Religion

[Nakranoth]

And there is soul... It's one of the biggest secrets of life, perhaps the biggest ever. Scientists will never be able to prove it, so it's just accepted as a fact, without proof, very much like God.

Alright... How's about we test this soul idea... scientists could, if not for moral reservations, clone a human. It would walk, it would breathe, it would think, it would live. It would in all ways be human, except that it was created by us, instead of by nature. Now, you come to this issue... Does it have a soul? If not, we have a human life without a soul, which means that none of us necissarily have souls. If so, we either stole a soul, which would leave the host souless, causing the same problem from before... or we've created a soul, which puts us on level with gods... so either souls don't need to exist, or we are gods.

[Dee]

I think it would very much be like a robot. The cloned human being will only know what scientists taught it, which is the same idea with God and humans, and that's why it's prohibited to clone humans. Yes, they would talk, they would walk, they would breathe, they would even think, but they'd be very much like computers. Their brains would not have the ability to learn new things on its own. I don't believe that anyone can ever create a human being in the sense of real human beings, you know what I mean? A clone will be just that, a clone. Not a real human being.

Actually, evil exists so that God tests our level of faith, and how much we believed in Him. God does not need us to love him.

I'm interested, go into more detail, why should God test our level of faith?

It's been said many times, but then again, everything in this thread has been said many times, but I'll say it again. Okay, let me put it this way... Your parents love you more than anything else in the world, and they have raised you well and know that you know what's right and what's wrong. Now, you have free will, and you have freedom of choice that's been given to you by your parents. Say, your parents find out that you're smoking pot or something, what would they do to you? They'd punish you, of course. Now, couldn't your parents be more firm about things and be always on your side or something to make sure that you absolutely don't smoke pot? Of course they could. But why won't they? Because they trust you, and they want to know whether you're going to betray their trust or not. Whether if you love them enough not to do it. It's your choice, but also you should be responsible for your own actions.

I hope you got my point, it's late here and speaking in my own language right now is a struggle, so explaining all this in english is something I'm very proud of right now, lol.

[Pie]

Alright... How's about we test this soul idea... scientists could, if not for moral reservations, clone a human. It would walk, it would breathe, it would think, it would live. It would in all ways be human, except that it was created by us, instead of by nature. Now, you come to this issue... Does it have a soul? If not, we have a human life without a soul, which means that none of us necissarily have souls. If so, we either stole a soul, which would leave the host souless, causing the same problem from before... or we've created a soul, which puts us on level with gods... so either souls don't need to exist, or we are gods.

I disagree with EVERYTHING YOU SAID THERE!

I also disagree with what dee sais.

When we clone people and things, we aren't doing it using just science. WE are JUST MANIPULATEING NATURE! A clone has a soal.

Oh, and, EVERY SINGLE HUMAN BEING is like a computer. We only do things we are taught to do.

Oh, and god dosen't neccesarily do EVERYTHING. He lets us have free will. He set up nature so that he dosen't have to create a soal everythime someone is born.


OH! By the way deadboy, SHUT UP! I Could say the same thing about you (being ignorant, choosing the easyest thing to believe)

1) HAH! you know, they say that us and monkeys are like, 98% alike. you know, I think that is really funny, becaus I'm not even 98% alike in my genetics as another human. So that is ludicris. It doesent show graduation. ALL of the fossil records show JUMPS, no gradual evolving, just large jumps. oh, and heres a question. how can evolution be so, cool, and unrandom? I mean, seriously, nothing went rong in the evolutionary cicle. *shrugs* just a thought.

2) Croatia? Wow, there must have been alot of CANCER during the croatian period. (that's what UV rays do.)

3) Early earth had sulfer, and other non-cool substances. It's a debait. And as I've said, building blocks don't just go into RNA or anything els. IT would need a miracle, an orgonised miracle.

4) I agree wth you. Tectonic plates.

5) hmm..

6) Evolution isn't a fact. it's a theory. thats why they call it the Evolutionary THEORY! Also, I'd have to disagree. The mutation of the genes, only genorates CANCR, and other deseases. The other place that genetics changes is within the birthing cycle, as in, well, a dog happens to, lets say, eat less. So the part in it's gene about makeing acids is down, or it's matabalsim is up. BUT, this isn't a permanent thing. The babies genes don't change, becaus the paren'ts genes didn't change. It's the geen ACTIVATOR things that were tured on or off.

7) Conciousness then, eh? how do we remain concious? (just a question.)

ALL of these numbers don't really matter (exept for number 3)

And then, after that, NO, i'm not calling vane. I'm calling hem Jealous. He's a jealous god, as he's said.


I don't really care anymore, as long as you don't doubt that god A: exists, B: is good, and all powerfull, or that Jesus A:exists, B:died, C: rose again.

ech.

[Antichrist_Online]

Evolution isn't a just a theory. There's also the observational Law, which is things change over time. The explaination is Evolutionary theory, which is these changes can lead to new species, and the theory of natural selection which provides a mechanism. Theistic evolution is the best religious stand point I can think of, as it doesn't contradict the evidence and allows 'god' to create life, Evolution is just how he does it (like fixing the out come of dice, by changing random chance to favor what he wants). More sense than making things anew every time the world changes.

[deadboy]

http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,21 ... 01,00.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evidence_of_evolution

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Evolution

just a few interesting links I thought you might like

[formerly known as hf]

I guess some people just like easy answers, regardless of their depth, substance and grounding in reality?

[Dee]

How is accepting that God exists is the easiest answer? In fact, it is the harder one.

[Pie]

http://www.yecheadquarters.org/catalog1.2.html

In that site, the part wich deals with us is at the bottom.

Heres an exerpt from it (you know, a small part that I'm taking and using right here so you don't have to look for it.)

Did you know that the DNA of a child will only have 94% of it's parents DNA? There's a 6% difference! But yet an organ transplant can be done between them. But not with the chimpanzee, that supposedly, is a closer match to humans than even the human offspring(according to science).

questionable, eh?

2% of a trillion music Cd's( each CD holds 700 megs of data).If "one" music cd can hold 700 megs, 2% of that would be 14 megs(the 2% of one cd). So 14 megs times 1 trillion = 14 trillion megs! This is how much information 1 DNA molecule holds at the 2% level.

hmm...

[Antichrist_Online]

The 98% simularity between chimps and humans is a mistake. Like the "we only use 10% of our brain". It's since been proven different when more evidence was given, however like the "half an eye" argument people still hang on to it. Also Nuclear DNA isn't the only thing that determines cell compatablity, pigs are more compatable with humans than chimps due to other characteristics, that allows pig to human transplants. Size for example, or mitochondria DNA or chromosome number (there's two more in chimpanzes). However there is alot of simularity between humans and apes.

The later bit makes little sense. CDs store in bianary code, DNA is a quadrianry code, but with fixed values, like an alphabet instead of morse code. These are broken into groups of three (codons), each codes for an amino acid, but some amino acids have multiple codons, others just one. DNA just codes the order of 20 pieces that are put together to form hundreds of proteins, alot of which aren't understood beyond the chemical order. (Shape is an important factor, caused by similar protiens nearby for example, or inorganic groups, or non-protein groups).

[formerly known as hf]

http://www.yecheadquarters.org/catalog1.2.html

In that site, the part wich deals with us is at the bottom.

Heres an exerpt from it (you know, a small part that I'm taking and using right here so you don't have to look for it.)

Did you know that the DNA of a child will only have 94% of it's parents DNA? There's a 6% difference! But yet an organ transplant can be done between them. But not with the chimpanzee, that supposedly, is a closer match to humans than even the human offspring(according to science).

A wonderful example of people just not reading things correctly.

Children share 94% of their DNA as identical to their parents. The other 6% is from DNA which has skipped a generation (i.e: Their grandparents) or minor mutations. Children are still 100% Human - their DNA structure is still human

Chimps share a 98/99% DNA structure with human DNA structure. The building blocks are almost identical, but, on an individual basis, the differences are too great.

Please stop linking to that site Pie - it's a wonderful example of people arguing with something they either haven't bothered to understand or just don;t understand.

I don't understand much about quantum physics. If I decided to argue against quantum physics, I'd make damned sure I knew my stuff before making any points...

[deadboy]

Heh yes I read through that article and my god does it use bad science. Take for example when it talks about using a pig heart instead of chimpanzees hearts for transplants and it claiming that it is due to us being too genetically dissimilar to chimpanzees and being more like pigs. Way wrong, we've just got the same sort of sized hearts as pigs, but they have protiens not found in us and so the pigs we use are genetically modified to be more like humans. The only reason we use pigs over chimpanzees is because chimpanzees are an endangered species so it would be very much illegal, whereas pigs are in mass abundance and it really isn't that difficult to genetically modify them to not contain the non-human protiens (Which when they exist cause our immune systems to attack and destroy the heart as it is foriegn tissue)

So then, when it uses science like -that- as an argument it makes you have to look very very closely at any other claims it may make. Just as the other arguments Pie brought up in this is flawed.

Let me take the first one, this one has been answered pretty well by HF. This is talking about the changes in alleles within genes. However, each gene is still the same gene no matter what the allele is, meaning that in genetic terms you still have 100% of your parents DNA because suprise suprise you are still 100% human, your genetic makeup is 100% similar to every other human, merely the alleles change, or yes, whether the genes are turned on or off.

Now the second point. This made me cringe a little when I read it. For the sake of argument lets pretend that DNA has anything to do with binary data and therefore statements like this can be made. Let's examine exactly what the statement says:

1. A person has 75 trillion cells
2. 1 cm2 of DNA is the same as 1 trillion music CD's
3. 1 music CD holds 700 megs
4. 14 megs times 1 trillion is 14 trillion
5. 14 t x 75 t = 1050t
6. 2% of 1050 t is 21 t

So then, this makes the claim that we are 21 trillion megs different than apes. But, let's just look at exactly what they've done each stage

1. Fair enough
2. Fair enough
3. Fair enough
4. Now we've started to veer off real science into psudo science. A single cell does not hold 1 cm2 of DNA. More like 1 x 10-9 cm2. So this is more like 14 x 1 x 10-9 = 1.4x10-8 trillion megs
5. Yet another piece of poor psudo science. All the genetics within every cell is exactly the same, so we can totally ignore this x 75 trillion.
6. Therefore 1.4x10-8 x 2% trillion = 200 megs

So, if we assume everything this article says to be true, which I don't really, but assuming it is, according to them there is only 200 megs difference between a human and a chimpanzee. Now let's take into account that ther difference is more like 0.5%, not 2%, so in reality there is something like 50-100 megs difference between a human and a chimpanzee according to this article. I'm sorry Pie but if this is the best arguments the best people in the best source you could find that argued for creationism gives, I am quite ashamed for you.

Just because that was quite long, let me reiterate, according to Pie's point there is only 50-100 megs difference between a human and a chimpanzee

[deadboy]

I'd like to just say, to whoever wrote that there article, let's have a toast to people who think that they are scientists but have no idea what they are talking about, you've made many a person believe in false things *Clinks a glass*

[west]

"Now, I'm no scientist, but God did tell me the other day that I'm always right."

[Nixit]

Oh, and, EVERY SINGLE HUMAN BEING is like a computer. We only do things we are taught to do.

Oh, and god dosen't neccesarily do EVERYTHING. He lets us have free will. He set up nature so that he dosen't have to create a soal everythime someone is born.

Contradictory, and also bullcrap. Unless you mean he teaches us to have free will...

[Nixit]

How is accepting that God exists is the easiest answer? In fact, it is the harder one.

It depends on the environment your raised in. You, Dee, were raised in a pretty much Muslim dominated environment, and to reject the faith and reject God completely is difficult... because it is so radical compared to everyone else.

Me? Accepting God is quite difficult, being raised Unitarian Universalist, I was raised with basic life principles but everything else is largely my choice to believe. To accept a God that already has everything planned out for me or has already decided morals or whatever would seem like a cop out to me. To me, anyway. Often times I wish I could fall on a God who would have guidance, but it never struck me as a truth and so I have myself, and other people to fall back on.

Not saying you're wrong, but to suggest that your lifestyle is any more harder, or for me to say that it's harder for is just wrong. I don't know you or your life.