Re: What's the Problem?
- From: "Jim Spaza" <spaza9@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 3 Aug 2006 20:08:03 -0700
Robin Levett wrote:
Jim Spaza wrote:
AC wrote:
On 24 Jul 2006 13:33:53 -0700,
Jim Spaza <spaza9@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Ye Old One wrote:
On 22 Jul 2006 10:51:20 -0700, "Jim Spaza" <spaza9@xxxxxxxxx> enriched
this group when s/he wrote:
May I submit that it stops with the Supreme Being? :-)
Please provide evidence that any SB actually exists.
--
Bob.
The chance that this universe got created in a stable and functional
way is infinitesimally small. Therefore, the answer probably resides
somewhere else. There are zero known instances of naturally occurring
or induced (designed) abiogenesis. Science has shown the possibility
of such an event is also infinitesimally small, if not absolute zero.
Therefore, the cause resides in something other than natural processes.
You have been asked repeatedly to show your work on this, Jim. Why do
continually make an argument you know you can't possibly back up?
<snip numerology based on varying the basic forces by absurd amounts>
Here are a lot of conditions that just have to be right (how randomly
lucky for us):
http://www.doesgodexist.org/Charts/EvidenceForDesignInTheUniverse.html
It is true that science has shown that variation of the basic forces beyond
some fairly close limits leads to a universe in which we couldn't exist.
That, however, was not your claim. Your claim was that "Science has shown
that the possibility of [abiogenesis] is also infinitesimally small".
Address that claim.
OK.
It's just that if I put too much into one post, then people tend to
read one or two lines and that's all.
Anyway...
1) Can anyone identify the process by which the first lifeform,
presumeably a proto-bacteria, came into being? No.
2) Can anyone identify the process by which the precursors to the DNA
which were needed to create the first proto-bacteria came into being?
no.
3) Can anyone identify the precursors themselves? No.
4) Can anyone reproduce this event, or something remotely close to it,
in controlled conditions? No.
OK. So far, we admit that we only have speculation concerning how
abiogenesis occurred, with what processes, and with what materials.
Well, speculation isn't science. Now, if people want to infer
abiogenesis for lack of any other theory, then OK. But, let's admit
that there is no scientific evidence.
Without any known process, we are left to infer RANDOM interactions of
just the right materials in just the right way for just the right
amount of time. And we don't know the materials, way, nor time.
So, randomness it is, but first assuming that a natural process is
capable. By the way, scientifically speaking, you cannot assume a
natural process is capable, since no one has witnessed it, been able to
reproduce it, or otherwise obtain direct evidence that it actually
happened. But, no matter. Let's assume for now.
Let conservatively assume that this first lifeform had a cell with 300
proteins. This
is indeed conservative as the simplest known cell today, Mycoplasma
hominis H39, has about 600 different proteins. This is actually a bad
assumption as the theory of evolution stipulates that lifeforms do NOT
have to increase in complexity as it evolves. But, assuming 300
proteins assuages the evolutionist who says that the first
proto-bacteria COULD have been simpler.
Here come the numbers...
This proto-bacteria's copy mechanism, which must have been created in
working condition (could not have existed non-functional then evolved
into something that worked), needs all amino acids to be left-handed
and all the nucleic acids to be right-handed. This is so in order to
make all the pairing molecules line up on the same side of the chain.
This MUST be the case. Now, some people will mention how the DNA
replication sequence might have been different (i.e. simpler) or used
RNA instead of DNA. This is just a pure guess based not on science but
on personal desire in order to make the numbers easier to swallow.
Don't think so? Then show me the scientific evidence that existing
life forms can reproduce using something other than the present DNA
system.
If the molecule does not have constant stereochemistry (constant left
or right-handedness), then it does not fold properly. Why do the
numbers start going against abiogenesis? Because the percentage of
left and right-handed nucleotides is always essentially 50%.
Let's look at a small protein length of just 100 units. The chance of
getting constant left or right-handedness is 50% (left v. right) ^ (#
of proteins x protein length) x 2 sides.
That is, with numbers, (1/2)^(300*100)*2=~1/10^9031.
THAT'S 0.0000000000000000000000000000000(+9000 more zeroes)1 %.
Now, that seems like essentially zero. But, let's talk about how many
chemical reactions could have been taking place at the time. There
must have been a lot of chances for this to occur.
How much time has elapsed since the Big Bang is thought to have
occurred? (I know that abiogenesis is estimated to have occurred only
2-4 billion years ago. But, let's give abiogenesis some better odds in
case the 2-4 billion number is in error.)
15 billion years * 360 days/year * 24 hours/day * 60 minutes/hour * 60
seconds/minutes = 466,560,000,000,000,000 seconds. That is 4.6656^17.
How many TOTAL atoms were thought to be in existence at the time?
(Forget the fact that most atoms couldn't interact with other atoms,
and forget the fact that it took very specific atoms interacting in
very specific ways for even the precursors to life to form.)
Let's say 10^83 total atoms. We'll forget the whole amino acid and
precursor thing for now.
So, 10^83 atoms interacting with each other for 4.6656^17 seconds until
NOW. That gives us about 4.6656*10^100 or so chances for abiogenesis
to occur. Pretty good chances...until you remember that 1/10^9031
chance that the DNA left/right-handedness chance.
And this assumes each atom is interacting PERFECTLY with each other
atom. Now, we know that it takes amino acids, not atoms, to form
proteins for the first proto-bacteria. Also, let's now throw into the
equation how every amino acids will NOT interact perfectly with other
amino acids.
Good gracious. Look at the numbers. You have a 10^100 chance saying
that abiogenesis happened versus a 10^9031 chance that it didn't.
And that's just the left/right-handedness requirement. We haven't
touched how such a DNA-creating mechanism itself (and with all of its
precursors) came about.
You do the math.
I hope that you appreciate the hour that it took for me to do the math.
Now, I have a headache and need a beer. :-)
<snippage>
Nor have we gotten into the specifics of how an ancient religious text
could have predicted future events,
These prophecies come in two types; prophecies conveniently written after
the fact or prophecies so vague that they have been applied to many
time periods (with a good deal of egg on some folks faces).
Yes. But, you'd have to have a combination of the CIA and Hollywood to
generate the successful events and characters behind most of the
Biblical prophecies.
Let's look at just one, as an example.
The Bible talks about the rebirth of Israel in the Book of Ezekiel.
Israel became a nation again in 1948.
This is a partial quote from the website referenced below.
In the year 592 B.C. in the Babylonian Empire, a Hebrew slave named
Ezekiel was instructed:
"Lie on your left side and put the sin of the house of Israel upon
yourself. You are to bear their sin for the number of days you lie on
your side. I have assigned you the same number of days as the years of
their sin. So for 390 days you will bear the sin of the house of
Israel. After you have finished this, lie down again, this time on
your right side, and bear the sin of the house of Judah. I have
assigned you 40 days, a day for each year." -Ezekiel 4:4-6.
At that time, the Jews were in captivity after being overthrown by the
Babylonian King Nebuchadnezzer in 606 B.C. This 70 year captivity of
the Jews had been prophesied extensively by Isaiah almost 100 years
earlier (Isaiah 39:5-7).
The prophecy in Ezekiel 4 predicts a total of 430 years of punishment
for the nation of Israel.
No it does not; if you are counting Israel and Judah together as the nation
of Israel, then the prediction is of 390 years, of which only the first 40
years are shared between the two houses.
If they were shared, then why did God not lump Judah's 40 years in with
the first 40 of Israel's 390 years, so of like judicial sentences
running concurrently? God didn't lump them together. Thus, the
prophecy is 430 years.
70 Years of this period of punishment are
accounted for in the 70-year Babylonian captivity. That leaves 360
more years of punishment unaccounted remaining.
This is key:
...and wrong.
In Leviticus 26, we are told that if the nation of Israel
did not hearken unto the Lord that she would be punished. Then after
being punished, if the nation continued to be in rebellion toward God
that the punishment would be multiplied by seven:
"If you will not listen to me and carry out all these commands, and if
you reject my decrees and abhor my laws and fail to carry out all my
commands and so violate my covenant...I will set my face against you so
that you will be defeated by your enemies. If after all this you will
not listen to me, I will punish you for your sins seven times over."
- Leviticus 26: 14-22.
A very contorted reading of the original; it looks almost like a quote mine.
It is somewhat a quote and somewhat my own. I wouldn't have pasted
part of it if I didn't believe it. You've seen me disagree with
educated Biblical scholars in this forum before.
Firstly, the word "over" in the quote above reads "more" in the KJV (BTW,
the citation reaches only verse 18, not 22).
You're correct. Sometimes, I get screwed by Biblical verses quoted by
some websites. It was late, and I didn't feel like going to
BlueLetterBible.com and doing the copy/pasting from the original King
James version.
Anyway, the "more"/"over" word in Hebrew is ' yasaf ' which means to
add, increase, or do again. The stem (form or tense) of the word is
the normal 'qal', which means that nothing gets added to, taken away
from, or changed in the basic meaning.
The number 7 appears again in verse 21:
"And if ye walk contrary unto me, and will not hearken unto me; I will bring
seven times more plagues upon you according to your sins."
Leviticus, on a fair reading, is not talking about multiplying the years of
captivity by 7.
I suppose that it all depends on what a plague is. We know it today as
a disease or pestilence. And the Bible does speak of it as a disease
and pestilence. However, the word in use is ' makkah ' which can mean
blow, wound, slaughter, beating, scourging, defeat, and conquest.
For example,
"But God shall shoot at them [with] an arrow; suddenly shall they be
wounded." - Psalm 64:7
The word "wounded" here is also ' makkah '.
Recently Biblical scholars have applied this Levitical principle of
multiplying Israel's punishment by seven to the remaining 360 years of
punishment and found a phenomenal discovery.
The Biblical prophetic year in the Jewish calendar is 360 days long.
This discovery was made by Sir Robert Anderson in his book "The Coming
Prince". In fact, all ancient calendars of the world at one time
calculated the year as 360 days.
All ancient calendars at one time calculated the year as 354 days as well.
Oh, I didn't know that.
So, if you multiple the 360 years of
remaining punishment x 360 days/year x 7 times punishment (Levitical
principle) = 907,200 days.
907,200 days is 2483.8 years (modern Julian calendar years).
No it is not.
The modern Julian year is, on average, 365.242222. days long.
Yes, 907,000 / 365.242222 = 2483.8
So,
907,200 days of punishment remained for the nation of Israel after the
70 year Babylonian captivity. The question is where do you begin
calculating the remaining 907,200 days?
Servitude of the Nation
There is a Biblical term applied to the nation of Israel called the
period of the servitude of the nation. This refers to the period of
time that the conquered people of Israel lived through without their
own rulership. The people and nation of Israel ceased being a
sovereign nation in 606 B.C. and began the first 70 years of servitude
at that time. After the 70 year Babylonian captivity, they returned to
the land but they were ruled over by a succession of empires
(Medo-Persian, Greek, Roman) until 70 A.D. when Jerusalem was destroyed
by the Romans. Then, for the next 18 centuries, the Israelites were
dispersed among the many nations of the world and for the most part
were slaves. To the Jewish mind, they lost their sovereignty in 606
B.C. with the Babylonian takeover and didn't regain it until the
servitude of the nation ended on May 14, 1948 when Israel again became
a nation.
The Babylonian captivity began July 25th 606 B.C. and ended July 23rd
537 B.C. This was the very day that the Medo-Persian emperor Cyrus gave
the decree that allowed the Jews to return to Israel.
Here is the important calculation. If you begin counting the 907,200
days of remaining punishment from July 23rd 537 B.C., the day of Cyrus'
decree and the end of the first 70
69
years of the servitude,
Why would you do that? Ezekiel was ordered to lie down in 592 BC, according
to your figures above.
In case, people, for whatever reason, had problems with the date that
Ezekiel was told to lie down. This is an alternate date which provides
an interesting result as seen below.
and go
foreword 907,200 days you get May 14th 1948.
21 May 1948. At which point Glubb Pasha was in virtual control of
Jerusalem.
Glubb Pasha? What the heck is a Glubb Pasha? OK. Google is my
friend, even though they cooperated with the communists in China and
censor the internet.
Ah! Wikipedia comes in handy, although must be taken with a grain of
salt at times.
"Although nominally the leaders of the attack, the Jordanian Arab
Legion under the leadership of Sir John Bagot Glubb, known as Glubb
Pasha, was given orders to not enter the terroritory of the Jewish
state defined by the partition plan. It was also initially ordered to
stay out of Jerusalem, but this order was reversed when it became clear
that Israel was attempting to take the city."
So, Israel had begun to take the city back for itself. We're arguing
semantics now.
This was the very day that David Ben Gurion announced to the whole
world the official formation of the nation of Israel. Skeptical? Read
on.
Desolation's of Jerusalem
Another term commonly discussed is the period of the desolation's of
Jerusalem. This was the period of time prophesied by the prophets in
which the city of Jerusalem would be desolate and 'trodden down by the
gentiles". Many people have mistakenly believed that this term was the
same period as the Servitude of the nation discussed above. However,
this period of the desolation's of Jerusalem did not begin in 606 B.C.
when Nebuchadnezzer took the first captives. The desolation's of
Jerusalem began with the third siege of Jerusalem with the destruction
of the city and the temple. The city and the temple were destroyed on
August 18th, 587 B.C. in the third siege of Nebuchadnezzer and the
Babylonian army.
Exactly seventy Hebrew calendar years later (360 days/year) brings us
to August 16th, 518 B.C.
Nope.
Nope? Why not?
If we begin calculating the remaining 907,200
days of punishment from that day it brings us to June 7th ,1967. This
is the very day Israel recaptured the city of Jerusalem during the Six
day war with Egypt, Jordan and Syria.
Random chance? Conspiracy to make a prophecy seem to come true?
Please.
There are tons of websites like this on the internet.
Numerology is indeed very popular.
Numerology is not what we're talking about. There is no inherent power
in numbers. We're talking about coincidences brought on by God, not
some human-made numbering system.
Read them for
yourself before deciding. Better yet, read the Bible just to make sure
that no one is making up anything. You can do the prophetic math
yourself where there are numbers involved.
Here's a start. www.daveandangel.com/CRN/BibleProofs.shtml
described natural processes before
science even existed,
Except where it makes the most implausible claims, in which case science
is ignored in favor of literalism.
For instance?
I guess he means Genesis 1 and 2; or 8.
Perhaps. I am no fan of the literal 6-day creation sequence.
and made promises which can be tested and
verified by any individual today.
You mean by the incredible evidence of your dreams and prayers, right?
Well, yes. But, I was thinking about more basic promises like:
"Call unto me, and I will answer thee, and shew thee great and mighty
things, which thou knowest not." - Jeremiah 33:3
Isn't that testing God...
No, not when He commands you to do so. The wrong testing of God comes
in when you initiate the interaction with God according to your own
personal desires and timetable and try to get Him to do what you want,
as you want, when you want.
God ain't no cosmic vending machine.
--
Robin Levett
rlevett@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (unmunge by removing big blue - don't yahoo)
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: What's the Problem?
- From: Robin Levett
- Re: Re: What's the Problem?
- From: Ye Old One
- Re: What's the Problem?
- Prev by Date: Re: 2 + 2 = 4? - Not Always
- Next by Date: Re: O.T. Scarier that creationism in science class
- Previous by thread: Re: 2 + 2 = 4? - Not Always
- Next by thread: Re: Re: What's the Problem?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
