1 of 7
1
Precision in Nature: Evidence of God or Accidents?
Posted: 06 July 2014 01:28 AM   [ Ignore ]
Jr. Member
Avatar
Rank
Total Posts:  9
Joined  2014-07-06

ALTER2EGO -to- EVERYONE:

For the average person, precision indicates that an intelligent person guided the outcome. According to Webster’s New World College Dictionary, the word “precision” is defined as follows:

“the quality of being precise; exactness, accuracy”


The reverse of precision is imprecision/inaccuracy/inexactness, which is always the result of an accident or a spontaneous event that happens by chance with no one guiding the outcome. Webster’s New Collegiate Dictionary defines an accident as:

“a nonessential event that HAPPENS BY CHANCE and has undesirable or unfortunate results.” (Source: Websters New Collegiate Dictionary)

AGRUMENT #1 FOR AN INTELLIGENT CREATOR:

Scientific evidence shows there is extreme precision in everything around us in the natural world. This precision renders the evolution theory and Big Bang theory mere fiction, because both theories rely on accidents or spontaneous events. Precision leaves no room for error or for accidental events. Rather, precision requires deliberation.

Take, for example, the first 60 elements that were discovered on the Periodic Table of the Elements of planet earth. They reflect a distinct, natural numeral order based upon the structure of their atoms. This is a proven LAW.

The precision in the order of the elements made it possible for scientists such as Mendeleyev, Ramsey, Moseley, and Bohr to theorize the existence of unknown elements and their characteristics. These elements were later discovered, just as predicted. (Sources: (1) The McGraw-Hill Encyclopedia of Science & Technology, (2) “Periodic Law,” from Encyclopdia Britannica, Vol. VII, p. 878, copyright 1978, (3) The Hutchinson Dictionary of Scientific Biography)

 

QUESTIONS FOR DISCUSSION:
1.
Were it not for the precise relationship among the first 60 discovered elements on the Periodic Table, would scientists have been able to accurately predict the existence of forms of matter that at the time were unknown?

2. Could the precise law within the first 60 discovered elements (on the Periodic Table) have resulted by chance aka spontaneously aka by accident? Or is this evidence for the existence an intelligent Designer/God who guided the outcome?

 Signature 

“That people may know that you, whose name is JEHOVAH, you alone are the Most High over all the earth.” (Psalms 83:18)

Profile
 
 
Posted: 06 July 2014 09:23 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 1 ]
Moderator
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  5551
Joined  2010-06-16

Wow, I haven’t seen an argument this dumb in a long time. 

According to you god must have made arithmetic since it’s precise, otherwise things like two plus two might equal any other number besides four. 

Of course the universe is precise.  It’s made up of a relatively small number of types of particles, basically protons, electrons, and neutrons.  They too are made up of a small number of even smaller particles, but let’s stay with these three for now.  They can combine in a relatively small number of ways according to physical laws and mathematics to form elements.  And we go from there.  No “intelligence design” is needed to explain their and our existence.

Were randomness to have been the case in the universe such that physical laws and consistent behavior of the contents within those laws didn’t have to occur, there’s no way life, especially humans, could exist.  And if we couldn’t exist, we couldn’t come up with arguments different from yours.  In other words, your argument is logically fallacious, based on the same concept as the more obvious:  The sun will come up tomorrow or it won’t.  If an argument doesn’t have the possibility of falsification, it is meaningless.

Occam

 Signature 

Succinctness, clarity’s core.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 06 July 2014 10:11 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 2 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  816
Joined  2012-04-25

We need a term for posters like this. It’s pretty obvious their purpose is to do “missionary” work to score points with their god (i.e. selfish), versus starting an honest discussion on a religious topic. Any ideas for a term? I’m thinking it should convey a few things: someone who is religious, obviously dishonest, has an ulterior motive, etc.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 06 July 2014 10:30 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 3 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  365
Joined  2014-03-12

How about, God Of the Gaps Missionary Automaton Trolls? GOGMAT’s for short.

 Signature 

“expectation is the mother of disappointment”

Profile
 
 
Posted: 06 July 2014 10:35 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 4 ]
Moderator
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  5551
Joined  2010-06-16
CuthbertJ - 06 July 2014 10:11 AM

. . .someone who is religious, obviously dishonest, has an ulterior motive, etc.

doesn’t your first word here, include the following ones?  LOL

Occam

 Signature 

Succinctness, clarity’s core.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 06 July 2014 11:16 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 5 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2425
Joined  2007-07-05
Alter2Ego - 06 July 2014 01:28 AM

Take, for example, the first 60 elements that were discovered on the Periodic Table of the Elements of planet earth. They reflect a distinct, natural numeral order based upon the structure of their atoms. This is a proven LAW.

You know there is a perfect science fiction story for that.

Omnilingual (1957) by H. Beam Piper
http://www.tor.com/blogs/2012/03/scientific-language-h-beam-pipers-qomnilingualq
http://www.gutenberg.org/files/19445/19445-h/19445-h.htm
http://librivox.org/omnilingual-by-h-beam-piper/

How do you know that their table of elements was anything like ours?”

Tranter and Penrose and Sachiko all looked at him in amazement.

“That isn’t just the Martian table of elements; that’s the table of elements. It’s the only one there is.” Mort Tranter almost exploded. “Look, hydrogen has one proton and one electron. If it had more of either, it wouldn’t be hydrogen, it’d be something else. And the same with all the rest of the elements. And hydrogen on Mars is the same as hydrogen on Terra, or on Alpha Centauri, or in the next galaxy—”

“You just set up those numbers, in that order, and any first-year chemistry student could tell you what elements they represented.” Penrose said. “Could if he expected to make a passing grade, that is.”

psik

 Signature 

Fiziks is Fundamental

Profile
 
 
Posted: 06 July 2014 02:28 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 6 ]
Jr. Member
Avatar
Rank
Total Posts:  9
Joined  2014-07-06

ALTER2EGO -to- EVERYONE:

Notice that several skeptics have now shown up in the thread with nothing resembling a credible explanation for why the first 60-discovered elements on the Periodic Table are so precise.  So precise are they that they are referred to in the scientific world as “LAW.”


This is a website where rational thought is emphasized; is it not?  Well, guess what?  None of the above comments regarding my OP come close to anything that could be considered “rational”.


I am waiting for a skeptic to explain how the precision among the first 60-discovered elements could have resulted from accidents or by spontaneous means.

 Signature 

“That people may know that you, whose name is JEHOVAH, you alone are the Most High over all the earth.” (Psalms 83:18)

Profile
 
 
Posted: 06 July 2014 03:47 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 7 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4860
Joined  2007-10-05

You must have missed Occam’s explanation and the passage psikey quoted.

[ Edited: 06 July 2014 05:26 PM by DarronS ]
 Signature 

You cannot have a rational conversation with someone who holds irrational beliefs.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 06 July 2014 05:25 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 8 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  840
Joined  2014-06-20
Alter2Ego - 06 July 2014 02:28 PM

ALTER2EGO -to- EVERYONE:

Notice that several skeptics have now shown up in the thread with nothing resembling a credible explanation for why the first 60-discovered elements on the Periodic Table are so precise.  So precise are they that they are referred to in the scientific world as “LAW.”


This is a website where rational thought is emphasized; is it not?  Well, guess what?  None of the above comments regarding my OP come close to anything that could be considered “rational”.


I am waiting for a skeptic to explain how the precision among the first 60-discovered elements could have resulted from accidents or by spontaneous means.


Right! And how could eveything have come together so precisely to create such perfect beings as us if there isn’t a creator!

You’d better go back to square one.

 Signature 

[color=red“Nothing is so good as it seems beforehand.”
― George Eliot, Silas Marner[/color]

Profile
 
 
Posted: 07 July 2014 11:37 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 9 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  816
Joined  2012-04-25
Alter2Ego - 06 July 2014 02:28 PM

ALTER2EGO -to- EVERYONE:

Notice that several skeptics have now shown up in the thread with nothing resembling a credible explanation for why the first 60-discovered elements on the Periodic Table are so precise.  So precise are they that they are referred to in the scientific world as “LAW.”


This is a website where rational thought is emphasized; is it not?  Well, guess what?  None of the above comments regarding my OP come close to anything that could be considered “rational”.


I am waiting for a skeptic to explain how the precision among the first 60-discovered elements could have resulted from accidents or by spontaneous means.

Hi GOGMAT, I’m waiting to hear what you mean by Creator? Until I hear differently I’ll assume you mean a female, or at least not a male. I’ll also assume you’re NOT referring to anything related to the Christian god-myth since that’s way WAY more than anything that could be explained by an answer to your question. An answer to your question could be Yes there is a creator. That THAT creator is in any way like or equal to the god of Christian myth is an entirely different matter.

I think you’d have better luck though trying to argue for a mediocre creator who got some things right, some things horribly wrong…for example allowing newborns to suffer from cancer or cocaine addiction (no matter whose fault it is - I mean She’s the creator of the entire universe - she oughtta be able to keep a baby from being born addicted). No creator who allows that to occur in her universe is worthy of worship, prayer, churches, etc.

[ Edited: 07 July 2014 11:41 AM by CuthbertJ ]
Profile
 
 
Posted: 07 July 2014 06:09 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 10 ]
Moderator
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  5551
Joined  2010-06-16

I was surprised to see you are from Los Angeles, A2E, because most of us Southern Californians are educated well enough that we don’t get sucked in by such weak logic.  Whoever your minister is, you should see if s/he can be fired and replaced with a more rational one.

Occam

 Signature 

Succinctness, clarity’s core.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 08 July 2014 04:01 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 11 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  840
Joined  2014-06-20
Alter2Ego - 06 July 2014 02:28 PM

ALTER2EGO -to- EVERYONE:

Notice that several skeptics have now shown up in the thread with nothing resembling a credible explanation for why the first 60-discovered elements on the Periodic Table are so precise.  So precise are they that they are referred to in the scientific world as “LAW.”


This is a website where rational thought is emphasized; is it not?  Well, guess what?  None of the above comments regarding my OP come close to anything that could be considered “rational”.


I am waiting for a skeptic to explain how the precision among the first 60-discovered elements could have resulted from accidents or by spontaneous means.

You are picking one aspect of the universe and claiming it is so precise only a god could have created it. What about all the imprecision in the universe? The imprecisions that cause natural disasters that wipe out species? The imprecisions that allow devastating disease, injury and pain to the precise creator’s creations? Answer that question before you posit perfect precision. If you are going to claim precision by a creator you must be prepared to explain and justify the devastating aspects of imprecision, which is even more obvious than a few examples of seeming precision.

 Signature 

[color=red“Nothing is so good as it seems beforehand.”
― George Eliot, Silas Marner[/color]

Profile
 
 
Posted: 08 July 2014 04:28 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 12 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4576
Joined  2008-08-14
CuthbertJ - 07 July 2014 11:37 AM

Hi GOGMAT, I’m waiting to hear what you mean by…

What’s GOGMAT?

 Signature 

Row row row your boat gently down the stream.  Merrily Merrily merrily merrily life is but a dream!

Profile
 
 
Posted: 08 July 2014 05:08 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 13 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  3255
Joined  2011-08-15

CuthbertJ - 07 July 2014 11:37 AM
Hi GOGMAT, I’m waiting to hear what you mean by…

What’s GOGMAT?

See Handydan post#3 Vy.


Cap’t Jack

 Signature 

One good schoolmaster is of more use than a hundred priests.

Thomas Paine

Profile
 
 
Posted: 08 July 2014 05:30 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 14 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  3255
Joined  2011-08-15

QUESTIONS FOR DISCUSSION:
1. Were it not for the precise relationship among the first 60 discovered elements on the Periodic Table, would scientists have been able to accurately predict the existence of forms of matter that at the time were unknown?

2. Could the precise law within the first 60 discovered elements (on the Periodic Table) have resulted by chance aka spontaneously aka by accident? Or is this evidence for the existence an intelligent Designer/God who guided the outcome?


As to #1, remember that it was the scientists themselves who accurately “discovered” the elements and not ancient proto-scientists who knew only four. And, no they probably wouldn’t have been able to accurately predict the forms of matter, but what’s your point here? If the foundation of your argument is Intelligent Design which is the book of Creationism with a new dust jacket then you are (and this is an assumption, you might be Muslim) basing your whole contention on the Bible, an non-scientific cobbled together collection of Bronze Age and early Iron Age intuitions having nothing to do with emperical knowledge.

As to #2, the answer is an emphatic yes! Spontaneous, or as you term it by “accident”.“A through reading of any monograph by a reputable astro physicist will answer your question. You could start with Phil Plait’s Death From the Skies or Lawrence Krauss’s A Universe From Nothing or if you want visuals, Sagan’s Cosmos. You’re using Paley’s Watch maker analogy and it may have been a plausible explanation in the 18th Century but has no provenance in the 21st. It’s time to move on. You’ll find the answers your looking for in science, not religion.

 

Cap’t Jack

 Signature 

One good schoolmaster is of more use than a hundred priests.

Thomas Paine

Profile
 
 
Posted: 08 July 2014 08:23 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 15 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  840
Joined  2014-06-20
Thevillageatheist - 08 July 2014 05:30 AM

QUESTIONS FOR DISCUSSION:
1. Were it not for the precise relationship among the first 60 discovered elements on the Periodic Table, would scientists have been able to accurately predict the existence of forms of matter that at the time were unknown?

2. Could the precise law within the first 60 discovered elements (on the Periodic Table) have resulted by chance aka spontaneously aka by accident? Or is this evidence for the existence an intelligent Designer/God who guided the outcome?


As to #1, remember that it was the scientists themselves who accurately “discovered” the elements and not ancient proto-scientists who knew only four. And, no they probably wouldn’t have been able to accurately predict the forms of matter, but what’s your point here? If the foundation of your argument is Intelligent Design which is the book of Creationism with a new dust jacket then you are (and this is an assumption, you might be Muslim) basing your whole contention on the Bible, an non-scientific cobbled together collection of Bronze Age and early Iron Age intuitions having nothing to do with emperical knowledge.

As to #2, the answer is an emphatic yes! Spontaneous, or as you term it by “accident”.“A through reading of any monograph by a reputable astro physicist will answer your question. You could start with Phil Plait’s Death From the Skies or Lawrence Krauss’s A Universe From Nothing or if you want visuals, Sagan’s Cosmos. You’re using Paley’s Watch maker analogy and it may have been a plausible explanation in the 18th Century but has no provenance in the 21st. It’s time to move on. You’ll find the answers your looking for in science, not religion.

 

Cap’t Jack

I suspect she’ll never find them in science. Her religion is a roadblock to scientific understanding.

 Signature 

[color=red“Nothing is so good as it seems beforehand.”
― George Eliot, Silas Marner[/color]

Profile
 
 
   
1 of 7
1