Undeniable and Scientific Evidence of THE Creator.

[Zzyzx]

.
From another thread

I present undeniable and scientific evidence of THE Creator.

I await the evidence.

Question for debate: Is the evidence undeniable and scientific (and compelling / convincing) or is it just more of the same stuff that has been presented ad nausea?

[Hatuey]

I know, .. boy that Stephen Hawking! But look how he gets away with it, and even calls it science and has millions of naive and gullible followers. Of course having the OneWorldGovernment and the controlled media on his side helps a lot too.

Oh, my. My, my, my. There's lots of criticism we can heap at Hawking's doorstep, but he falls under peer review BECAUSE of his name. Think how cool it is for a physicist to mathematically shows Hawking wrong? He's science because of how critical is the response to any scientific claims he makes.

Once the human mind is reduced to believe he is an animal, an ape who responds by instinct and not free will, the rest of the convincing is easy. Also, fluoride in the toothpaste, in the water and heavy chem-trailing 24/7, and enough I-Phone apps to keep them busy, they remain obedient animals.

So far, the human mind seems the most advanced among all other animal minds. As the most intelligent ape, most able to change his environment around him, he finds meaning and beauty and art within the fabric of existence and experience of life well lived. No shame in that realization. There's a purpose that transcends any that some supposed god could provide.

[arian]

.

Oh, .. but I did 'observe' everything I tell you, and you could observe it also,

Anyone can "observe" anything they wish in their mind as you indicated doing when talking about your "scientific evidence of a creator."

Imagination is boundless. Reality seems to have limits.

It takes time and effort and a lot of ID for imagination to become reality, and the possibilities are endless, as long as we don't allow physical reality to limit our mind. The scientific evidence of our Creator should be obvious, but if it's not, it is because physical reality is limiting, or keeping us from seeing this.

and if you really put your mind to it, you would come to the same conclusion as I have.

Of course, anyone can "put their mind to it" and come up with all sorts of imaginary, fanciful, irrational things.

Yep, that too. It's called 'free will'. Without which we humans would be walking around like animals and acting like animals, .. praying on the weak, and the Godly minded Believers simply because they are 'easy prey'. Then when they are taken advantage of, just call them gullible suckers.

Ungodly people ask: "What is truth?

Non-Religious people often ask "What is truth?"

Religious people often claim "I know TRUTH" (because I worship one of the gods). Thus, they need not search for truth because they already think they have the answer – and it is "God." Therefore, many expend their energy attempting to defend irrational claims, statements and stories of ancient religion promoters -- or make up new ones or new "interpretations" of ancient opinions.

Yep, .. I agree with you that them religious people spend endless time and effort in defending their religious beliefs, BB theories, Evolution stories, New Age beliefs that they are animals and not just humans, protect their imaginary gods many claim they don't believe in, and creators like quantum specks of gravitational waves that create gravity, .. until one day they put on their Nikes and take a trip causing the the rest of mankind to be 'Left Behind', .. because the earth is being recycled, or whatever the reason!?

We are what we are by evolution,

Agreed

See what I mean?

a purposeless unplanned chaotic accident."

Those who wish to regard themselves as purposeless (or purposeless without their favorite gods) are welcome to do so – for themselves. However, their personal opinion is not binding upon others.

Not until it is enforced. Until it is accepted nothing other then a purposeless chaotic accident.

Yet they sure like to keep the police around, right?

Non-Religious people think of police about like Religious people think of police. Any astute person realizes that not all members of society (religious or not) act honorably toward others or abide by the rules of their society.

Can you explain to me what 'rules' and what intelligence was behind the design of these rules in a universe where animals evolved through a purposeless chaotic accident? I have never seen other apes incarcerate members of their families for braking rules? Are you saying that man is somehow different, intelligent where he rules by Intelligent Design, .. like his Creator?

But for what, .. to force 'their' version of what is good and evil on their fellow animals that act on instinct like they do?

Societies set the standards of behavior for citizens without regard for whether individuals think they came from "gods" or not. Societies which are dominated by religion are theocracies – exemplified by Middle Eastern countries currently and by European nations during the Dark and Middle Ages.

I thought billions of years of purposeless chaotic accident of Evolution set the 'standards of behavior', not free will? Where did I.D. come in all of a sudden?

speck of whatever, .. time, .. evolution, .. evolution, .. millions of years of evolution, .. billions of years of evolution, .. then suddenly ID?? What gives?

I mean just look at your human animal, if evolution could do that, then why would you give up evolution and accept ID just to set a few rules and regulations? And this after about 13 billion years?

I mean I sure wouldn't give up my Creator for some evolution religious story! But then my faith is not built on faith alone, but on evidence with some substance. I seek proof before I just go on believing.

Happy Thanksgiving Z, to you and your loved ones!

[Zzyzx]

.

As a scientifically minded person, I can ONLY go by what I can observe, which is the world around me.

Have you observed any supernatural entities in the world around you?

You mean demons, .. yes.

No, I do not mean "demons" but clearly specified "supernatural entities" – not restricted to supposed "demons."

Kindly describe the supernatural demons you have observed personally – and tell how you knew 1) they were demons, and 2) that they were supernatural.

Did the "observations" occur in your mind (along with the other "evidence" you presented)?

Have you observed any evidence of supernatural entities that can be SHOWN to be directly attributed to an entity and which can be SHOWN to be something that is not produced by human imagination?

Other than those supernatural entities, yes; God, our Infinite, Eternal Creative Mind, in whose image we were created, .. the mind/spirit part of us. Our characteristics we got from God, there is no other explanation, and it fits.

Are you now attempting to claim that "god" is our (human) mind – or in our mind?

If so, I do not dispute that any "god" is a mental image.

Also that our mind controls the body is an undeniable fact

Yes. So what?

I have shown that the body couldn't create the mind, it wouldn't make sense.

Correction: You may have stated an OPINION in the matter – which shows only that you think so.

A "scientifically minded person" should / would not accept "evidence" that is unverifiable.

I agree. This is why I show that the mind is undeniable and can verify itself. Can't have anything more verified than that, right?

Thank you for the agreement – without the added verbiage.

One who claims to have scientific evidence but produces only mental / psychological / emotional opinions does not earn respect or credibility (except perhaps among the naive and gullible).

I know, .. boy that Stephen Hawking!

We are not debating Stephen Hawking. We are debating YOUR unsupported claims of "scientific evidence of a creator."

I understand that you would perhaps like to change the subject after failing to provide anything more than personal testimonial and speculation masquerading as "scientific".

Once the human mind is reduced to believe he is an animal, an ape who responds by instinct and not free will, the rest of the convincing is easy.

Life on Earth is known to biologists, people who study such things, as:

Every living creature on Earth belongs to a kingdom. Scientists debate how many kingdoms there are, but most agree there are five. Here is how the five kingdoms are organized.

Monera-- single-celled organisms that don’t have a nucleus. Bacteria make up the entire kingdom. There are more forms of bacteria than any other organism on Earth. Some bacteria are beneficial to us, such as the ones found in yogurt. Others can cause us to get sick.

Protists-- mostly single-celled organisms that have a nucleus. They usually live in water. Some protists move around, while others stay in one place. Examples of protists include some algae, paramecium, and amoeba.

Fungi-- usually motionless organisms that absorb nutrients for survival. They include mushrooms, molds, and yeasts.

Plants-- contain chlorophyll, a green pigment necessary for photosynthesis, a process in which plants convert energy from sunlight into food. Their cell walls are made sturdy by a material called cellulose, and they are fixed in one place. Plants are divided into two groups: flower- and fruit-producing plants and those that don’t produce flowers or fruits. They include garden flowers, agricultural crops, grasses, shrubs, ferns, mosses, and conifers.

Animals -- the most complex organisms on Earth. Animals are multi-celled organisms, eat food for survival, and have nervous systems. They are divided into vertebrates and invertebrates and include mammals, amphibians, reptiles, birds and fish.
http://www.factmonster.com/science/biol ... gdoms.html

Take your choice – or add a category and describe its characteristics (as done above).

Show how humans are not animals.

Who, exactly (verbatim quote with citations) besides those attempting to argue against biology, maintains that human responses are instinct?

Also, fluoride in the toothpaste, in the water and heavy chem-trailing 24/7, and enough I-Phone apps to keep them busy, they remain obedient animals.

Is that rant intended as debate?

[arian]

I know, .. boy that Stephen Hawking! But look how he gets away with it, and even calls it science and has millions of naive and gullible followers. Of course having the OneWorldGovernment and the controlled media on his side helps a lot too.

Oh, my. My, my, my. There's lots of criticism we can heap at Hawking's doorstep, but he falls under peer review BECAUSE of his name. Think how cool it is for a physicist to mathematically shows Hawking wrong? He's science because of how critical is the response to any scientific claims he makes.

Once the human mind is reduced to believe he is an animal, an ape who responds by instinct and not free will, the rest of the convincing is easy. Also, fluoride in the toothpaste, in the water and heavy chem-trailing 24/7, and enough I-Phone apps to keep them busy, they remain obedient animals.

So far, the human mind seems the most advanced among all other animal minds. As the most intelligent ape, most able to change his environment around him, he finds meaning and beauty and art within the fabric of existence and experience of life well lived. No shame in that realization.

There's a purpose that transcends any that some supposed god could provide.

Don't you mean: "There's an evolving purposeless chaotic accident that transcends any that some purposed god could provide, .. and as the most intelligent ape, most able to change his environment around him, he finds meaning and beauty and art within the fabric of existence and experience of life well lived. " ?? Now to be honest here, for me to admit to such intelligence who finds meaning of beauty, who can create what he dreams up, there would be shame in admitting to such belief as having come about by some mindless chaotic accident. I mean I would have to get some pretty big pay, and be extremely desperate to stoop that low. Maybe even torture, prison, you know, .. like all those Believers in Communist countries, .. but even they wouldn't stoop so low. I mean it would be a shame, there is no way I could do it!

[Hatuey]

Don't you mean: "There's an evolving purposeless chaotic accident that transcends any that some purposed god could provide, .. and as the most intelligent ape, most able to change his environment around him, he finds meaning and beauty and art within the fabric of existence and experience of life well lived. " ?? Now to be honest here, for me to admit to such intelligence who finds meaning of beauty, who can create what he dreams up, there would be shame in admitting to such belief as having come about by some mindless chaotic accident. I mean I would have to get some pretty big pay, and be extremely desperate to stoop that low. Maybe even torture, prison, you know, .. like all those Believers in Communist countries, .. but even they wouldn't stoop so low. I mean it would be a shame, there is no way I could do it!

No, that's not what I mean. You're not very good at this. If you're trying to be convincing, or present any science, you just haven't got the hang of this at all. What a shame.

[arian]

.

As a scientifically minded person, I can ONLY go by what I can observe, which is the world around me.

Have you observed any supernatural entities in the world around you?

You mean demons, .. yes.

No, I do not mean "demons" but clearly specified "supernatural entities" – not restricted to supposed "demons."

Kindly describe the supernatural demons you have observed personally – and tell how you knew 1) they were demons, and 2) that they were supernatural.

Did the "observations" occur in your mind (along with the other "evidence" you presented)?

Have you observed any evidence of supernatural entities that can be SHOWN to be directly attributed to an entity and which can be SHOWN to be something that is not produced by human imagination?

Other than those supernatural entities, yes; God, our Infinite, Eternal Creative Mind, in whose image we were created, .. the mind/spirit part of us. Our characteristics we got from God, there is no other explanation, and it fits.

Are you now attempting to claim that "god" is our (human) mind – or in our mind?

If so, I do not dispute that any "god" is a mental image.

Also that our mind controls the body is an undeniable fact

Yes. So what?

I have shown that the body couldn't create the mind, it wouldn't make sense.

Correction: You may have stated an OPINION in the matter – which shows only that you think so.

A "scientifically minded person" should / would not accept "evidence" that is unverifiable.

I agree. This is why I show that the mind is undeniable and can verify itself. Can't have anything more verified than that, right?

Thank you for the agreement – without the added verbiage.

One who claims to have scientific evidence but produces only mental / psychological / emotional opinions does not earn respect or credibility (except perhaps among the naive and gullible).

I know, .. boy that Stephen Hawking!

We are not debating Stephen Hawking. We are debating YOUR unsupported claims of "scientific evidence of a creator."

I understand that you would perhaps like to change the subject after failing to provide anything more than personal testimonial and speculation masquerading as "scientific".

Anything more than personal testimonial and speculation masquerading as "scientific"? Are you kidding me Z? I believe you are forgetting that you are the one defending the Big-bang Evolution, falsely called theories!?

Once the human mind is reduced to believe he is an animal, an ape who responds by instinct and not free will, the rest of the convincing is easy.

Life on Earth is known to biologists, people who study such things, as:

Every living creature on Earth belongs to a kingdom. Scientists debate how many kingdoms there are, but most agree there are five. Here is how the five kingdoms are organized.

Monera-- single-celled organisms that don’t have a nucleus. Bacteria make up the entire kingdom. There are more forms of bacteria than any other organism on Earth. Some bacteria are beneficial to us, such as the ones found in yogurt. Others can cause us to get sick.

Protists-- mostly single-celled organisms that have a nucleus. They usually live in water. Some protists move around, while others stay in one place. Examples of protists include some algae, paramecium, and amoeba.

Fungi-- usually motionless organisms that absorb nutrients for survival. They include mushrooms, molds, and yeasts.

Plants-- contain chlorophyll, a green pigment necessary for photosynthesis, a process in which plants convert energy from sunlight into food. Their cell walls are made sturdy by a material called cellulose, and they are fixed in one place. Plants are divided into two groups: flower- and fruit-producing plants and those that don’t produce flowers or fruits. They include garden flowers, agricultural crops, grasses, shrubs, ferns, mosses, and conifers.

Animals -- the most complex organisms on Earth. Animals are multi-celled organisms, eat food for survival, and have nervous systems. They are divided into vertebrates and invertebrates and include mammals, amphibians, reptiles, birds and fish.
http://www.factmonster.com/science/biol ... gdoms.html

Take your choice – or add a category and describe its characteristics (as done above).

They left out humans, as in:

Humans -- humans are also multi-celled organisms, eat food for survival, and have nervous systems, hair under their armpits, facial hair, with a body designed to be more like their Invisible Creator, with hands and fingers that can create and handle delicate tools, unlimited minds that can dream up, IDesign and create their dreams. They have a body that was created from the dust of the earth like any other biological life, but man was special, a little design from many other animals, which may be weaker in some physical aspects, but together with the other 'extras', he dominates all animals, and can tame and domesticate them all.
The human can reason, dream and create, and best of all unlike the animals, he has free will.

Show how humans are not animals.

I did, above. But because man has such unique design, rob him of his mind through any various indoctrinations and you can make him act like almost any animal. He can do the chicken-dance, make duck-calls, swing from trees like a monkey, put some plywood under his arms and he'll flap his arms and thinks he can fly like a bird, give him to run a country and when they come after him he can hide in holes like a rat, .. physically, an amazing adaptive creature, but mentally unique, like the Creator in whose image he was 'created in'.

Who, exactly (verbatim quote with citations) besides those attempting to argue against biology, maintains that human responses are instinct?

George Gaylord Simpson; "man is the result of a purposeless and natural process that did not have him in mind."

Why is it that after all that we man have Intelligently Designed, and created, .. after all the evidence of ingenious design in science we have observed and documented of our world around us, could use the word 'purposeless', or 'chaotic accident' or 'chance' when it comes to the creation of our universe, the earth, and biological life?

After all the countless man-hours and observations we made and continue to make in watching fish swim so we could replicate better and faster submarines, sonars, or the birds we watched like the eagles, seagulls etc. to improve our flying, how can anyone say it just happened with no particular purpose?

So if the brain creates the mind, and the brain evolved over billions of years without purpose, and the human is just an animal, and that we have no free will, then the only thing you have left is that your human animal acts by instinct.

So how could Evolution now suddenly switch over to ID with a purpose? That is IMPOSSIBLE from your Evolutionary POV.
You can't be switching from evolution, .. evolution, mindless, purposeless evolution, .. billions of years of evolution, .. then suddenly Intelligent Design!

Mindless, Purposeless, Unplanned, Chaotic, Mutated Chance has gotten your animal/man his brain, to survive so far by instinct, and now you're going to switch over to; Intelligent Design? How convenient?

Also, fluoride in the toothpaste, in the water and heavy chem-trailing 24/7, and enough I-Phone apps to keep them busy, they remain obedient animals.

Is that rant intended as debate?[/quote]

Well, is this a plan, or is that just mans instinct, to kill off the weak?

[Hatuey]

[Replying to post 136 by arian]


Evolution is not purposeless, chaotic, or accidental. That might be your problem.

[arian]

[Replying to post 136 by arian]


Evolution is not purposeless, chaotic, or accidental. That might be your problem.

Of course not, it was all planned out first, then designed and then created by the hand of our Creator God as in 'I.D.', just like everything that we plan, design and create.

Here it is in a nutshell: Looking at ourselves (man) as in a mirror, we see our Creator.

You can understand this scientifically, philosophically, religiously, optimistically, pessimistically, if you are a theist/atheist, another words "if you believe that you don't believe and worship god/gods" - atheist
.. or "don't believe, that you are actually worshiping other god/gods that are not God" - theist

[Hatuey]

Of course not, it was all planned out first, then designed and then created by the hand of our Creator God as in 'I.D.', just like everything that we plan, design and create.

And your proof?

Here it is in a nutshell: Looking at ourselves (man) as in a mirror, we see our Creator.

No thanks. The human animal is the human animal, not god.

You can understand this scientifically, philosophically, religiously, optimistically, pessimistically, if you are a theist/atheist, another words "if you believe that you don't believe and worship god/gods" - atheist
.. or "don't believe, that you are actually worshiping other god/gods that are not God" - theist

What? God is exactly like the tooth fairy...invisible, undetectable, and irrelevant. If he were visible, detectable, and relevant, the world would have scientific proof.

[Zzyzx]

.

We are not debating Stephen Hawking. We are debating YOUR unsupported claims of "scientific evidence of a creator."

I understand that you would perhaps like to change the subject after failing to provide anything more than personal testimonial and speculation masquerading as "scientific".

Anything more than personal testimonial and speculation masquerading as "scientific"? Are you kidding me Z? I believe you are forgetting that you are the one defending the Big-bang Evolution, falsely called theories!?

CORRECTION: I have never defended or even discuss big bang. Rather than speculate about what I do not pretend to know, I leave it to 1) astrophysicists who study such things, and 2) religionists who study tales by ancient religion promoters and claim to know their favorite "god" was responsible.

It does not increase one's credibility in debate when they are consistently wrong or when they say whatever pops into their head without regard for whether it is true or not.

Regarding biological evolution: (properly defined as "genetic change through generations"), I maintain that it occurs every time an organism becomes antibiotic resistant.

What, exactly, is "big bang evolution"? Is that a term used in science?

They left out humans, as in:

Sure, biologists just left out humans. Perhaps they were unaware humans existed?

Humans -- humans are also multi-celled organisms, eat food for survival, and have nervous systems,

Thereby they qualify as animals.

hair under their armpits, facial hair,

Presence or absence of hair is immaterial in determining which organisms are animals. Animal species have identifying characteristics. Bears, for instance, have characteristics that are very different from those of chickens, which in turn have characteristics different from worms.

with a body designed to be more like their Invisible Creator,

Pure ancient speculation and opinion masquerading as knowledge.

with hands and fingers that can create and handle delicate tools, unlimited minds that can dream up, IDesign and create their dreams.

Human animals possess a certain amount of dexterity. How does that compare to ability of spiders in making a web?

They have a body that was created from the dust of the earth like any other biological life,

It would be more accurate to say "composed of elements of the Earth."

but man was special, a little design from many other animals,

All animals are "special" – different from other animals (or all animals would be identical).

which may be weaker in some physical aspects, but together with the other 'extras', he dominates all animals,

Tools and tactics have enabled humans to dominate other animals. Earlier humans lacking the necessary tools did not have that ability.

and can tame and domesticate them all.

Not all animals can be tamed and domesticated – for example, amoeba.

The human can reason, dream and create,

Zoologists, people who actually study animals instead of speculating or pontificating, have gained some understanding of the "reasoning" capabilities of other animals, for instance dolphin.

Other animals evidently dream, for example dogs.

Many animals create intricate structures – for instance termite mounds and hummingbird nests.

and best of all unlike the animals, he has free will.

"Free will" cannot be shown to be anything more than an ability to make choices among alternatives. Dogs and cats, for example, possess that ability.

Horses have "free will" if they can decide whether to go left or right. Correct?

Show how humans are not animals.

I did, above.

No you didn't. You showed only that humans, like all animals, possess certain characteristics

But because man has such unique design, rob him of his mind through any various indoctrinations and you can make him act like almost any animal.

Correction: Humans DO act like animals. They eat for nourishment, are mobile, respond to the environment by means of a nervous system, etc.

He can do the chicken-dance, make duck-calls, swing from trees like a monkey, put some plywood under his arms and he'll flap his arms and thinks he can fly like a bird, give him to run a country and when they come after him he can hide in holes like a rat, .. physically, an amazing adaptive creature, but mentally unique, like the Creator in whose image he was 'created in'.

Hilarious – God doing a chicken-dance and trying to fly with plywood under his arms.

Who, exactly (verbatim quote with citations) besides those attempting to argue against biology, maintains that human responses are instinct?

George Gaylord Simpson; "man is the result of a purposeless and natural process that did not have him in mind."

Notice that the quotation says NOTHING about human responses being instinct (which is what you were attempting to defend).

Why is it that after all that we man have Intelligently Designed, and created, ..

Since there is no proof of "intelligent design" it remains in the realm of speculation – promoted by religionists parroting ancient religion promoters and ignoring what is known about the real world.

after all the evidence of ingenious design in science we have observed and documented of our world around us, could use the word 'purposeless', or 'chaotic accident' or 'chance' when it comes to the creation of our universe, the earth, and biological life?

Humans are capable of deceiving themselves into believing they are "special" by virtue of being "created" by an invisible, undetectable supernatural entity which cannot be shown to be anything more than a product of human imagination.

After all the countless man-hours and observations we made and continue to make in watching fish swim so we could replicate better and faster submarines, sonars, or the birds we watched like the eagles, seagulls etc. to improve our flying, how can anyone say it just happened with no particular purpose?

Supposed "purpose" is a religionist claim that has not been substantiated.

So if the brain creates the mind, and the brain evolved over billions of years without purpose, and the human is just an animal, and that we have no free will, then the only thing you have left is that your human animal acts by instinct.

Perhaps it would be prudent to consult people who actually study such things as the brain.

So how could Evolution now suddenly switch over to ID with a purpose?

Genetic change continues to occur – there is no "switch-over" involved.

That is IMPOSSIBLE from your Evolutionary POV.

1. I have no "evolutionary point of view." Correctly stated, my world view includes acceptance that evolution occurs in life forms; however, my world view includes far more than just that.

2. I do not propose any "switch" to ID. That is YOUR concept, not mine.

After being consistently wrong attempting to guess (or assign) my position on various matters one might be prudent to stop guessing.

You can't be switching from evolution, .. evolution, mindless, purposeless evolution, .. billions of years of evolution, .. then suddenly Intelligent Design!

I have no inclination to switch to intelligent design because it is mere conjecture with no coherent evidence in support.

Mindless, Purposeless, Unplanned, Chaotic, Mutated Chance has gotten your animal/man his brain, to survive so far by instinct, and now you're going to switch over to; Intelligent Design? How convenient?

There is no "switch" except possibly in your mind.

Also, fluoride in the toothpaste, in the water and heavy chem-trailing 24/7, and enough I-Phone apps to keep them busy, they remain obedient animals.

Is that rant intended as debate?

Well, is this a plan, or is that just mans instinct, to kill off the weak?

I do not pretend to know but leave such speculation to those so inclined. If there is some sort of "plan" or an effort to kill off the weak it doesn't seem to be working very well since human population continues to increase.