Ateizam vs. Religija

Rasprave o vjerskim temama.
Locked
User avatar
Dozer
Posts: 33040
Joined: 19/09/2008 10:14
Location: Zemlja maloumne ENV matrice...

#6051 Re: Ateizam vs. Religija

Post by Dozer »

славянин wrote: Kako se piše pravilno: ja bih ili ja bi? Pravilno je i piše se ja bih jer aorist glagola biti glasi ja bih, ti bi, on bi, mi bismo, vi biste, oni bi.
Ovo ne moe ovako. Skoro sve bliske predratne i poslijeratne generacije je prilicno lako prepoznati po elementarnoj nepismenosti, pa je kod njih umjesto ispravnog "biste" i "bismo" - bi smo i bi ste :D

Krcat forum ovoga, i ne samo forum, nego i sve rustvene mreze, viber i WA grupe, itd.
User avatar
Dozer
Posts: 33040
Joined: 19/09/2008 10:14
Location: Zemlja maloumne ENV matrice...

#6052 Re: Ateizam vs. Religija

Post by Dozer »

Smrcak15 wrote:
Dozer wrote:Nece. Uvijek ce imati mogucnost spina svake moguce cinjenice, bez obzira koliko je naucno dokazana. Evolucija dokazana stvar, ali jok... Kao sto se vidi, to je "prica za djecu" i "izmastani scenarj", dok se pisanije kojekakvih pustinjaka, kojima se danas i tinejdzeri smiju, smatraju suhim cinjenicama, istinom i nadasve validnim scenarijem :D

Komedija, Tita mi... :D

SMRLEEEEEE!!! JEL' ISPOD ILI IZNAD 30? :D
iznad.
Znaci - 32, s obzirom da si rekao da si blize 30, a ne 40. 32 je blize 30, 33 je blize 35 :D
Znaci - godiste '86, maksimalno '84, a u slobodarskoj Sveckoj vjerovatno od neke ratne godine, sto ce reci da si tada imao 6 do max. 12 godina. :D

Jesam u pravu? Pardon - upravu :D
User avatar
zforumas
Posts: 8742
Joined: 25/10/2016 20:35

#6053 Re: Ateizam vs. Religija

Post by zforumas »

...li...

:evil:
User avatar
cendlerbing
Posts: 15622
Joined: 17/08/2017 03:43

#6054 Re: Ateizam vs. Religija

Post by cendlerbing »

Dozer wrote: Znaci - 32, s obzirom da si rekao da si blize 30, a ne 40. 32 je blize 30, 33 je blize 35 :D
Znaci - godiste '86, maksimalno '84, a u slobodarskoj Sveckoj vjerovatno od neke ratne godine, sto ce reci da si tada imao 6 do max. 12 godina. :D

Jesam u pravu? Pardon - upravu :D
Svaka čast, CIA. Šta sad sa informacijama? :mrgreen:
User avatar
MarlboroGold
Posts: 22975
Joined: 24/06/2013 17:14
Location: Chaos Sanctuary

#6055 Re: Ateizam vs. Religija

Post by MarlboroGold »

Dozer kao Sherlock :D
User avatar
Pujdo12
Posts: 217
Joined: 11/08/2018 21:10

#6056 Re: Ateizam vs. Religija

Post by Pujdo12 »

MarlboroGold wrote:Dozer kao Sherlock :D
Više kao Shocker :-D
User avatar
¤ jelena ¤
Posts: 5183
Joined: 18/05/2010 20:04
Location: BD

#6057 Re: Ateizam vs. Religija

Post by ¤ jelena ¤ »

cendlerbing wrote: Šta sad sa informacijama? :mrgreen:
Apsolutno ništa - šuplja ad hominem priča. Ti ovakav, ti onakav; ti ovo, ti ono... i toliko.

A puna usta logike i argumenata. :lol:
User avatar
MarlboroGold
Posts: 22975
Joined: 24/06/2013 17:14
Location: Chaos Sanctuary

#6058 Re: Ateizam vs. Religija

Post by MarlboroGold »

Ne moRe sve biti 0 i 1... treba tu i ad hominem nekad ubaciti kao reality check za pojedince.
User avatar
¤ jelena ¤
Posts: 5183
Joined: 18/05/2010 20:04
Location: BD

#6059 Re: Ateizam vs. Religija

Post by ¤ jelena ¤ »

Nekad ubaciti... :lol:

To je konstanta -> pattern -> domet - naaaajljepše rečeno. :D
User avatar
славянин
Posts: 11277
Joined: 30/05/2013 21:43
Location: Tuzla,Sarajevo i dalje :)

#6060 Re: Ateizam vs. Religija

Post by славянин »

Ma 30 to pomnozis dva puta jer imaju dva pola dobijes 60 onda oduzmes 25 sto je danasnji datum to ti da 35 a onda to rasiris na 40 eto vidis da ima 40 godina :D
User avatar
cendlerbing
Posts: 15622
Joined: 17/08/2017 03:43

#6061 Re: Ateizam vs. Religija

Post by cendlerbing »

славянин wrote:Ma 30 to pomnozis dva puta jer imaju dva pola dobijes 60 onda oduzmes 25 sto je danasnji datum to ti da 35 a onda to rasiris na 40 eto vidis da ima 40 godina :D
hahahahahahaha
User avatar
MarlboroGold
Posts: 22975
Joined: 24/06/2013 17:14
Location: Chaos Sanctuary

#6062 Re: Ateizam vs. Religija

Post by MarlboroGold »

славянин wrote:Ma 30 to pomnozis dva puta jer imaju dva pola dobijes 60 onda oduzmes 25 sto je danasnji datum to ti da 35 a onda to rasiris na 40 eto vidis da ima 40 godina :D
To viša matematika :-) :D
User avatar
Smrcak15
Posts: 11092
Joined: 13/12/2015 13:23

#6063 Re: Ateizam vs. Religija

Post by Smrcak15 »

славянин wrote:Ma 30 to pomnozis dva puta jer imaju dva pola dobijes 60 onda oduzmes 25 sto je danasnji datum to ti da 35 a onda to rasiris na 40 eto vidis da ima 40 godina :D
Dok ja iznosim argumente koje nemogu osporiti neki se bave gatanjem tudjih godina :lol: najbolji dokaz oni koji citaju sa strane da oponenti nemogu pero odbiti mojim argumentima...i dalje ce kinesin nanorobot hodit klixovim temama dok god je "mara gatara" prisutnih ovdje :D
User avatar
Bloo
Globalna šefica
Posts: 50580
Joined: 16/01/2008 23:03
Location: Korriban

#6064 -mod comment -

Post by Bloo »

Svaka dalja diskusija na temu Smrckovih godina, e-barenja i veza, prepiske na razini Farme ce rezultirati kljucanjem teme.
User avatar
Smrcak15
Posts: 11092
Joined: 13/12/2015 13:23

#6065 Re: Ateizam vs. Religija

Post by Smrcak15 »

Da se vratimo temi nakon sto ste odlutali od teme....

Ako su DNK kodovi informacije, onda je logicki prihvatiti da infomracije dolaze of inteligencije neke.
Lost in translation
The genetic information code points to an intelligent source

The Kingston Trio song “Desert Pete” reached its peak Billboard position (# 33) in 1963. The tune described a traveler in the desert that encounters an old water pump and a baking powder tin with a note in it. The writer of the note explains that buried underneath the sand he has placed a jar with water in it, and if the traveler primes the pump with its contents, they will be able to have all the water they desire. He warns however;

“Now there’s just enough to prime it with
so don’tcha go drinkin’ first
You just pour it in and pump like mad,
buddy, you’ll quench your thirst … ”

This amusing tune speaks of loving your neighbor in a practical way (one person taking the time to leave the water jar) and also of confidence in your fellow man (the other man’s step of faith by trusting that the instructions left are correct and that the water will not be wasted unnecessarily).

Send and receive
But what if the traveler was unable to read the note (either because they were of a different culture or simply illiterate)? What good would the information have been without someone that could understand it?

Obviously in any form of communication (whether Braille, Morse code, spoken language etc) there must first be a transmitter and then a receiver that understands the specific code used or else the communication is useless, literally “lost” in translation. If Desert Pete’s traveler had been Chinese (and didn’t understand English) he might have perished!

Origin of a code
Atheistic evolutionists are committed to a materialistic origin of life. As such, there should be no non-material quantity to the universe. However, modern science shows us that the study of biology is largely a study of information science, as all living things contain vast libraries of information in the form of a genetic code (DNA).

So committed evolutionists must believe (for the origin of life to have occurred naturalistically) that a code system originated by chance, with no outside intelligence. But experimental science has shown this is false. Information is non-material; it is a metaphysical entity, and has only been observed to be derived from an intelligent source. An example can be demonstrated simply.

Origin of a code
Atheistic evolutionists are committed to a materialistic origin of life. As such, there should be no non-material quantity to the universe. However, modern science shows us that the study of biology is largely a study of information science, as all living things contain vast libraries of information in the form of a genetic code (DNA).

So committed evolutionists must believe (for the origin of life to have occurred naturalistically) that a code system originated by chance, with no outside intelligence. But experimental science has shown this is false. Information is non-material; it is a metaphysical entity, and has only been observed to be derived from an intelligent source. An example can be demonstrated simply.

Pretend I take a piece of chalk and write a message on a blackboard; “Hi, my name is Cal”. If I asked you “Where did the information come from?” would you say “From the chalk”? If I were to rub the message off the board and show you the chalk on my hand would you say there is any information in it? No.

Obviously information was carried on the material of the chalk (because of the arrangement) but chalk has no inherent information content. The information can be traced back to the mind (me) that formulated the message, not the matter (calcium carbonate). Similarly, DNA is comprised of sugar, phosphates and bases, but the matter that it is made of does not contain the information, the arrangement of it does.

So information is 1) metaphysical (it is not a part of the matter it is carried on) and 2) only ever been observed to be created by intelligence. This is a huge challenge to the atheistic paradigm, and many atheistic evolutionists committed to their faith are aware of the challenge and trying desperately to solve it.

“To stem the growing swell of Intelligent Design intrusions, it is imperative that we provide stand-alone natural process evidence of non trivial self-organization at the edge of chaos. We must demonstrate on sound scientific grounds the formal capabilities of naturally-occurring physicodynamic complexity.”1

One scientist has identified what he calls the “null hypothesis” to naturalism,2 shown below.

He acknowledges the more honest we are about current discoveries within living things, the further away from naturalistic explanations we get;

“ … science has an obligation to be honest about what the entire body of evidence clearly suggests. We cannot just keep endlessly labelling abundant evidence of formal prescription in nature “apparent”. The fact of purposeful programming at multiple layers gets more “apparent” with each new issue of virtually every molecular biology journal.”3
So the ever increasing accumulation of observable evidence is going in the wrong direction! All living things operate and replicate using vast quantities of coded information which is stored, read, transcribed and translated. All of these processes shout out purposeful, intelligent sophisticated programming (far more advanced than any technology we’ve yet conceived), not blind, purposeless, naturalistic processes.

Aside from the fact that no one has observed a code system spontaneously generating, it is even beyond our imagination to concoct a story of how matter could formulate a code. So, far from the average lay person’s belief that scientists have the origin of life figured out, the honest scientists who understand the problem are admitting that they don’t know at all.

“At the same time, we have spent much of the last century arguing to the lay community that we have proved the current biological paradigm. Unfortunately, very few in the scientific community seem critical of this indiscretion. One would think that if all this evidence is so abundant, it would be quick and easy to falsify the null hypothesis put forward above.”4

But the problem is even more dire than most people know. Not only must the committed materialist believe that a code system spontaneously generated, they must also believe that a translation device specific to that exact code must also have “evolved” through natural causes! (The coded information in the DNA of living things is only useful when translated and expressed in specific structures and functions).

This is truly a dizzying prospect, as not only is the process of translation itself (in all of our experience) another activity that can always be traced back to an intelligent source,5 but what is the chance (in the infinite amount of “translators” that might have evolved) for it to be the exact one that matched the code that evolved?

It’s like the note in Desert Pete. Even if the note could have written itself somehow, what good is the note if there were no one to understand it? What good are instructions if no one is receiving them? The faith needed to believe that a code system spontaneously came into being is far fetched, but the concept that “matter” developed a “mind” capable of understanding it goes beyond faith and into the realm of fantasy
User avatar
Pujdo12
Posts: 217
Joined: 11/08/2018 21:10

#6066 Re: Ateizam vs. Religija

Post by Pujdo12 »

Ma vala ni DNK, ni tvoji "roboti" ne pripadaju ovoj temi
User avatar
Smrcak15
Posts: 11092
Joined: 13/12/2015 13:23

#6067 Re: Ateizam vs. Religija

Post by Smrcak15 »

Pujdo12 wrote:Ma vala ni DNK, ni tvoji "roboti" ne pripadaju ovoj temi
Itekako pripadaju jer su dokazi za postojanje Boga


Osim da ti vjerujes kako materija stvara informacije i paralelno sa transmitterom evolvira i reciever
User avatar
Sara03
Posts: 3426
Joined: 22/02/2017 03:17

#6068 Re: Ateizam vs. Religija

Post by Sara03 »

Smrcak15 wrote:Ako su DNK kodovi informacije, onda je logicki prihvatiti da informacije dolaze od inteligencije neke.
Jesu li ti logični svi članci sa te kreacionističke stranice, il' eto, samo ovaj?
Creation.com wrote:About Us
First time here? About Creation Ministries International

Our Motto: Proclaiming the truth and authority of the Bible
Our Vision: To see the Lord Jesus Christ honoured as Creator and Saviour of the world
Our Mission: To support the effective proclamation of the Gospel by providing credible answers that affirm the reliability of the Bible, in particular its Genesis history
Amen, sis! Ne zaboravimo i tvoju ljubav prema Discovery Institutu. Samo čekam kad ćeš se prekrstiti, tobejarabi. :mrgreen:
User avatar
Smrcak15
Posts: 11092
Joined: 13/12/2015 13:23

#6069 Re: Ateizam vs. Religija

Post by Smrcak15 »

Sara03 wrote:
Smrcak15 wrote:Ako su DNK kodovi informacije, onda je logicki prihvatiti da informacije dolaze od inteligencije neke.
Jesu li ti logični svi članci sa te kreacionističke stranice, il' eto, samo ovaj?
Creation.com wrote:About Us
First time here? About Creation Ministries International

Our Motto: Proclaiming the truth and authority of the Bible
Our Vision: To see the Lord Jesus Christ honoured as Creator and Saviour of the world
Our Mission: To support the effective proclamation of the Gospel by providing credible answers that affirm the reliability of the Bible, in particular its Genesis history
Amen, sis! Ne zaboravimo i tvoju ljubav prema Discovery Institutu. Samo čekam kad ćeš se prekrstiti, tobejarabi. :mrgreen:
Netvrdim da su im svi tacni ali ono sto je tacno podrzajem
User avatar
Sara03
Posts: 3426
Joined: 22/02/2017 03:17

#6070 Re: Ateizam vs. Religija

Post by Sara03 »

Pa podržaji.

Jednostavno gomila pseudonauke, bez ikakve naučne relevantnosti, koju bi pratile naučne studije i istraživanja. Dakle, baš tu spadaju ove tvoje kreacionističke stranice, čije ''istine'' perfidno prodaješ ovdje. Uključujući i Evolution News, stranicu koju vodi tvoj voljeni Discovery Institute, a koju si već nekoliko puta pokušao podvaliti kao relevantnu u oblasti evolucije.

Lagim, lagim, to najvolim?
Last edited by Sara03 on 26/08/2018 11:56, edited 1 time in total.
zijancer
Posts: 4749
Joined: 03/08/2004 20:52
Location: 39

#6071 Re: Ateizam vs. Religija

Post by zijancer »

sori ako je zatrpavanje teme, treba mi mala pomoc (( help HELP )) sa razumijevanjem jedne recenice iz vamo jednog clanka (o religiji :P )
sta bi moglo znaciti ---> 'pursuit of conjecture in the face of certitude'
pitanje je smrtno ozbiljno :sad:
User avatar
¤ jelena ¤
Posts: 5183
Joined: 18/05/2010 20:04
Location: BD

#6072 Re: Ateizam vs. Religija

Post by ¤ jelena ¤ »

Smrcak15 wrote:Da se vratimo temi nakon sto ste odlutali od teme....

Ako su DNK kodovi informacije, onda je logicki prihvatiti da infomracije dolaze of inteligencije neke.
Nemaš dokaz da je ''inteligencija neka'' = Bog. A ''logički prihvatiti'' je preduslov i za cijeli niz manipulacija, što takođe ne mora imati nikakve veze s Bogom. Za uspješnu, dugotrajnu manipulaciju sasvim su dovoljna dva čovjeka: jedan koji odašilje informacije krcate logično formulisanim podacima i jedan koji ih prima.

Pojmovi: inteligencija, informacija, podatak. DNK, kod... i tumačenje istih je produkt čovjeka.

Čovjek ih opaža, tumači i analizira u skladu sa zakonitostima mita, religije, filozofije, nauke - što je sve, takođe, produkt čovjeka.

To su segmenti ljudskog uma, kao što je segment ljudskog uma i ideja (o postojanju) Boga, koja se ne može negirati, ali ne može ni biti dokaz da Bog zaista i postoji.

Ukratko.
User avatar
zforumas
Posts: 8742
Joined: 25/10/2016 20:35

#6073 Re: Ateizam vs. Religija

Post by zforumas »

zijancer wrote:sori ako je zatrpavanje teme, treba mi mala pomoc (( help HELP )) sa razumijevanjem jedne recenice iz vamo jednog clanka (o religiji :P )
sta bi moglo znaciti ---> 'pursuit of conjecture in the face of certitude'
pitanje je smrtno ozbiljno :sad:
Pa otprilike potraga za zakljuckom nakon nedovoljno informacija kako bi potvrdila svoje uvjerenje. To ti je ovo sto Smrle radi...zagugla...vidi spominje se nesti sto njemu pase i odmah "Eureka" bez da udje dublje u materiju i istrazi.
User avatar
_BataZiv_0809
Nindža revizor
Posts: 84192
Joined: 09/05/2013 13:56
Location: ...da ti pricam prstima..kad padne haljina...
Vozim: Lancia na servisu

#6074 Re: Ateizam vs. Religija

Post by _BataZiv_0809 »

славянин wrote:
Montana1 wrote:Zasto je bog stvorio samo adema i havu/adama i evu pa da se od njih svi razmnozimo?
Mislim, zar nije mogao napraviti nekoliko parova pa da ako ista sprijeci incest? U cemu je smisao samo jedan par, zafalilo materijla?
:confused:
Image :D
Pogledaj:

Image
User avatar
Smrcak15
Posts: 11092
Joined: 13/12/2015 13:23

#6075 Re: Ateizam vs. Religija

Post by Smrcak15 »

¤ jelena ¤ wrote:
Smrcak15 wrote:Da se vratimo temi nakon sto ste odlutali od teme....

Ako su DNK kodovi informacije, onda je logicki prihvatiti da infomracije dolaze of inteligencije neke.
Nemaš dokaz da je ''inteligencija neka'' = Bog. A ''logički prihvatiti'' je preduslov i za cijeli niz manipulacija, što takođe ne mora imati nikakve veze s Bogom. Za uspješnu, dugotrajnu manipulaciju sasvim su dovoljna dva čovjeka: jedan koji odašilje informacije krcate logično formulisanim podacima i jedan koji ih prima.

Pojmovi: inteligencija, informacija, podatak. DNK, kod... i tumačenje istih je produkt čovjeka.

Čovjek ih opaža, tumači i analizira u skladu sa zakonitostima mita, religije, filozofije, nauke - što je sve, takođe, produkt čovjeka.

To su segmenti ljudskog uma, kao što je segment ljudskog uma i ideja (o postojanju) Boga, koja se ne može negirati, ali ne može ni biti dokaz da Bog zaista i postoji.

Ukratko.
Nemaš dokaz da je ''inteligencija neka'' = Bog.
kodiranje DNK je dokaz inteligencije, osim da ti vjerujes da kodiranje doslo iz slucajnih neplanskih dogadjaja.

potreban je i transmitter i reciever, dzaba ti kkodiranje ako nema nikoga da to dekodira i pretvori u funkcioju i infomraciju, takvo kodiranje je beznacajno...pa samim tim mozes li objasniti kako je reciever evolvirao paralelno sa transmitterom?

drugim rijecima kkao je DNK kod razvija paralelno sa masinerijom u celiji koja dobija funkcije iz tog koda

imas kodove, robote, masine, motore, turbine, kopiatore, razrjedjivadje viska proteina , nesto poput reciklaze itd sve to onako paralelno evolviralo sa kodovima :-)
Locked