Intelligent Design is not creationism

[I am...]

The body is an engine of destruction.

It is designed to destroy the mind that powers it.

The beneficiary is an artificially intelligent designer that parasitically "lives" as long as the mind is unable to shake it loose, thus compromising it's ability to function properly.

The body nearly guarantees that the mind is forever unable to function properly, thus destroying it.

What can die was never alive. So the body is a machine. It exists upon fiat of belief, and obeys the dictates of a confused mind. Thus it dies.

The body is for dying. The artificially intelligent designer is unable to make anything that actually lives.

The designer has capitalized on the mind's belief in it's ability to separate, segregate, divide, subdivide, split up, compartmentalize, and privatize.

The body is this belief manifested in some form. So the body is actually just a symbol symbolizing a belief system.

The belief system behind the building of the body includes a death wish. It is a logical conclusion based on what the mind believes about itself.

Only as the mind believes the truth about itself is the body able to symbolize an inability to die. This is accomplished as the artificial intelligence that designed the body is stripped of it's influence on the mind it feeds off of.

Jesus

 

[FerdinandAlx]

Quote from I am...:

The body is an engine of destruction.

Jesus

I find the New Testament motif of the Living God having an experience of death to be a truely fascinating one of which the deeper implementations have been largely ignored by Christianity.

Instead it seems most Christians keep each other busy by perpetuating the pagan idea that a god being made them from a hump of clay. Intelligent design is a variant of this idea, window dressed a bit to meet the needs of a modern society.

The result is that attention is diverted away from questions about life, death and the nature of God that truely matter and that drove people towards religion in the first place.

 

[kjkent1]

The vacuum energy found in this universe is clearly created by the animus between the participants of this thread.

 

[acronym]

Quote from tradeslikagod:

The ignorance of fundamentalist christianity is only matched by the stupidity of it's dogma

How dare you!!!


Now say ten hail mary's, drink the blood of a (dead) sinner, and flaggelate youself, with big whips, into a coma, you heathen.

Oh wait, thats catholics......well same deal, anyhoo.

 

[stu]

Quote from jem:

more misleading bullshit from STU. I just love reading the indignant, self righteous blather of people posing as open minded acolytes of science;when they can not even open their mind to the science of top string theorists on this very subject.

I would have thought by now stu would have caught on to the fact that national publications are writing about many top scientists converting to a belief in alternate parallel universes. (billions and billions of them) The magazines even discuss dopppelgangers.

Are you too damn dense to understand why they have to make these assertions of parallel universes without any proof?

You would think that after reading all the quotes I gave you from top physicists you would understand that some top scientists admit the universe looks designed.

gawsh jem, I certainly do seem to rattle your cage. What are you so interminably angry about?

The thing about The Scientific Method which persistently evades you is , it doesn't matter what high priests of science assert, it's what they prove scientifically which actually counts.

You may not have noticed , things are completely opposite in your world. Where priests lead you by the nose through only assertion and superstition, under fear of an irrational threat of eternal proportions. And that is then what you say understanding should be based upon.

I do see how you would get so frustrated when religious assertion was all you could achieve from the posing of these questions. But I think you are very foolish to then take it out on science and scientists by trying to distort or demean them or what they say, to fit with your religious beliefs the way you do , just because they can prove stuff.

And for some (perverse) reason, you still think multiverses will allow a gap for God to sit in.
In any case there are still as many scientists whose views do not coincide with those multiverses you have latched onto, as there are whose do. It's what becomes the most scientifically validated that will make a difference.

 

[stu]

Quote from acronym:

How dare you!!!


Now say ten hail mary's, drink the blood of a (dead) sinner, and flaggelate youself, with big whips, into a coma, you heathen.

Oh wait, thats catholics......well same deal, anyhoo.

... ahh yes, the good old - bishops' stick and carrot approach.

 

[Teleologist]

Stu wrote:

What at first glance may sound plausible, turns out puerile, often childish but always simplistic controversial argument, wrapped up in misleading fancy wordplay, which relies on the assumption most will be ignorant of the salient facts . That has fast become recognized as a key trade mark of ID.

This coming from a guy that thinks machines orginate via sheer dumb luck!

 

[I am...]

Quote from FerdinandAlx:

I find the New Testament motif of the Living God having an experience of death to be a truely fascinating one of which the deeper implementations have been largely ignored by Christianity.

Instead it seems most Christians keep each other busy by perpetuating the pagan idea that a god being made them from a hump of clay. Intelligent design is a variant of this idea, window dressed a bit to meet the needs of a modern society.

The result is that attention is diverted away from questions about life, death and the nature of God that truely matter and that drove people towards religion in the first place.

Yes, the world is set up to be a distraction. Think of the designer as an illusionist. An illusionist does indeed divert attention away from what is really going on.

If anyone ever explained what is really going on, his words could be twisted around to become just another distraction guised as religion.

And this is because the sleepers dreaming of this world are still very intent on keeping the dream alive. This requires ever more ingenious ways of subverting the truth to maintain sleep and it's delusions.

The world is set up to mock and kill God. If anything at all can be killed, then God can be killed. Certainly, if His Son can be killed, surely He can be killed.

Mark my words, this world is intended to kill the Son of God. This can only seem possible if the body were made something special, something of value, something real...some kind of identity. Now, if you can get God into a body, then you have a chance to kill him.

But God is not mocked by all this impossibility.

The death of God can only occur as a parody. This world is a sad parody, and my "death" was a parody upon a parody. Everyone in a body dies because everyone in a body is "the artist formerly known as" the Son of God. And it is the designer's intent to kill such God.

Therefore, every death is my death...but only as a parody. So my resurrection is a parody of everyone's resurrection. It prophecies the inevitable waking of each mind from a nightmare. Each mind wakes to find it is one mind, and the dream is forgotten.

Jesus

 

[Teleologist]

Stu wrote:

You are, as always, ill informed. The ATP synthase is an enzyme and as such is a chemical reaction not a mechanical interaction. For that reason it is not a literal motor or machine.

You are the one that is ill informed. Considering the the F-ATP synthase, Science News reported "With parts that resemble pistons and a drive shaft, the enzyme F1-ATPase looks suspiciously like a tiny engine. Indeed, a new study demonstrates that's exactly what it is." Science News vol 151, p173

That description fits a machine not a chemical reaction.

 

[Teleologist]

Quote from Teleologist:
Are you claiming that molecular machines reproduce? They don't. They are created within the cell. The cell is a factory that contains an elaborate network of interlocking assembly lines where machines are put together part by part.

Stu replies:

You ARE joking?

Repeated chemical reaction , constantly recurring processes, producing an enzyme over and over, is not reproducing?

Cells reproduce. Molecular machines do not reproduce. They are assembled within the cell part by part. Do some research.

Quote from Teleologist:

Wrong. The ATP synthase is a small electromechanical engine, its performance is described as a mechanical device.

Stu replied:

The ATP synthase is an enzyme and as such is a chemical reaction not a mechanical interaction. For that reason it is not a literal motor or machine.

Nonsense. The peer-reviewed literature calls the F1-ATP synthase the smallest electrical machine created by Nature and describes its parts as: rotor, shaft, stator, and clutch.

Stu wrote:

Your arguments alwys seem to be based on a logical fallacy of one kind or another

Machines are intelligently designed
ATP synthase is a machine
Therefore ATP synthase is intelligently designed.

The ATP synthase is a machine. It either originated via intelligent design or sheer dumb luck. I happen to think intelligent design is the better explanation. No logical fallacy there.