• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Why I am a good proof that there is a God

Suave

Simulated character
Sounds a lot like apophenia.

Scientific journals are not "peer reviewed".

"The Editor in Chief of Icarus is responsible for overseeing the peer review process alongside a team of Editors and working with the Editorial Advisory Board. Currently, each Editor is responsible for a particular field, and the Editor-in-Chief would be responsible for directly handling the peer review of papers which fall within their area of expertise. In general, we would expect this to be around 50 papers per year. The role includes working with the Publisher and the DPS to shape the strategy and direction of the journal as well as commissioning research articles, review articles, and special issues. The anticipated start date is the 1st of January 2018, though some preparatory activities will take place towards the end of 2017."

Icarus Editor-in-Chief Application | Division for Planetary Sciences
 

KWED

Scratching head, scratching knee
Sheldon, I greatly appreciate your valuable input and very useful feedback regarding the notion of there being the number 37 as well as an Egyptian triangle depicted in our genetic code. I realize most people are going to reject the Wow signal of the terrestrial genetic code hypothesis, because as Carl Sagan once stated, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. While I believe Vladimir Scherbak and Maxim Makukov have indeed detected a signal of intelligence in our genetic code, others will believe they practiced numerology to get fabricated results. .
The problem with this kind of "research" is that it relies on subjective selection and interpretation of data. Exactly the same data will produce different results if approached differently. That is not "science". It is no coincidence that religionists often claim to have found similar "patterns" hidden in holy texts. Presumably you concede that their research is similarly accurate?
 

KWED

Scratching head, scratching knee
I believe I am fortunate. Not every Christian is so gifted.
So it is a special ability you have to be able to hear god, rather than god's word being audible to everyone.
Interesting.
Why do you think other religionists are unable to hear him, despite them being even more pious and devout than you?
 

KWED

Scratching head, scratching knee
So let us try the null hypothesis. Have you ever hear of another god inhabiting believers bodies? I have heard of no such claims.
Are you claiming that no other religion has followers who believe they have been spoken to by god?
Come now, you need to try harder than that.
 

KWED

Scratching head, scratching knee
Harry Potter is fiction but if yo think you can be a wizard then try it. I believe you will fail.
They are only appear to be fiction if you don't believe them to be real.
So, if someone believes them to be non-fiction, are they proof of wizards?
 

KWED

Scratching head, scratching knee
"The Editor in Chief of Icarus is responsible for overseeing the peer review process alongside a team of Editors and working with the Editorial Advisory Board. Currently, each Editor is responsible for a particular field, and the Editor-in-Chief would be responsible for directly handling the peer review of papers which fall within their area of expertise. In general, we would expect this to be around 50 papers per year. The role includes working with the Publisher and the DPS to shape the strategy and direction of the journal as well as commissioning research articles, review articles, and special issues. The anticipated start date is the 1st of January 2018, though some preparatory activities will take place towards the end of 2017."

Icarus Editor-in-Chief Application | Division for Planetary Sciences
They review the papers that are presented for publication. Icarus itself is not peer reviewed.
 

Suave

Simulated character
I think there might be others who similarly doubt your perception of reality.

As a Christian Matrixist, I doubt anybody's perception of reality, matter being a probability wave that materializes into a particle upon observational interaction. This perhaps in order to conserve computational resources of simulation devices.
 

KWED

Scratching head, scratching knee
I believe there is no objective evidence. I believe the concept of objective evidence is a myth. All evidence is relative to previous knowledge.
So if a child is brought up to think that 2+2=5, then 2+2 does indeed = 5 and if someone later tried to explain to them that 2+2 actually = 4, they would be wrong and the child right?
 

Suave

Simulated character
They review the papers that are presented for publication. Icarus itself is not peer reviewed.
  • In an attempt to maintain quality and ensure validity of the research being published, Science Journals subject the articles through a rigorous peer-review process, honoring copyrights. Science Journals may include various types of articles such as, letters, short communications, review articles, research articles, case reports, editorials, and other supplementary articles. The rules and guidelines of article writing as well as formatting may vary with the type of the journal and the publisher.
 

Suave

Simulated character
The problem with this kind of "research" is that it relies on subjective selection and interpretation of data. Exactly the same data will produce different results if approached differently. That is not "science". It is no coincidence that religionists often claim to have found similar "patterns" hidden in holy texts. Presumably you concede that their research is similarly accurate?

"It has been repeatedly proposed to expand the scope for SETI, and one of the suggested alternatives to radio is the biological media. Genomic DNA is already used on Earth to store nonbiological information. Though smaller in capacity, but stronger in noise immunity is the genetic code. The code is a flexible mapping between codons and amino acids, and this flexibility allows modifying the code artificially. But once fixed, the code might stay unchanged over cosmological timescales; in fact, it is the most durable construct known. Therefore it represents an exceptionally reliable storage for an intelligent signature, if that conforms to biological and thermodynamic requirements. As the actual scenario for the origin of terrestrial life is far from being settled, the proposal that it might have been seeded intentionally cannot be ruled out. A statistically strong intelligent-like “signal” in the genetic code is then a testable consequence of such scenario. Here we show that the terrestrial code displays a thorough precision-type orderliness matching the criteria to be considered an informational signal. Simple arrangements of the code reveal an ensemble of arithmetical and ideographical patterns of the same symbolic language. Accurate and systematic, these underlying patterns appear as a product of precision logic and nontrivial computing rather than of stochastic processes (the null hypothesis that they are due to chance coupled with presumable evolutionary pathways is rejected with P-value < 10–13). The patterns are profound to the extent that the code mapping itself is uniquely deduced from their algebraic representation. The signal displays readily recognizable hallmarks of artificiality, among which are the symbol of zero, the privileged decimal syntax and semantical symmetries. Besides, extraction of the signal involves logically straightforward but abstract operations, making the patterns essentially irreducible to any natural origin. Plausible way of embedding the signal into the code and possible interpretation of its content are discussed. Overall, while the code is nearly optimized biologically, its limited capacity is used extremely efficiently to store non-biological information." - Vladimir sCherbak, Maxim Makukov

https://www.mentealternativa.com/ma...ow-signal-of-the-terrestrial-genetic-code.pdf

The "Wow! signal" of the terrestrial genetic code
Vladimir I. shCherbak, Maxim A. Makukov
carus, 2013, 224(1), 228-242
DOI: 10.1016/j.icarus.2013.02.017
arXiv:1303.6739


".Hi, I'm one of the authors of the papers being discussed here (thanks for pointing out this discussion, Simone). Saying right off: I am not going to make war and press on changing anything in the wiki-article. I'll appreciate if the wiki-editors here will take my note into account; but if not - well, I can live with that, From the discussion here I see that the point is not whether our papers are ID or not (they are not; if that matters - I share entirely naturalistic worldview). Rather, the point is whether they are numerology or not. As I guess, this is a short way of saying that the data we described might be just the result of our arbitrary "juggling" until we found some "desired patterns". In our recent paper (mentioned here by the user Andy Shepp) we devote a good chunk of text to discussing this very point, so here I'll instead make a comparison between our study and the Bible Code (the comparison brought about by PZ Myers, I suppose). First - there is no any scientific hypothesis behind the Bible code (at least none that I've heard of. God? That's not a hypothesis, since the notion of God is notoriously ill-defined. Without such restriction, you are free to choose/invent any method you like for data analysis. In our case, we have the working hypothesis (that of Sagan and Crick & Orgel), and we attempt to develop analysis methodology appropriate for that hypothesis - the condition which greatly restricts the options (in particular, we are trying to follow similar basic logic that was used to construct Earth-made messages such as the Arecibo message, etc.). Second - the analogy with the Bible code is irrelevant simply from statistical standpoint. In one case the data (Bible) is millions of letters long - what a scope for opportunities. In another case, the data (genetic code) is only a few hundred bits. Next, the Bible is but one of many books ever written, while the genetic code is unique (with several minor variations). The Bible is written with a writing system which is itself completely arbitrary and is but one of many existing writing systems; in contrast, in our approach we do not rely in any way on arbitrary cultural codes, relying instead on the language of abstract logic and mathematics (yes, I know not everyone agrees that even mathematics might be useful for communication with another intelligent species; still, if you attempt to do that, first of all you'll most probalby resort to logic/mathematics, not Hebrew, right?). ----------- Of course, I by no means imply that our data unambiguously supports the hypothesis of Crick & Orgel. My point is that the data favors this hypothesis to the extent which makes it unreasonable to dismiss it as numerology just like the Bible code. As typically happens in such situations, the problem is that it is difficult to find an objective criterion for judging opinions and biases." - Maxim Makukov

Reference: Wikipedia Talk Panspermia Talk:panspermia - Wikipedia
 
Last edited:

KWED

Scratching head, scratching knee
  • In an attempt to maintain quality and ensure validity of the research being published, Science Journals subject the articles through a rigorous peer-review process, honoring copyrights. Science Journals may include various types of articles such as, letters, short communications, review articles, research articles, case reports, editorials, and other supplementary articles. The rules and guidelines of article writing as well as formatting may vary with the type of the journal and the publisher.
Yes. This merely verifies what I said.
 

KWED

Scratching head, scratching knee
"It has been repeatedly proposed to expand the scope for SETI, and one of the suggested alternatives to radio is the biological media. Genomic DNA is already used on Earth to store nonbiological information. Though smaller in capacity, but stronger in noise immunity is the genetic code. The code is a flexible mapping between codons and amino acids, and this flexibility allows modifying the code artificially. But once fixed, the code might stay unchanged over cosmological timescales; in fact, it is the most durable construct known. Therefore it represents an exceptionally reliable storage for an intelligent signature, if that conforms to biological and thermodynamic requirements. As the actual scenario for the origin of terrestrial life is far from being settled, the proposal that it might have been seeded intentionally cannot be ruled out. A statistically strong intelligent-like “signal” in the genetic code is then a testable consequence of such scenario. Here we show that the terrestrial code displays a thorough precision-type orderliness matching the criteria to be considered an informational signal. Simple arrangements of the code reveal an ensemble of arithmetical and ideographical patterns of the same symbolic language. Accurate and systematic, these underlying patterns appear as a product of precision logic and nontrivial computing rather than of stochastic processes (the null hypothesis that they are due to chance coupled with presumable evolutionary pathways is rejected with P-value < 10–13). The patterns are profound to the extent that the code mapping itself is uniquely deduced from their algebraic representation. The signal displays readily recognizable hallmarks of artificiality, among which are the symbol of zero, the privileged decimal syntax and semantical symmetries. Besides, extraction of the signal involves logically straightforward but abstract operations, making the patterns essentially irreducible to any natural origin. Plausible way of embedding the signal into the code and possible interpretation of its content are discussed. Overall, while the code is nearly optimized biologically, its limited capacity is used extremely efficiently to store non-biological information." - Vladimir sCherbak, Maxim Makukov

https://www.mentealternativa.com/ma...ow-signal-of-the-terrestrial-genetic-code.pdf

The "Wow! signal" of the terrestrial genetic code
Vladimir I. shCherbak, Maxim A. Makukov
carus, 2013, 224(1), 228-242
DOI: 10.1016/j.icarus.2013.02.017
arXiv:1303.6739


".Hi, I'm one of the authors of the papers being discussed here (thanks for pointing out this discussion, Simone). Saying right off: I am not going to make war and press on changing anything in the wiki-article. I'll appreciate if the wiki-editors here will take my note into account; but if not - well, I can live with that, From the discussion here I see that the point is not whether our papers are ID or not (they are not; if that matters - I share entirely naturalistic worldview). Rather, the point is whether they are numerology or not. As I guess, this is a short way of saying that the data we described might be just the result of our arbitrary "juggling" until we found some "desired patterns". In our recent paper (mentioned here by the user Andy Shepp) we devote a good chunk of text to discussing this very point, so here I'll instead make a comparison between our study and the Bible Code (the comparison brought about by PZ Myers, I suppose). First - there is no any scientific hypothesis behind the Bible code (at least none that I've heard of. God? That's not a hypothesis, since the notion of God is notoriously ill-defined. Without such restriction, you are free to choose/invent any method you like for data analysis. In our case, we have the working hypothesis (that of Sagan and Crick & Orgel), and we attempt to develop analysis methodology appropriate for that hypothesis - the condition which greatly restricts the options (in particular, we are trying to follow similar basic logic that was used to construct Earth-made messages such as the Arecibo message, etc.). Second - the analogy with the Bible code is irrelevant simply from statistical standpoint. In one case the data (Bible) is millions of letters long - what a scope for opportunities. In another case, the data (genetic code) is only a few hundred bits. Next, the Bible is but one of many books ever written, while the genetic code is unique (with several minor variations). The Bible is written with a writing system which is itself completely arbitrary and is but one of many existing writing systems; in contrast, in our approach we do not rely in any way on arbitrary cultural codes, relying instead on the language of abstract logic and mathematics (yes, I know not everyone agrees that even mathematics might be useful for communication with another intelligent species; still, if you attempt to do that, first of all you'll most probalby resort to logic/mathematics, not Hebrew, right?). ----------- Of course, I by no means imply that our data unambiguously supports the hypothesis of Crick & Orgel. My point is that the data favors this hypothesis to the extent which makes it unreasonable to dismiss it as numerology just like the Bible code. As typically happens in such situations, the problem is that it is difficult to find an objective criterion for judging opinions and biases." - Maxim Makukov

Reference: Wikipedia Talk Panspermia Talk:panspermia - Wikipedia
Not sure why you keep reposting this quote. It doesn't address my point.
 

Suave

Simulated character
Not sure why you keep reposting this quote. It doesn't address my point.
Please let us appreciate my post's reiterating how the scientific minded duo of Vladimir sCherbak and Maxim Makykov diesel the notion of their discovered mathematical patterns in genetic coding as having occured by natural selection or by any natural biological process.
 

74x12

Well-Known Member
Given the claims made by and about god, yes.
However, he is demonstrably not clear to see. Therefore by your argument, god does not exist.
(Note: I do not think that simply because something is not clearly apparent it therefore does not exist, but you seem to, so your god must be examined by your own standards)
So if God should be clearly seen then why don't you? It must be because you're blind. That's the only conclusion I can come to.
 

Sheldon

Veteran Member
I believe I am human but God in me is not.

Ok, but I don't believe that, so perhaps can demsonrate some objective evidence for the belief? Also how that belief differs in any objective way from other identical claims people make for other deities?

Have you ever hear of another god inhabiting believers bodies? I have heard of no such claims.

I have heard other theists claim to have personally experienced different deities yes, but I pay no heed to unevidenced claims, that's why I asked is you could demsonrate any objective evidence for your claim in the original post (above)? When I asked how your belief differs in any objective way to identical claims from theists for other deities, I meant theists who make subjective unevidenced claims to have personally experienced a deity in any way.

Either way can you demonstrate anything approaching objective evidence, or anything beyond the bare claim?
 
Last edited:

Sheldon

Veteran Member
So if God should be clearly seen then why don't you? It must be because you're blind. That's the only conclusion I can come to.

That's a not true Scotsman fallacy, it seems a very popular type of argument among apologists on this site when atheist point out they don't experience any deity, but it is irrational.

Also using Occam's razor, there is a much simpler explanation for why someone doesn't experience something, than them being blind to its existence.
 

Sheldon

Veteran Member
I have run away from nothing, nor have I ever experienced any deity or anything supernatural.

You run away from God and his guide as if running away from a Lion. Just stop it and secrets of life begin to open up for you.

Really, just a blinkered repetition of a claim I just told you is untrue? The last sentence is just another vapid platitude sorry, it is meaningless.

I have neither run from anything, nor have I ever experienced any deity. Now, can you demsonrate anything approaching any objective evidence for any deity?
 
Last edited:
Top