Information supports Intelligent Design

originally posted by: ancientlight
a reply to: camain

Reminds me of this video:

I'm agnostic. I don't support 'intelligent design' because it just has too many holes. Like how did this intelligent being/designer pop into existence then? Someone designed him/it ? And on and on into infinity? Doesn't make sense.
This video , the woman who experienced an NDE says we are all connected in time/space and all knowledge is stored in this collective consciousness.

Not knowing how or why a god came into existence isn't a hole, nor does it matter if it was created.

I believe in intelligent design. I call the designer God.

Ultimately, though, I don't think it matters if I believe in that creator or not. I suppose I'd consider myself Agnostic, too.

originally posted by: Peeple
a reply to: cooperton

what's your definition of 'intelligence'?

I think 'information processing' would actually be a good definition of intelligence.

a reply to: rounda

Ive never understood that rebuttal, who cares if he was or was not created?

a reply to: ARM1986


Just another angry atheist saying the same things they always do.

a reply to: cooperton

hey I said that, lol sooo: I won't disagree with you.
However for the computer it is still required that it has electricity and a man made program to be able to read, store and process that information.
The universe is different more chemistry and different forces that allow the storage and processing of information.
Like a rock if you look at it, has a size, a unique shape, a chemical composition all of that is basically information about its formation.
Right so you need intelligence to extract that information from it. But the forming of the rock? That required no intelligence.

I get that your argument is that the computer required intelligent humans to be built and so the universe needed an intellligence to be built, but to be honest: the universe is not built, it is in itself developing and changing.
The design idea just doesn't work for me, but I could see that the universe itself in all its magnitude and complexity is intelligent.

originally posted by: Peeple
Like a rock if you look at it, has a size, a unique shape, a chemical composition all of that is basically information about its formation.
Right so you need intelligence to extract that information from it. But the forming of the rock? That required no intelligence.

You could look at chemical structures and see that the geometry of these matters look crafted by intelligence.

Then also the need for the various persistent laws that keep it all together. To me it seems like a well-contrived material interface for living things to have their being

a reply to: cooperton

well because those are models that have not that much to do with how it actually is. The rest is basically magnetism that they can only arrange in certain ways if we stick to the example of minerals.

The laws are not given they are the product of how things interact and again: a man made model that simplifies the actual reality by a lot

There is a 2 part series on Amazon called "Is Genesis History?" Very interesting and I would recommend to anyone regardless of where they stand on this issue. a reply to: neoholographic

originally posted by: infp1986
Ive never understood that rebuttal, who cares if he was or was not created?

Those who believe the claim that their god has always been care and they should because if that isn't the case, then what else did their book get wrong?

originally posted by: Degradation33
What about the black hole information paradox? Information can't be destroyed, because that violates quantum physics.

And Hawking radiation is thermal and can't carry information. But, if quantum gravity is thrown into the mix Hawking Radiation effectively becomes non-thermal and carries information.

Everyone misses the obvious about Black Holes.

Gravity escapes a Black Hole.

If Gravity is a particle, then a particle can escape a Black Hole.

If that particle can have mass, then that mass can escape a Black Hole.

If that particle contains any information about the Black Hole in any way, then Information escapes a Black Hole.

Of course that postulation is moot if Gravity is not made up of particles.

This video says Gravity can transform into a photon.
Gravity can create light

So Gravity could create a photon, which carries mass.

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg
If anyone thinks that the human body has been intelligently designed (internally draining lungs due to current upright posture, potentially lethal vestigial organs like the appendix), then I can only point and laugh hysterically at them.
The need to create a god or gods to explain how the world was born out of a pile of dung or something (insert creation myth here) is understandable for hunter-gatherers in the Bronze Age. However, it's time for humanity to leave such childish things behind us.

I find posts like this one fascinating. So obviously without
the slightest clue and yet some how convinced of the extreme
opposite. I mean open your mind up amigo. The first rule of
writing or speaking of anything you know nothing about? Is
to not come off as if you do know at the same time you're
proving you don't.

I do hope this helps.

a reply to: surfer_soul
I see more arrogance out of religious people instead of atheists. Atheists don't have to play mental gymnastics to keep their beliefs relevant. There's just no real evidence for a creator.

a reply to: Saloon
So you say that atheists or agnostic atheists have no room talking about things we do not understand? How does one understand God? Which God do we choose? How do we know he's there? Do we ignore the mountains of evidence that point to there not being a God in favor of a God?

The whole god thing is honestly for weak minded individuals who are scared of the dark. In my opinion at least. Get a flashlight

originally posted by: Satanwasframed
a reply to: surfer_soul
I see more arrogance out of religious people instead of atheists. Atheists don't have to play mental gymnastics to keep their beliefs relevant. There's just no real evidence for a creator.

There's evidence for a Creator and it has been listed over and over again on this forum and others. It's the atheist who lives in Plato's Cave.

The carnal mind thinks it has the knowledge to know there's no God, no life after death, no intelligence and no existence outside of the limits of 3 dimensions of space and 1 little dimension of time which Einstein showed that we see it as distinctions between past, present and future which he called an illusion. Think about it. We only have access to one line of time.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------->
past present future

We're stuck inside this line of time so we can only experience a before and after within this 1 dimension of time. Einstein showed us that all of time exists out there just like all of space but we're reduced to one dimension of time. Why?

The Bible tells us, before the fall, Adam and Eve had the freedom to eat off of any tree in the Garden. After the fall, they were reduced to one corrupted state.

The reason you can't see the future or the past is because you're stuck on a line. You can only experience things at points on this line which give you the illusion of a before and after. If you just had access to another dimension of time, then you would be able to move perpendicular to our worldline on a 2D plane of time and you could see points or events on our worldline from beginning to end.

This is why atheism makes no sense to me. It's the hubris to talk about an eternal God in such blasphemous ways and you have spent 20-40 years on this 3rd rock from the sun stuck in 1 dimension of time.

Like I said in the OP, information supports Intelligent Design. Atheist reduce all things to their limited minds in this type 0 civilization. One of the articles I posted ended this way:

So maybe the universe is filled with the buzzing signals of black hole quantum computers storing data with technology unfathomable to our simple Type-0.75 minds—and we’ve just been tuned in to the wrong channel.

www.popularmechanics.com...

How can you use your simple, limited, carnal minds to blaspheme an eternal God?

a reply to: neoholographic
Your evidence is pseudo science performed by people who do not understand actual science. I'm not going to bother reading your ridiculous response, which I'm sure is full of jumping through hoops, and making huge stretches to reach a conclusion based on faith. I'll stick with what's actually measurable or demonstratable. Feel free to believe in a God or strology or tarot cards or whatever. I feel like you're childish for doing so

a reply to: Satanwasframed

Of course you don't want to read it because the truth is a cancer to non-believers. Here's more:

Quantum computers and black holes

The geometry of spacetime around a black hole behaves like a quantum computer, and it can encode photons with quantum messages, according to a new paper in the journal Annals of Physics. The author suggests that this means quantum computers could be used to decode some of the mysteries of the universe.

“The distorted geometry of spacetime near rotating black holes can create and manipulate quantum information encoded in beams of light that are emitted by, or that pass close to, these black holes,” explains Racorean. This is similar to the process that happens in a theoretical quantum computer.

This means that a spinning black hole writes a quantum code that we may decode in the near future when we come to create quantum computers. “We are now on the verge of a new technological era, an era that will be dominated by quantum technology,” Racorean concludes. “We have legitimate hopes that these quantum computers will help unveil some of the now-hidden mysteries of the universe.”

www.journals.elsevier.com...

This information shows that the laws of physics are designed by Intelligence to process, store, transfer and manipulate quantum information. If you can't stand to read the truth in this thread, you will run from the new thread I just posted in another forum called:

The Laws of Physics support Intelligent Design
www.abovetopsecret.com...

a reply to: neoholographic

Dunning Krueger.

The stretch here. So black holes behave like a quantum computer so therefor god did it. This is what you people do for everything. This isn't evidence

If there was actual evidence for a higher power there would be no debate. There would be facts that back it up. The person who discovers any proof of God would probably win a Nobel prize. The proof definitely wouldn't be coming from some random nobody on ATS.

originally posted by: surfer_soul
a reply to: AngryCymraeg

It would be better to be agnostic than so arrogant. Considering the fact we don’t everything.

The arrogance on display that you pointed out, is the effect of years of propaganda playing on the emotions. Most notably in the case of the resulting arrogance or haughtiness, the emotions of pride and fear.

A reverse appeal to pride plays on our fear of seeming stupid.

Or ‘uninformed, unreasonable, irresponsible, incompetent, ignorant, dogmatic, enslaved by old illusions and prejudices.’ (or any other negative description that people don't want to be seen as) It generally nurtures or fuels some type of superiority complex that leads to the disdainful haughty attitude that looks down upon those who have not fallen for such appeals to the emotions (i.e. those who are the targets of such negative descriptions and the often accompanying or resulting ridicule and disdain), the attitude on display that you responded to.

Source: The Manipulation of Information (Awake!—2000)

‘UNBELIEVERS are uninformed, unreasonable, irresponsible, incompetent, ignorant, dogmatic, enslaved by old illusions and prejudices.’ In these ways leading evolutionists describe those who do not accept evolution as a fact. However, cool, logical, scientific reasoning, backed by observational and experimental evidence, need not resort to such personal invective.

The position of the evolutionists is more characteristic of religious dogmatism. ...

... Unable to refute Jesus, the Pharisees as a group resorted to tyranny of authority. Today evolutionists adopt the same tactics: ‘Stupid crowds, what do they know? All reputable scientists accept evolution!’ Not so. As Discover magazine said: “Now that hallowed theory is not only under attack by fundamentalist Christians, but is also being questioned by reputable scientists.”​—October 1980.

...

THE “TYRANNY OF AUTHORITY” USED BY EVOLUTIONISTS

“When he [Darwin] finished, the fact of evolution could be denied only by an abandonment of reason.”​—Life Nature Library, “Evolution,” p. 10.

“It is not a matter of personal taste whether or not we believe in evolution. The evidence for evolution is compelling.”​—“Evolution, Genetics, and Man,” p. 319, Dobzhansky.

“Its essential truth is now universally accepted by scientists competent to judge.”​—“Nature and Man’s Fate,” p. v, Hardin.

“The establishment of life’s family tree by the evolutionary process is now universally recognized by all responsible scientists.”​—“A Guide to Earth History,” p. 82, Carrington.

“No informed mind today denies that man is descended by slow process from the world of the fish and the frog.”​—“Life” magazine, August 26, 1966, Ardrey.

“It has become almost self-evident and requires no further proof to anyone reasonably free of old illusions and prejudices.”​—“The Meaning of Evolution,” p. 338, Simpson.

“There is no rival hypothesis except the outworn and completely refuted one of special creation, now retained only by the ignorant, the dogmatic, and the prejudiced.”​—“Outlines of General Zoology,” p. 407, Newman.

You can clearly see that AngryCymraeg has been affected by such propagandistic statements and claims (and similar ones that generally paint the same picture). Note the expression "old illusions" in comparison to what AngryCymraeg said about those from the Bronze Age and their "creation myth". And its relation to the expression "outworn" in the last quote.

Source: If Not a Fact, What Is It? (Awake!—1981)

Which follows:

Is It a Fact?

There's also some measure of projection going on, or more accurately, the behaviour described at Isaiah 5:20,21 (I'll quote it later). Cause if there's anything that is based on "outworn" "old illusions"/myths/false stories "and prejudices", "completely refuted" and "retained only by ... the dogmatic, and the prejudiced", it's this ancient set of "Bronze Age" philosophies (perhaps technically more Iron Age):

The Pagan Religious Roots of Evolutionary Philosophies and Philosophical Naturalism (part 1 of 2)

part 2:

“Woe to those who say that good is bad and bad is good,

Those who substitute darkness for light and light for darkness,

Those who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter!

Woe to those wise in their own eyes

And discreet in their own sight!” (Isaiah 5:20,21)

originally posted by: Satanwasframed

Dunning Krueger.

The stretch here. So black holes behave like a quantum computer so therefor god did it. This is what you people do for everything. This isn't evidence

So something behaves like a computer, and your knee-jerk response is that it definitely involved no intelligence in being created? Lol.

With that logic If I sit around long enough maybe an iPhone from the future will generate by random chance. Imagine taking that to Apple, "you guys just need to wait and let dumb luck to code your next generation of technology."

originally posted by: Satanwasframed


If there was actual evidence for a higher power there would be no debate. There would be facts that back it up.

If trillions of micromolecular bots (proteins) roaming around your cells performing functions to keep your body alive isn't an indication of a designer then I can't really think of what would even constitute as evidence for intelligent design beyond that? Do you want like a letter written from God by followers of an ambassador that comes and preaches love and mercy, gets put to death for standing his ground in truth, and then subsequently conquers death in the name of said God?