[Hindsite]

It goes wrong after a few minutes in.
The golden section isn't 3 by 5.
It's 1:1.618 if you solve the quadratic equation.

It does not matter what you think is wrong, it is what is right that counts. What is right is not an invention of man. Man can only discover what is right. The math that God used in creation is only something that man can discover. Man does not invent the concept of the math used by God, but can only represent the concept with numbers, symbols, ect. that we can make.

Some men have discovered that the body plans in animals and plants are in the DNA programming. The numbers can be plotted and graphed to produce the shapes. Computer programs are being used to speed up the graphing of these design number codes to produce the shapes on the computer screen.

[mikema63]

No, we can't do that with the raw genetic code. It's far more complex than that.

[Besoeker]

It does not matter what you think is wrong,

I agree.
But wrong is wrong.

[Albert]

Hindsite, what you are speaking about is God's Law. Essentially that is what god is. And to know god is through faith, that in faith his wisdom will be revealed to you and his law.

Essentially this law dictates what is wrong and right. In practical sense all that is wrong is destructive to existence and right that which continues existence, that which is nourishing and productive. This law is also universal to humanity and upon which all customs and traditions in human society is build upon. In essence there is no subjectively but objectivity in spirituality. Even though the law does allow uniqueness and expression of it varies from one human society to another. Hence different custom in different societies, but in basic they are all the same.

But in the end you are right, what we think right and wrong, without faith, is useless and stuck in illusion so to speak. If we loose all faith and hope we go insane and grow destructive, further loosing sight of the difference between right and wrong.

In the Bible the chapter Romans addresses this, also Peter's speech to Corinthians to some degree.

[Rei Murasame]

No longer can non believers declare the non existence of God in Science.

Or so you thought:

Life may have started on Mars before arriving on Earth, a major scientific conference has heard.

New research supports an idea that the Red Planet was a better place to kick-start biology billions of years ago than the early Earth was.

The evidence is based on how the first molecules necessary for life were assembled.

Details of the theory were outlined by Prof Steven Benner at the Goldschmidt Meeting in Florence, Italy.

Scientists have long wondered how atoms first came together to make up the three crucial molecular components of living organisms: RNA, DNA and proteins.

The molecules that combined to form genetic material are far more complex than the primordial "pre-biotic" soup of organic (carbon-based) chemicals thought to have existed on the Earth more than three billion years ago, and RNA (ribonucleic acid) is thought to have been the first of them to appear.

Simply adding energy such as heat or light to the more basic organic molecules in the "soup" does not generate RNA. Instead, it generates tar.

RNA needs to be coaxed into shape by "templating" atoms at the crystalline surfaces of minerals.

The minerals most effective at templating RNA would have dissolved in the oceans of the early Earth, but would have been more abundant on Mars, according to Prof Benner.

Red or dead

This could suggest that life started on the Red Planet before being transported to Earth on meteorites, argues Prof Benner, of the Westheimer Institute of Science and Technology in Gainesville, US.

The idea that life originated on Mars and was then transported to our planet has been mooted before. But Prof Benner's ideas add another twist to the theory of a Martian origin for the terrestrial biosphere.

Here in Florence, Prof Benner presented results that suggest minerals containing the elements boron and molybdenum are key in assembling atoms into life-forming molecules.

The researcher points out that boron minerals help carbohydrate rings to form from pre-biotic chemicals, and then molybdenum takes that intermediate molecule and rearranges it to form ribose, and hence RNA.

This raises problems for how life began on Earth, since the early Earth is thought to have been unsuitable for the formation of the necessary boron and molybdenum minerals.

It is thought that the boron minerals needed to form RNA from pre-biotic soups were not available on early Earth in sufficient quantity, and the molybdenum minerals were not available in the correct chemical form.

Prof Benner explained: "It’s only when molybdenum becomes highly oxidised that it is able to influence how early life formed.

"This form of molybdenum couldn’t have been available on Earth at the time life first began, because three billion years ago, the surface of the Earth had very little oxygen, but Mars did.

"It’s yet another piece of evidence which makes it more likely life came to Earth on a Martian meteorite, rather than starting on this planet."

Early Mars is also thought to have had a drier environment, and this is also crucial to its favourable location for life's origins.

"What’s quite clear is that boron, as an element, is quite scarce in Earth’s crust," Prof Benner told BBC News, “but Mars has been drier than Earth and more oxidising, so if Earth is not suitable for the chemistry, Mars might be.

"The evidence seems to be building that we are actually all Martians; that life started on Mars and came to Earth on a rock," he commented.

"It’s lucky that we ended up here, nevertheless - as certainly Earth has been the better of the two planets for sustaining life. If our hypothetical Martian ancestors had remained on Mars, there may not have been a story to tell."

None of this suggests that any of what happened as a result of this was done on purpose by anyone. Most religions will argue that some kind of latent intent of The All may have been behind the initial action, but everything which followed was a complete accident.

This was touched on in my thread, 'Humans are path to universe knowing itself': [Link]

It's not some kind of top down creation. It's bottom up. Once life starts going, mutations happen, and those mutations lead to us. If the universe itself has a consciousness, that consciousness can only exist insofar as it too evolved from the bottom up, in a fragmented way.

Regarding the issue of sacred geometry, that is Greco-Egyptian magic, Taoist magic, and so on, all of which are actually mathematical expressions, which describe what exists. Mathematics is not some kind of concrete laws of the universe from which everything is built, rather, mathematics is the language which humans have created in order to describe what is already happening in the universe. There is a subtle difference.

[Saeko]

^ Rei is absolutely right. As always.

[Hindsite]

^ Rei is absolutely right. As always. :)

Only a fool would actually believe that DNA in the cell and the instructions contained in the DNA occured by accident and no intelligent design was necessary.

DNA Proves Evolutionary Theory is Wrong

[youtube]_rdQ2Wyqdgk[/youtube]

[mikema63]

I'll take a look at the video when I get home since it's mercifully short, but no you're incredibly wrong.

[AuRomin]

This video states facts then an opinion, but there is nothing joining the two. No proof. You can show facts all you want, but their veracity does not necessarily have bearing on the veracity of your claim.

I love the irony in the fact that he says that it takes an intelligent person to come to the conclusion but says so forcefully in a coercive manner that actually demeans the viewers by trying to steer them the the conclusion.

[Albert]

I dont know about the whole Mars thing, sound pretty out there to me, if you know what I mean.......

[Rei Murasame]

Only a fool would actually believe that DNA in the cell and the instructions contained in the DNA occured by accident and no intelligent design was necessary.

It is indeed an accident. Billions of years of accidents led to the system that is being described arising, because that system was the one which was most adaptable and capable of surviving in this environment.

The proof of its accidental-ness is all around us, and is in fact visible even in the phenotypes of the persons having this conversation.

For example, you are a European and I'm East Asian. Why is your verbal module more likely to be more powerful than mine? Why is my ability as mathematics (derived from the 'tool making module') more likely to be more powerful than yours? Because we evolved in different environments, the fact that my ancestors trekked through the cold environment of the Himalayas and Siberia for eons, resulted in visual and mental differences between the divergent human groups.

That is not by design, that is by accident. The accident of the fact that your people walked westward, and mine walked northeast, before the dawn of written history.

You are male and I am female. Why do you have a lump at the front of your neck whereas I do not? Because you have a Y-chromosome and I don't. The Y-chromosome carries code that makes your voice box bigger, for reasons that are obvious connected to male gender roles from pre-history, and which have been passed along as an adaptation on the Y-chromosome. Apparently for males, being able to to yell loudly and deeply was something advantageous, and so that mutation was was passed along on the Y-chromosome.

Your hair is thin and light weight, whereas my hair is slightly wavy and has a wider diameter than yours and is heavier. Why? Because you have EDAR370V which was maintained in the open plains of Europe, whereas I have EDAR370A, the latter of which would be a mutation that gained popularity in the migration through South East Asia because of temperature regulation benefits and its ability to frustrate certain annoying organisms that are local to that region. Yes, the diameter of your head-hair is adapted to the region that your ancestors operated in, because of selective pressures.

The shape of my eyes is also different from yours, take for example this illustration of a Tatar girl from 1936:



The whole idea of 'intelligent design' was destroyed at the moment that Europeans started taking an interest in Eastern people and realised that almond shaped eyes, which is to say, the epicanthic fold, is an adaptation which persisted because of its usefulness eons ago in the wind and snow of the Himalayas and Siberia, and because in warm environments it also regulates heat as well.

All of that is completely accidental, in the sense that these are mutations that emerged randomly and were then selected for by environmental pressures. There is no god who was like "Check it, I'm going to make these people look this way on purpose, because it's cute."

[Albert]

Although I'm not one to argue for creationism. Yet if our physical outlook has been dictated by our environment, this means that there was no random design, but one that was dictated by the environment, with logic, intelligence and reason behind it.

[Rei Murasame]

The mutations are random, but the selection of such mutations is dictated largely by the environment and choices made by organisms in that environment, yes.

The overall point though is that none of this requires a god to have planned any of it ahead of time.

[Albert]

Randomness is pretty creative.

I'm sorry I'm just arguing with you for the sake of arguing. It is fun to see what you will come up with.

[mikema63]

By the time I got back he'd already been red carded so I've lost motivation on engaging with his nonsense.

[Besoeker]

By the time I got back he'd already been red carded so I've lost motivation on engaging with his nonsense.

Does the red card mean that got a ban? And, if so, for how long?

[mikema63]

A temporary 1 week ban. When the one week is up he may request to have it removed.

[Besoeker]

A temporary 1 week ban. When the one week is up he may request to have it removed.

Thank you sir!

[AuRomin]

Anyone know what he did?

[Godstud]

Probably consecutive rule 2 violations, then probably back-talking moderators by saying he was only doing god's work. That'd be my best guess.