and is all powerful. And before you say it isn't for us to judge him, because we don't know everything, realize that you also judge him and deem him worthy of worship, and call him just and good, etc. If we presume an all powerful creator then all evidence I see points in the other direction.

 

[Pygoscelis]

:skeleton:

Like what's the point of replying? They think they know everything. Excuses, lies, "more evidence needed..,"

You contradict yourself. If they say more evidence is needed then they don't think they know everything. I have yet to meet an atheist who claims to have the perfect and complete answer to how we came to be. Theists on the other hand, claim that all the time, through "revelation".

 

[جوري]

We should start a separate thread a spin off the above post of do atheists believe they're entitled to immortality and where does that sense of entitlement stem from? in other words what have they offered if the existence of man can sometimes be construed to be less than that of animals for at least animals if eating, drinking pooping and procreating don't go out of their way to harm and torture and ruin wherever they go!

 

[Pygoscelis]

I think you posted this before and I read it then. You are still trying to pick holes in TOE but that's not my question - so that's not the answer.

Perhaps someone else could answer from a Creationist point of view?

Doubt it. Creationists always do this. They focus on attacking Evolution and never build a case for Creation Theory, because, as we saw earlier in the thread, they think the "default conclusion" is God-Did-It, rather than admitting they don't know. Its just another God of the Gaps thing.

 

[جوري]

Lol- so predictable is the defense of the ailing and the dying on top of all the folly and self aggrandizement and congratulations desire someone else to do their homework for them!

 

[Muhaba]

The fossil record and other evidences do not prove TOE, but are consistent with it. My question remains: from a Creationist point of view, why is this? Please allow someone else to answer.

I haven't studied the fossil records myself so I don't know if they are consistent with TOE or not and I can't accept everything someone tells me.

Have you studied the fossil records yourself?

 

[Muhammad]

Yes. Look at the whole picture, realize you are claiming God to be all powerful, and realize that he must intend the horrible suffering in this world to exist. Sure, there is good as well, so maybe he is a little benevolent, but that doesn't change all the nasty stuff he made for us and subjects us to. A perfect creator could have avoided the sadistic diseases that face us.

But this completely misses the point of this world being a test. This world was never meant to be a paradise in the first place, or else there would be no reason to have a Day of Judgement, heaven and hell.

Did he? Last I checked we had lots of incurable diseases.

They are currently 'incurable' because of limited research and understanding. That is not to say a cure will never be found.

And last I checked it was human scientists that came up with the cures we do have.

That is expected for an atheist to say. All the evil is attributed to God, but success and achievement is attributed to human beings. Many a time scientists/doctors do not even understand what the problem is, and yet a person still recovers.

And even if he did send both the problem and the cure, what does that tell us exactly? That he wanted to make us suffer, but only for a while? If he wanted to cure disease, then why did he put it on us in the first place?

Because when we look beyond a superficial understanding of these things, we can appreciate many wisdoms behind them. A simple example is that if we were never sick, we would never appreciate our health. People tend to only realise the value of something once it's taken away. In Islam, there are multiple ways of looking at it. Sickness and suffering is an expiation of one's sins, be it simply the prick of a thorn. Obviously someone who doesn't believe in God cannot appreciate this, so it makes more sense to establish the existence of God before attempting to reconcile who God is with our perception of reality.

No. These are perfectly fair questions. They are all we have to go by to judge this creator you claim to exist.

We have a lot more to go by than presumptuous and loaded questions.

We don't know exactly what his reasoning was that led him to make innocent children suffer through disease, but we do know he did that, if we presume he exists and is all powerful.

We also know His wisdom surpasses ours.

And before you say it isn't for us to judge him, because we don't know everything, realize that you also judge him and deem him worthy of worship, and call him just and good, etc. If we presume an all powerful creator then all evidence I see points in the other direction.

One wonders what evidence you are referring to. We are simply dealing with a matter of perspective. There is nothing here that can disprove the existence of God.

 

[Muhaba]

Doubt it. Creationists always do this. They focus on attacking Evolution and never build a case for Creation Theory, because, as we saw earlier in the thread, they think the "default conclusion" is God-Did-It, rather than admitting they don't know. Its just another God of the Gaps thing.

I want to know where the first matter came from if you say that God didn't create it. TOE does not tell us that and atheists never answer that question.

 

[Iceee]

I want to know where the first matter came from if you say that God didn't create it. TOE does not tell us that and atheists never answer that question.

They say they don't know... like always. Might take a year to find out, 5 years, 10 years, 100 years... They'll die knowing they don't know this answer.