Intelligent Design vs. Casino Universe

@farmerman,

farmerman wrote:

Such a belief does contravene the existing evidence.

     If you are curious to know some of your pieces of evidence are contradicting some of the other of your pieces of evidence, but you are not willing 'to be inquired' on the issue.
     Let's start from the very beginning. Your favorite theory claims that the Earth is 4.54 By, the Solar System is 4.57 By and the Universe is 13.8 By - right?
   1. How has the Solar System looked like without the Earth - for a period of 300 000 years?
   2. The Solar System appeared out of what? You have no clue about the assumptions - what has been right here, in our place, from time 13.8 Bya to time 4.57 Bya. You have missing information ... without a trace. How can you explain that?
   3. If you are missing so much information about the Solar System (our own place in the Universe), how much information can you be missing about the whole Universe? You can calculate this by proportion: If we are missing SSi for the SS, we are most probably missing Ui information about the whole U, but as you will never be able to calculate the missing information about the space where at present the SS is (notwithstanding your claims of having evidences ... that you cannot even interpret properly), most probably we will never be able to calculate the missing information about the whole Universe ... not to mention also the Black Holes, the Dark Matter, the Dark Energy, etc.
     Hence, FM you have no evidence - you have found figuratively some books here and there, taken away from the flood of time, but you have no idea of how the whole library might have looked like.

farmerman wrote:

So what is it gonna be? Believe and ignore evidence ?

     Contradictions with the laws of physics are also evidence ... about inability of existence which is called impossibility.

RE: the Big Bang itself
     FM, you have no valid theory. A 'theory' full of contradictions can infer anything. This could not be a theory. It is invalid as a theory, not as a set of claims. No matter how much evidences you may have about particular claims there - it is invalid as a theory for it is based on contradictions. If you want to claim that you have a theory you will have to clean it up from the contradictions ... from ALL of them.
     Thus for example how can you explain the existence of something without Time. The very existence is a process, hence Time runs implicitly and concurrently with the existence. If you want to have something without Time that something is only the absolute Nothing that can exist without the Time, for it does not exist as anything. Hence you will have to create the Universe out of absolute Nothing - zero-D space, zero Energy, zero Momentum, zero Temperature, zero Gravitation ... and zero Time.

1 Reply

Wtf.

0 Replies

@parados,

parados wrote:

... of why you dislike Occam's razor.

This is 13th c. philosophy - which century is now. So, your claim is that as the Big Bang 'theory' has no assumptions at all, it should be chosen with preference to any other hypothesis. lol
If you are curious to know the Big Bang 'theory' has no assumptions, because it is such a retard construct that it does not even know that it is supposed to have some assumptions ... in order to present itself as a theory.

3 Replies

@Herald,

Still waiting for that robust defense of your "personal 45% god." Laughing

Like, why is that god necessary to explain observed phenomena?

1 Reply

This was voted among the top 10 stories in Chemistry for 2014. Pretty interesting stuff: http://www.sciencemag.org/content/345/6204/1584.short

Quote:

Science 26 September 2014:
Vol. 345 no. 6204 pp. 1584-1587
DOI: 10.1126/science.1256678
REPORT
Detection of a branched alkyl molecule in the interstellar medium: iso-propyl cyanide
Arnaud Belloche1,*, Robin T. Garrod2, Holger S. P. Müller3, Karl M. Menten1
+ Author Affiliations

1Max-Planck-Institut für Radioastronomie (MPIfR), Auf dem Hügel 69, 53121 Bonn, Germany.
2Center for Radiophysics and Space Research, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853-6801, USA.
3I. Physikalisches Institut, Universität zu Köln, Zülpicher Straße 77, 50937 Köln, Germany.
↵*Corresponding author. E-mail: [email protected]

ABSTRACT EDITOR'S SUMMARY

The largest noncyclic molecules detected in the interstellar medium (ISM) are organic with a straight-chain carbon backbone. We report an interstellar detection of a branched alkyl molecule, iso-propyl cyanide (i-C3H7CN), with an abundance 0.4 times that of its straight-chain structural isomer. This detection suggests that branched carbon-chain molecules may be generally abundant in the ISM. Our astrochemical model indicates that both isomers are produced within or upon dust grain ice mantles through the addition of molecular radicals, albeit via differing reaction pathways. The production of iso-propyl cyanide appears to require the addition of a functional group to a nonterminal carbon in the chain. Its detection therefore bodes well for the presence in the ISM of amino acids, for which such side-chain structure is a key characteristic.

Received for publication 29 May 2014.
Accepted for publication 20 August 2014.

2 Replies

@FBM,

So???????????????????????????????????????????

0 Replies

@FBM,

FBM wrote:

Like, why is that god necessary to explain observed phenomena?

     Because among the phenomena you have our intelliegence ... and various features of intelligence exhibited into the biosphere - that is why.
     None of your 'observed phenomena' can create any intelligent function.
     It doesn't matter whether you deny the existence of our intelligence or not - it exists, and you are unable to disprove that it has always existed in some form or another. It exists and your fake theory has to explain it up to the eighteenth digit after the decimal point - for which I doubt, for it cannot explain even how it is functioning as a theory when it is full of contradictions.

1 Reply

@Herald,

Herald wrote:

FBM wrote:
Like, why is that god necessary to explain observed phenomena?

Because among the phenomena you have our intelliegence ... and various features of intelligence exhibited into the biosphere - that is why.
None of your 'observed phenomena' can create any intelligent function.

Well, if you're the function under study, I'd be forced to agree.

Aren't you worried that this god of yours is going to be seriously pissed off at you for only giving it a "personal 45%"? That's a pretty low blow. Gods don't like that ****.

And why exactly 45%? Why not 46 or 82%?

1 Reply

@FBM,

FBM wrote:

And why exactly 45%? Why not 46 or 82%?

     These percentages are rough estimate, and depend greatly on the chosen formal model of assessment. When you assign expert knowledge to something, it is not 82.5% - it is either 80% or 85% or between 80 and 85%. What difference does it make whether it is 45 or 46% - what matters is that it is below 50%, and quite close to it.
     Besides there are some other hypotheses - for us to have been made by another Intelligent Life Form (ILF)? From where do you have such great confidence that God (if exists), should deal directly with us and would not assign the performance of the ID to some Contractors? From where do you have such a great self-conceit that you are of such a great importance in the Universe, that God should deal exclusively and personally with you ... while at the same time the so called 'theory' of the Big Bang is trying to convince you that you are recycled garbage ... some fossil evidence, evolved from star-dust.
     Let me ask you something - so and so we may never be able to find the truth (by various reasons) - with which of the above said two hypotheses you feel more comfortable?

1 Reply

@Herald,

Herald wrote:

FBM wrote:
And why exactly 45%? Why not 46 or 82%?
These percentages are rough estimate, and depend greatly on the chosen formal model of assessment.

Great! Mind sharing yours with us? Maybe your metrics? Maybe we can sharpen them up to produce something better than a "rough estimate."

1 Reply

@FBM,

If that molecule had another functional group (carboxyl) itd be a dead ringer for a simple amino acid

1 Reply

@farmerman,

Carbon. Oxygen. Hydrogen. Those sure are rare in this universe, eh? I guess goddidit, after all. Wink

0 Replies

Also in the current science news feed: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/12/141222111603.htm

Quote:

Scientists 'map' water vapor in Martian atmosphere
Date:
December 22, 2014
Source:
Moscow Institute of Physics and Technology
Summary:
Scientists have created a 'map' of the distribution of water vapor. Their research includes observations of seasonal variations in atmospheric concentrations using data collected over ten years by the Russian-French SPICAM spectrometer aboard the Mars Express orbiter. This is the longest period of observation and provides the largest volume of data about water vapor on Mars.

1 Reply

@Herald,

A typical idiotic response. A maxim for obtaining a logical position, or for practicing sound reasoning is not diminished by its age. If a logical or reasoning principle was sound when William of Occam propounded his reasoning principle (which was in the early 14th century, not the 13th century), then so it is today. It was not new, even then. Maimonides articulated such a principle in the 12th century, and it can be argued that Aristotle did so in the 4th century BCE. Logic and reasoning age very well.

1 Reply

@Setanta,

How old is the concept of a magical sky-daddy who made everything and will give you the slap-down if you don't worship it with 100% of your being? I can take the Abrahamic god back to the (local) Bronze Age.

http://i206.photobucket.com/albums/bb192/DinahFyre/goodmorning.gif

0 Replies

@FBM,

Im not sure I undertand the "map"
1. I assume its a kind of Oblique Mercator projection of an ortho projection of lat on the y and long on the x

2. I assume the colors correspond to presence of water (more and darker the blue the more water)
Was there a legend

2 Replies

@farmerman,

I also looked for a legend, but they slipped up there. Seems reasonable to presume the red represents the water, seeing as how it increases at the poles. And that's assuming the orbiter's orbit is predominantly latitudinal. I'll follow the link and see if I can get more. Brb.

1 Reply

@FBM,

I ws assuming that the white was the polar ice. If youre right, this defies convention in depicting water volumes by color. Fuckin Russians, so goddam incompetent they cant even make a decent map.

0 Replies

@farmerman,

I got cockblocked by a subscription-only page, but found this abstract: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0019103514005466

Quote:

Abstract

The SPICAM IR instrument on the Mars Express mission continuously observes the water vapor in the martian atmosphere starting from 2004 in the 1.38-μm spectral band. The water vapor column abundance is retrieved from nadir observations to characterize its spatial, seasonal and interannual variations. A reference set of SPICAM water vapor column abundances (zonally averaged) covering the time period from 2004 to 2013 (martian years 27–31) is available for a grid of 2° Ls × 2° latitude, along with an average reference map of water vapor abundance combining all the martian years of Mars Express observations. Compared to the previous data retrieval by Fedorova et al. (Fedorova, A., Korablev, O., Bertaux, J.L., Rodin, A., Kiselev, A., Perrier, S. [2006]. J. Geophys. Res. 111, E09S08) the new processing algorithm includes many improvements concerning the calibration and assumed parameters. A major improvement is the account for aerosol scattering based on dust and water ice cloud optical depths measured by THEMIS/Mars Odyssey (Smith, M.D. [2009]. Icarus 202, 444–452). The account for multiple scattering by aerosol particles increases the retrieved water vapor amount by ∼10% in polar areas during summer, and up to 60–70% for large solar zenith angles. The sensitivity of the results to aerosol properties, surface albedo, solar spectrum, and water vapor vertical distribution has also been studied. The retrieved water vapor reveals nominal annual cycle with maximum abundance of about 60–70 pr. μm for the Northern summer and ∼20 pr. μm for the Southern summer. The annual average amount of water has been estimated to be of 10–20 pr. μm, in agreement with other measurements. From year to year the seasonal cycle of water vapor abundance is very stable. An observed decrease during the MY 28 global dust storm cannot be fully attributed to the masking effect of dust, and indicates a real decrease of water amount near or above the surface. No evidence of diurnal variation of column water vapor amount was found, even though the 1.38-μm measurements are sensitive to the few lowermost kilometers above the surface.

So, given the stated distribution, it's clear that the y axis is latitude and the x axis is longitude.

1 Reply

The lower scale, the "Ls" scale, refers to the solar longitude, with reference to the Martian northern hemisphere. Therefore, Ls 0 equals the vernal equinox, Ls 90 equals the summer solstice, Ls 180 equals the autumnal equinox, and Ls 270 equals the winter solstice. The lower scale shows the seasonal variations.

1 Reply

Intelligent Design vs. Casino Universe

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know