Consciousnees; The coolest evidence of God.

[St Giordano Bruno]

Why wouldn't consciousness just simply emerge as matter reaches a critical level of complexity, especially carbon based life forms. After all other things emerge as matter reaches a certain level of complexity such as the nucleosynthesis of carbon. Why should consciousness be any exception to the rule? it could be just another thing that happened naturally.

 

[mickiel]

Why wouldn't consciousness just simply emerge as matter reaches a critical level of complexity, especially carbon based life forms. After all other things emerge as matter reaches a certain level of complexity such as the nucleosynthesis of carbon. Why should consciousness be any exception to the rule? it could be just another thing that happened naturally.

Complexity did not come from things not as complex as the original, how could that even be possible? And I explain this all the time, thats why I keep going over this. Matter cannot create itself, it had to be created by a complex power that is " Greater Than" itself, which is God. Emergant evolution is simply a theory that seeks to explain life without a lifegiver. And it has its followers and believers, just as God does.

In my view, Life can only come from life, Consciousness could only have come from Consciousness. Birds come from birds, lizards come from other lizards, humans could have only come from other humans. Life then, can only originate from other life forms.

Its academic that God exist. And its logical.

Peace.

 

[PolyHedral]

Complexity did not come from things not as complex as the original, how could that even be possible?

Would you like me to send you some of the many books on exactly how it is possible?

 

[mickiel]

Would you like me to send you some of the many books on exactly how it is possible?

A simple explination would be nice to read , if you have one. Because I know there is none.

Peace.

 

[PolyHedral]

A simple explination would be nice to read , if you have one. Because I know there is none.
Peace.

Very well, then. Let us consider a simplified universe, which is a grid of 2D cells. The cells can be either "alive" or "dead". Each step of time, any cell that has 3 neighbors which are "alive" will become alive, and every cell with exactly 2 neighbors will not change state. Every other cell becomes dead.

That took 291 characters to write down, and so can be absolutely described if you have 2,328 bits. If we start the game using this pattern of alive (black) and dead (white) cells, then we start the game with 2,728 (2,328+400 to describe the pattern) bits of complexity.

However, if you run the pattern, 35,000 time-steps later you end up with this, which cannot be described in anything less than 179,786 bits. Where do those 177,000 bits come from, if they so desperately need a source?

 

[mickiel]

Very well, then. Let us consider a simplified universe, which is a grid of 2D cells. The cells can be either "alive" or "dead". Each step of time, any cell that has 3 neighbors which are "alive" will become alive, and every cell with exactly 2 neighbors will not change state. Every other cell becomes dead.
?

Now your suggesting that we have a universe of dead and alive cells which change each other to eventually create another universe that spawns ours in time.

Man, you got to be kidding, your base explination is absolutely absurd. Dead things which came from nowhere couldnot procreate with live things which came from nowhere, unless you believe in frankenstien or fantasy island.

Peace.

 

[PolyHedral]

Only in our actual universe, which is not what I'm talking about.

 

[mickiel]

Only in our actual universe, which is not what I'm talking about.

Yeah well when you know what your talking about, let me know.

Peace.

 

[Diederick]

Complexity did not come from things not as complex as the original, how could that even be possible?

Ah! The Junkyard Argument (Hoyle's Fallacy), how nice of you to bring that up, it's been a while since I last came across that one...

Its academic that God exist. And its logical.

Do you mean it is hypothetical/theoretical that God exists, or do you mean "God exists" is a claim backed by an academy? More importantly, what are you trying to say with it?

And what, exactly, is your definition of logical? Because I'm not sure you'll be able to back up the statement that it is logical that God exists. I hope you're not basing it on the above linked fallacy...

 

[mickiel]

Ah! The Junkyard Argument (Hoyle's Fallacy), how nice of you to bring that up, it's been a while since I last came across that one...

Do you mean it is hypothetical/theoretical that God exists, or do you mean "God exists" is a claim backed by an academy? More importantly, what are you trying to say with it?

And what, exactly, is your definition of logical? Because I'm not sure you'll be able to back up the statement that it is logical that God exists. I hope you're not basing it on the above linked fallacy...

Its Academic that God exist, meaning its higher educational that he exist, the mind has to be educated at a higher insight to see it. Its Academic that God exist, meaning it has to be learned that he exist. Its Academic that God exist, meaning its understood by a practical application of knowledge.

Its Logical that God exist, meaning his existence is in accordance with reasonable consequences. Its logical God exist, meaning the apparent unavoidable cause and effect relationship with man and the universe leads to a particular conclusion, only a God could have done it.

Peace.

 

[Diederick]

Its Academic that God exist, meaning its higher educational that he exist, the mind has to be educated at a higher insight to see it. Its Academic that God exist, meaning it has to be learned that he exist. Its Academic that God exist, meaning its understood by a practical application of knowledge.

So if my IQ was any higher I would have found proof of God?

Its Logical that God exist, meaning his existence is in accordance with reasonable consequences. Its logical God exist, meaning the apparent unavoidable cause and effect relationship with man and the universe leads to a particular conclusion, only a God could have done it.

Right, well at least I can work with your definition of logical. But if you read the article I linked to in my previous post, about the Junkyard Argument, you understand that the manner of thinking which leads you to believe "only a God could have done it" is flawed. Because complexity does not require something more complex in a creator-position to exist. We don't need a watchmaker.

Unless, of course, I am drawing conclusions too fast and you were referring to a different argument to produce "only a God could have done it".

 

[Tiapan]

Boy oh Boy what an ounce of commonsense could add to this discussion. A bee bit me what a miracle I didn't die it must be a miracle. Wow!

Cheers

 

[mickiel]

Boy oh Boy what an ounce of commonsense could add to this discussion. A bee bit me what a miracle I didn't die it must be a miracle. Wow!

Cheers

Well offer your own common sense to the discussion.

Peace.

 

[mickiel]

Boy oh Boy what an ounce of commonsense could add to this discussion. A bee bit me what a miracle I didn't die it must be a miracle. Wow!

Cheers

The implication here is that this thread is devoid of common sense, that bothers me. Not because of the insulting implication, but the blindness to the common sense I have employed that is unseen. I explain in simple terms the truth of the matter, it is continually spit on by those who can't get to it. Senseless sarcasm thrown back and forth, delusional darts thrown at it.

Its a window of the reality of how far human understanding has been dumped by the demons that be.

Peace.

 

[mickiel]

You ever heard the expression," Theres a timebomb ticking inside of you?"

Well theres constant evidence of God ticking inside of you; its your Consciousness, definte proof of God.

Peace.

 

[mickiel]

When God decides to influence an individual, he will appeal to their consciousness, he will communicate there. Consciousness is the coolest evidence of God, but it is also the communicating lifeline he will use when he decides to inspire the human.

And That is very important. The most real thing you can have happen to your belief system, is your own consciousness.

Peace.

 

[Dirty Penguin]

God is Cool man, and when he created human Consciousness, it was a corner pocket shot of unique evidence of him. Consciousness, the Governor of human behavior and the coolest imprint of Gods identification track. We can know that God exist, because our Consciousness exist. It is impossible for Consciousness to have evolution, it has been consistant since God gave it to humans, I do not believe he gave it to Primordal humans.

Consciousness is sure evidence of God, and I will be going back into it.

Peace.

Which creator god do you ascribe to?

 

[mickiel]

Which creator god do you ascribe to?

I think the God in the bible is the true God, that is my view of it. I don't know him, but I am on my way to learning.

Peace.

 

[Diederick]

Would you mind answering my questions?

 

[mickiel]

So if my IQ was any higher I would have found proof of God?quote

No, IQ has nothing to do with it, I think seeing proof of God, is something God has to open to the human, or they simply willnot see it. God has to be involved at some level, for humans to see his involvement. To see his reality, and yet there are exceptions even to this. Some humans see it on their own determined belief, without Gods involvement, so although God is not leading their inspiration, they are inspired on their own. These kinds of humans may then believe in God, but their understanding of him, is not guided by him. Which is why we then have so much misinterpitation of God going around in believers.

quote
Right, well at least I can work with your definition of logical. But if you read the article I linked to in my previous post, about the Junkyard Argument, you understand that the manner of thinking which leads you to believe "only a God could have done it" is flawed. Because complexity does not require something more complex in a creator-position to exist. We don't need a watchmaker.

Unless, of course, I am drawing conclusions too fast and you were referring to a different argument to produce "only a God could have done it".

Well I don't disagree with that arguement, but I was not refering to it. Only a God could have done it, is acceptable to my reasoning, because I too think like that and agree with it. Only a God could have created the universe, I do not see it creating itself. Its just too marvelous. I look at females, one of Gods finest creations. Their symectric makeup, their boundless beauty, their symatry, shape and definement, its simply incredible and wonderful.

Women are proof of God, no evolution could produce them. No! They are the result of an incredible artist who knew just what he was doing and designing. Females are a " Work of Wonder", no doubt in my mind, thats why I always enjoy having one, I enjoy my creators comittment to giving us men a help mate, evolution couldnot be concerned with such things. Evolution has no mind of its own, its not concerned with beauty and emotional content.

Now I have a question for you, explain to me how an unemotional thing and concept like evolution, could then produce emotions?

Peace.