139d
@ghost-of-a-duke saidYour problem, or I should say one of your problems you don't grasp the issue of thinking that symbolism is neglecting evidence. Symbolism is used to grasp deeper meanings! In the case of life, you should be more concerned with how life is laid out in genetic information. There is meaning in life's code, it can be read and understood that's evidence you are ignoring.
You favour symbolism over evidence?
You might look at DNA and not grasp everything about it or anything at all, but that doesn't change the FACT that in it, directions are directing the type of cells that are being reproduced. You may see some foreign language and not understand what is written out, but a native speaker may see and understand it. Within the code life's forms along with its features are directed in reproduction and activity, for example, a human liver cell will reproduce a human liver cell there is no ambiguity in that process, and information removes all of the unknown possibilities that would be possible if there were no instructions.
Show me any example where informational instructions were written by chance and necessity, if you say life you will only be using circular logic to back up your claims in the discussion on life.
@kellyjay saidWhat "should be" is not a fact, although it is a fact about you that you think this.
From your point of view the natural state of man is that he steals, robs, murders, rapes, lies, and all of these things are just what man does with some worse than others. The fact these things occur is only because that is just the way it is, nothing to see here, but that isn't how it should be, and a "should be" is something man cannot create for himself, you are simply a ...[text shortened]... ng accountability looking for any excuse to avoid looking at righteousness and man at the same time.
- Joined
- 14 Mar 15
- Moves
- 28795
139d
@kellyjay saidYour problems sir would require a list that would take me the whole afternoon to compile.
Your problem, or I should say one of your problems you don't grasp the issue of thinking that symbolism is neglecting evidence. Symbolism is used to grasp deeper meanings! In the case of life, you should be more concerned with how life is laid out in genetic information. There is meaning in life's code, it can be read and understood that's evidence you are ignoring.
Y ...[text shortened]... you say life you will only be using circular logic to back up your claims in the discussion on life.
139d
@ghost-of-a-duke saidI'm sure you have better things to do with your time, and he wouldn't understand anyway.
Your problems sir would require a list that would take me the whole afternoon to compile.
@kellyjay saidThere is no code inside a cell. It's just chemicals. Humans interpret it as if it were coded instructions because that's how humans are: they think in terms of codes and instructions, and they see patterns everywhere, even where they don't really exist. Like seeing 'designs' in sand dunes. There is no mind making sand dunes fall into regular wave-like patterns, and there is no mind moving molecules around inside cells (causing mutations or coding instructions into DNA).
Your problem, or I should say one of your problems you don't grasp the issue of thinking that symbolism is neglecting evidence. Symbolism is used to grasp deeper meanings! In the case of life, you should be more concerned with how life is laid out in genetic information. There is meaning in life's code, it can be read and understood that's evidence you are ignoring.
Y ...[text shortened]... you say life you will only be using circular logic to back up your claims in the discussion on life.
139d
@moonbus saidYou are willfully blind, yes we think in terms of instructions and see patterns and because of that, we know it when we see it. You can see design in snowflakes and sand dunes but in them, you do not have patterns that we can read and see how things are coded to do specialized work where decisions are actively taking place. The wind blows on a sand dune and the sand moves in an unpredictable way where each piece of sand ends up and that is not what we see in life.
There is no code inside a cell. It's just chemicals. Humans interpret it as if it were coded instructions because that's how humans are: they think in terms of codes and instructions, and they see patterns everywhere, even where they don't really exist. Like seeing 'designs' in sand dunes. There is no mind making sand dunes fall into regular wave-like pa ...[text shortened]... is no mind moving molecules around inside cells (causing mutations or coding instructions into DNA).
Suggesting as proof there is no mind-moving molecules is not an argument it is a declaration of what you believe! Then you have to deny the evidence that within life, systems move several parts of life to accomplish very precise work, blood pressure, body temperature, body metabolism, blood clotting, and on and on we see and recognize these for what they are. You and a few others here reject it not because of what you see, you know it is there, but for philosophical reasons, your worldview denies it even if it is right in front of you, you close your eyes and refuse to see it.
139d
@ghost-of-a-duke saidPick one
Your problems sir would require a list that would take me the whole afternoon to compile.
139d
@ghost-of-a-duke saidWell good, you established something we can compare and contrast, I assume you have something specific I ignore, not a story of some sort that aligns with your beliefs, but some fact that I willfully don't look at.
You asked me to pick one, so I did.
You are wilfully blind.
- Joined
- 14 Mar 15
- Moves
- 28795
139d
@kellyjay saidScience Kelly, you ignore science.
Well good, you established something we can compare and contrast, I assume you have something specific I ignore, not a story of some sort that aligns with your beliefs, but some fact that I willfully don't look at.