Is there a GOD? - ding! ding! ding ding geeeeet reaaaaaady toooooo rummmmble!!!!

[YLGuy]

I think Reruns last post was perfect.  The name of the thread seems to imply a just a yes or no reply.  The thread is not prove or disprove there is a God.  It is not which God is really God or which way is the best way to worship him.  It is not which church worships correctly.  It just asks if there is a God.

Yes

[dwcrawford]

Oh Marc with a c.   .. I understand now.

Yes or no?  How about "I  doubt it" if you mean one God.  I'm not roo sure yet.  I'll let you know as soon as I find out.

Now, a "higher power"?  There are many powers higher than I.  Off hand, an IHD Moderator comes to mind.  Wouldn't you love  to have that kind of power?

(I love you Okarol... just a little joke).   

[paris]

Yes        Keeping it simple!

[fc2821]

I think Reruns last post was perfect.  The name of the thread seems to imply a just a yes or no reply.  The thread is not prove or disprove there is a God.  It is not which God is really God or which way is the best way to worship him.  It is not which church worships correctly.  It just asks if there is a God.

Yes

Marc,    This is what I started out trying to say.   

[Hemodoc]

The language of DNA proves there is a God.

[Hemodoc]

The stasis found in the fossil record falsifies Darwinian evolution theory.

[Hemodoc]

Haldane's Dilemma falsifies the chimp to man hypothesis.

[nursewratchet]

The language of DNA proves there is a God.

How?

[willowtreewren]

Haldane's Dilemma falsifies the chimp to man hypothesis.

What chimp to man hypothesis? Do you mean that chimpanzees and homo sapiens came from a common ancestor?

Insert Quote
Quote from: Hemodoc on Today at 02:20:38 PM

    The language of DNA proves there is a God.

How?

Yes, that should be interesting....

The stasis found in the fossil record falsifies Darwinian evolution theory.

How come the scientific community disagrees with this?

[paris]

These comments will just lead us back to the chaos of the past days.   We have truly moved far away from Epoman's original question.  Some tried to bring it back and answer the question - but once again, we are off track.   

Okarol has said "stay on topic".  I repeat her statement.   I'll just borrow Kitkatz's big stick for now   

[del]

No one has to prove anything.  Just state your position. You may need several  paris!!!

[Hemodoc]

Dear Paris,  with all due respect, my comments follow precisely in line with the original and subsequent comments by Epoman that he did not believe in Evolution and that he believed in the God of the Bible and that if you don't accept Jesus Christ as your personal Saviour, you will go to hell.  I am paraphrasing, but those are the comments by Epoman within the first few pages if anyone wishes to go back and read them.  I have spoken respectfully and openly without any profane comments, is this not what we are allowed when we act responsibly even if many do not agree here on IHD? 

Thank you,

Peter

[Stoday]

You've lost me Paris. Now I don't know what you consider may or may not be discussed in this topic.

These comments will just lead us back to the chaos of the past days.

We have truly moved far away from Epoman's original question.  Some tried to bring it back and answer the question - but once again, we are off track.   

Okarol has said "stay on topic".  I repeat her statement.   I'll just borrow Kitkatz's big stick for now   

If we are only allowed to say "I believe in God" or "I don't believe in God", then we have no topic, just a pointless list.

Hemodoc has said that he believes in one particular version of God and backs up his assertion with reasons for it. Fair enough. But then others see his reasons as outrageously invalid and want to challenge them. Is this off topic? If so, should hemodoc's reasons be off topic too?

I shall, of course, defer to a moderator's rulings, but it would help if the moderator could clarify what is and is not permissible.

[paris]

All  views are welcome.  I think we can all agree that things got a little out of hand.  It seemed to some that it was starting up again.   So discuss away-------------

We all have off days; this is mine!    Sorry!   

[YLGuy]

The issue is either you do or you don't.  Does anyone here think that they are going to post something that will convince others to change their minds?  Does anyone have something so profound that all who think otherwise are going to have a great epiphany?  I really do not think so.  (Please do not call me a Doubting Thomas and/or quote the biblical reference of its origin) 

[kitkatz]

I am not here to change anyone's mind just to make a statement of what I believe in.

If you look around at our wonderfully made world,it is amazing to see how everything interconnects.  There had to be some design behind it.   Call it God or Mother Nature or whatever...

[dwcrawford]

I'm not allowed to post here cause I irritate people, but "right on KitKatz"... beautiful most of the time ain't it.  And who care what you call the designer.

[tyefly]

I  see the world different, to me all the interconnection of the world ,animals,plants, climate zones, and so forth shows me that evolution worked very well.  So I believe in evolution and I cannot support a god verses the evolution. 

   

[Hemodoc]

Thank you Paris as always.  We may not agree on this issue, but I have always respected the manner in which you conduct yourself.

Now, for clarification, from the title page:

Off-Topic: Talk about anything you want.
Talk about anything here that's not about Dialysis. Keep it clean please. If you want to debate a off-topic subject, this is the place for you. If your post has the word "Dialysis" in it, then it does not belong here.

The reason that this thread went off topic had nothing to do with the ideas presented, it was the first rule of this thread instead that was violated: Keep it clean please. 

Second of all, it is a place to debate:

debate definition

to discuss opposing reasons; argue
to take part in a formal discussion or a contest in which opposing sides of a question are argued

Epoman himself set up this thread on here and he kept to the rules above.  I would hope that we can do the same.

[Hemodoc]

Haldane's Dilemma falsifies the chimp to man hypothesis.

What chimp to man hypothesis? Do you mean that chimpanzees and homo sapiens came from a common ancestor?

Insert Quote
Quote from: Hemodoc on Today at 02:20:38 PM

    The language of DNA proves there is a God.

How?

Yes, that should be interesting....

The stasis found in the fossil record falsifies Darwinian evolution theory.

How come the scientific community disagrees with this?

Dear Aleta,

Darwinian evolution was based on his concept that we would see slow changes with a myriad of intermediate forms.  More than 150 years since he published his book, the fossil record that he said we would find with a multitude of intermediate forms has never been found.  What has been found instead is stasis of populations.  From the start of a species in the fossil record until it became extinct, it did not change.  This is what the evidence from the fossil record shows.

Understanding this, Stephen J. Gould believed that the changes must have happened quickly instead.  This is where he proposed that changes happened in saltations, or simply rapidly.  The second component of punctuated equilibrium theory by Gould was that of Haldane's Dillmma dealing with the cost of subsitution.  Basically, if you are going to get a new gene into a breeding population to become a predominant characteristic of that population, then those without that characteristic must die or become separated from the new individuals with the new trait.  His solution to this was to propose a theory where rapid changes occurred at the end of a long period of stasis, or no changes at all, in the periphery of the breeding population.

There are many other theories of evolution that compete with punctuated equilibria, but it is one of the prevailing theories still.  If people wish to believe in evolution, I would strongly advise all to truly understand what it is that they believe.  Darwinian evolution of slow gradual changes is not accepted at all at the higher levels of study simply because there is no evidence to support his theory of slow gradual changes at this time.

As far as the "chimp to man", yes that was in reference to the alleged similarities with man and chimp and the alleged common ancestor of both that has never been found as well, the so called missing link. This ties in directly with the proposed amount of time to fix a new trait in a breeding population, which Haldane calculated to be 300 generations.  Walter Remine has written extensively on Haldane's Dillemma recently, but most scientists have not dealt with this most important biological issue.  They have instead simply ignored the limitations it places on how fast evolution could occur.  Haldane's Dilemma is one of the biggest obstacles to showing that macroevolution is possible.  That is instead of changes within a kind, which is what is also called microevolution, we have never seen an example of macroevolution or changing into a new kind of animal, like chimp to man for example.  Haldane's Dilemma shows that it is impossible to go from chimp to man, or more correctly, common ancestor to chimp and man.

[Hemodoc]

Dear Aleta,

The issue of language in DNA is an amazing result of much study over the last 3 decades.  I participated in some of this research myself briefly when I was at the National Cancer Institute back in the 80's before starting medical school.  Discovering that DNA is actual language with the same rules that we find in other languages begs the question of how did it get there.  It is not something that can occur by random mutations.  Many state that evolution is not random, but all the mechanisms of evolution are dependent on many random factors.  If there are no random mutations, there is no change in the genome to drive the alleged changes over time.  Take a look at a representative published review of the DNA language issue.

Basic Gene Grammars and DNA-ChartParser for language processing of Escherichia coli promoter DNA sequences

Motivation: The field of ‘DNA linguistics’ has emerged from pioneering work in computational linguistics and molecular biology. Most formal grammars in this field are expressed using Definite Clause Grammars but these have computational limitations which must be overcome. The present study provides a new DNA parsing system, comprising a logic grammar formalism called Basic Gene Grammars and a bidirectional chart parser DNA-ChartParser.

http://bioinformatics.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/17/3/226

There are many more examples of current DNA research into the functions of DNA language.  It is very strong evidence that intelligence is behind our design.  If we are designed, there must be a designer. 

[BigSky]

I'm not allowed to post here cause I irritate people, but "right on KitKatz"... beautiful most of the time ain't it.  And who care what you call the designer.

Yes you are the victim as you have so well told us time and time and time and time and time again.

[dwcrawford]

Have you no sense of humor at all?  I was joking.  I can come in as I wish but it is better (for me) not too.  And neither of us are on topic, are we.  Besides, I have no earthly idea who you are.  Where did you come from anyway? Don't think I've ever read or commented on anything you've ever posted.  I've asked others who you are and get some rather suspicioius answers. I'd really be open to getting to know you.  I've reviewed some of your older posts and you appear to be a logical and thoughtful person.

And what is the topic?  First you  want it yes or no.  Then you want to cut and paste -- the same items over and over. Basically I think it is a matter of control rather than conviction. It can be just a place where some can pontificate and that's  ok.  Speaking of staying on TOPIC...

For anyone who plays the word association game... I say God, you reply Church, I reply Baptist, you reply Jesus, I reply salvation, you replay creation, I reply divine, you reply intervention, I reply evolution, ...  get my point.  Staying on topic is different for each individual.  You say god, I say higher power, ...


I have apologized for the one unclean thing that I said.  Has anyone else?  I thought the whole deal about Jesus on the cross was about forgiveness.  Can we all bury the hatchet  - preferably not into each other heads.

[rocker]

Have you ever heard the old joke, "I went to a fight and a hockey game broke out!"?

Well, it seems we all came to a thread about God and a fight about evolution broke out.

For those who are interested in the evolution debate, I have started a new topic.

http://ihatedialysis.com/forum/index.php?topic=17438.0

For those not interested, please resume the festivities here.   

  - rocker

[paris]

Have you ever heard the old joke, "I went to a fight and a hockey game broke out!"?

Well, it seems we all came to a thread about God and a fight about evolution broke out.

For those who are interested in the evolution debate, I have started a new topic.

http://ihatedialysis.com/forum/index.php?topic=17438.0

For those not interested, please resume the festivities here.   

  - rocker

Thank you rocker.  Very wise thing to do.   Everyone please play nice.