Title: Scientific method proves order cannot exist w/o intelligence
Post by: scientist on December 01, 2009, 02:13:35 PM
Post by: scientist on December 01, 2009, 02:13:35 PM
ATTENTION NORMAL HAF MEMBERS, BEFORE YOU BOTHER RESPONDING TO THIS DRIBBLE PLEASE BE AWARE OF THE FOLLOWING
ORIGINAL OP CONTENT BELOW:
I've been in major debates against atheists and time and time again, the fundamental flaws of atheism lead to their consistent defeat. This is expected because atheism's flaws are basic, fundamental in nature and cannot stand against good theist attacks.
One (among many) of their popular tenets is "Order can exist without an intelligence guiding it".
Atheists will resort to giving examples of order in nature (by their subjective definition of order). They would proceed to naming these. Some popular ones include snowflakes (viewed under a microscope), soup (yes, the contents in it as well), super novas, the structure of gems (diamonds, etc.), molecular structures, rainbow, etc.
The theists and atheists will debate back and forth - one in approval, the other one against it.
A scientist though, can be objective and use the scientific method to see the truth.
First, it is clear that the very notion of order can be subjective in nature. The structure of snowflakes, rainbow, supernova, and all mentioned examples are prone to subjective observation. Hence, the counter-attack by the theist debaters. Their strategy is built on this fact.
By the scientific method, a scientist will divide subjects into specific, separate groups for objective observation. Each group will be put into separate rooms and be provided a piano, and a full deck of cards.
Group A consists of rocks - this would represent inorganic objects.
Group B consists of insects, bees for example - this represents the animal kingdom
Group C consists of humans - this represents the human specie, the group w/ the highest intellect.
They will be observed for a period of time. The results:
Group C was able to achieve a high level of order. The piano was played (recognized as a musical instrument) and a house of cards was built. Intelligence that provided order was displayed of the highest among the three.
Group B displayed some order, though not in the level of Group C. A beehive was made, a structure with geometric design inside. Acceptable as order.
Group A, composed of inorganic objects displayed zero order, no activity or even any movement made.
By the scientific method, we can conclude that inorganic objects are incapable of producing order of any kind without an intellgence/intelligent being guiding them.
The notion that inorganic objects, snowflakes, gems, rainbows, etc. by atheists are somehow capable of producing order by themselves is fundamentally flawed.
Only intelligent beings, controlling inorganic objects can make these objects arrange into order as the scientific method proves.
If an inorganic object (rocks in our example) cannot do any movement or order by itself, then all inorganic objects will have to share that characteristic.
Arguing that snowflakes, supernova, etc. are capable of order is a viiolation of the "special exception rule", and definitely goes against the laws of the scientific method.
Peace.......
Quote from: "templeboy"Folks, when a new post like this comes out, google a phrase in it like ""Atheists will resort to giving examples of order in nature"
This time it comes up with this result, posted more than a week ago: http://ravingatheists.com/forum/showthread.php?t=15678
He is a ctrl+v troll: ban him and forget him.
ORIGINAL OP CONTENT BELOW:
I've been in major debates against atheists and time and time again, the fundamental flaws of atheism lead to their consistent defeat. This is expected because atheism's flaws are basic, fundamental in nature and cannot stand against good theist attacks.
One (among many) of their popular tenets is "Order can exist without an intelligence guiding it".
Atheists will resort to giving examples of order in nature (by their subjective definition of order). They would proceed to naming these. Some popular ones include snowflakes (viewed under a microscope), soup (yes, the contents in it as well), super novas, the structure of gems (diamonds, etc.), molecular structures, rainbow, etc.
The theists and atheists will debate back and forth - one in approval, the other one against it.
A scientist though, can be objective and use the scientific method to see the truth.
First, it is clear that the very notion of order can be subjective in nature. The structure of snowflakes, rainbow, supernova, and all mentioned examples are prone to subjective observation. Hence, the counter-attack by the theist debaters. Their strategy is built on this fact.
By the scientific method, a scientist will divide subjects into specific, separate groups for objective observation. Each group will be put into separate rooms and be provided a piano, and a full deck of cards.
Group A consists of rocks - this would represent inorganic objects.
Group B consists of insects, bees for example - this represents the animal kingdom
Group C consists of humans - this represents the human specie, the group w/ the highest intellect.
They will be observed for a period of time. The results:
Group C was able to achieve a high level of order. The piano was played (recognized as a musical instrument) and a house of cards was built. Intelligence that provided order was displayed of the highest among the three.
Group B displayed some order, though not in the level of Group C. A beehive was made, a structure with geometric design inside. Acceptable as order.
Group A, composed of inorganic objects displayed zero order, no activity or even any movement made.
By the scientific method, we can conclude that inorganic objects are incapable of producing order of any kind without an intellgence/intelligent being guiding them.
The notion that inorganic objects, snowflakes, gems, rainbows, etc. by atheists are somehow capable of producing order by themselves is fundamentally flawed.
Only intelligent beings, controlling inorganic objects can make these objects arrange into order as the scientific method proves.
If an inorganic object (rocks in our example) cannot do any movement or order by itself, then all inorganic objects will have to share that characteristic.
Arguing that snowflakes, supernova, etc. are capable of order is a viiolation of the "special exception rule", and definitely goes against the laws of the scientific method.
Peace.......
Title: Re: Scientific method proves order cannot exist w/o intelligence
Post by: karadan on December 01, 2009, 02:29:23 PM
Post by: karadan on December 01, 2009, 02:29:23 PM
I guess you need to define what you mean by order before coming to such a conclusion. You seem to confuse order of hierarchical complexity with order of reaction (compositional order) which is an arrangement of composition, spin, magnetism, etc. in matter. You obviously don't need a human to help cesium lose an atom every (sorry can't remember the half life) second. Now, if there is no order in that physical constant, then none of the nuclear clocks in the world would work, would they?
By the way, it is best to introduce yourself before jumping straight into a debate on this forum. Tis the polite thing to do
By the way, it is best to introduce yourself before jumping straight into a debate on this forum. Tis the polite thing to do
Title: Re: Scientific method proves order cannot exist w/o intelligence
Post by: Whitney on December 01, 2009, 02:41:09 PM
Post by: Whitney on December 01, 2009, 02:41:09 PM
Soup, really? What's naturally orderly about soup?
Snowflakes are used as an example because they do exactly what you wanted from your "experiment", they form complex orderly shapes without outside influence as they crystalize. All crystaline objects do this.
(https://www.happyatheistforum.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm4.static.flickr.com%2F3235%2F3119206272_d2eb5f569f.jpg&hash=3d612801e99472c7cc214c28bd9c4ea7adea0c51)
No...order is not subjective; order simply describes the arrangements of objects in a pattern; they either are in a pattern or they are not. In fact, if order were subjective you couldn't argue that scientific method proves order cannot exist without intelligence because the scientific method doesn't deal with subjective observation.
I save any discussion about abiogenesis for if you bother to return.
Snowflakes are used as an example because they do exactly what you wanted from your "experiment", they form complex orderly shapes without outside influence as they crystalize. All crystaline objects do this.
(https://www.happyatheistforum.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm4.static.flickr.com%2F3235%2F3119206272_d2eb5f569f.jpg&hash=3d612801e99472c7cc214c28bd9c4ea7adea0c51)
Quote from: "scientist"First, it is clear that the very notion of order can be subjective in nature. The structure of snowflakes, rainbow, supernova, and all mentioned examples are prone to subjective observation. Hence, the counter-attack by the theist debaters. Their strategy is built on this fact.
No...order is not subjective; order simply describes the arrangements of objects in a pattern; they either are in a pattern or they are not. In fact, if order were subjective you couldn't argue that scientific method proves order cannot exist without intelligence because the scientific method doesn't deal with subjective observation.
I save any discussion about abiogenesis for if you bother to return.
Title: Re: Scientific method proves order cannot exist w/o intelligence
Post by: SSY on December 01, 2009, 03:23:49 PM
Post by: SSY on December 01, 2009, 03:23:49 PM
All your experiment proves is that rocks will not interact with pianos and cards, it does not provide the necessary evidence to conclude all in-organic objects and systems cannot lead to order. Every time a Christian pretends to understand the scientific method, a puppy dies
Also people, even if we conclude that all order requires intelligence, we just have to wait for the special pleading about his own deity.
Also people, even if we conclude that all order requires intelligence, we just have to wait for the special pleading about his own deity.
Title: Re: Scientific method proves order cannot exist w/o intelligence
Post by: McQ on December 01, 2009, 03:56:07 PM
Post by: McQ on December 01, 2009, 03:56:07 PM
(https://www.happyatheistforum.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi11.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fa184%2FMcQ14%2FMisc2%2Fpicard-no-facepalmbig.jpg&hash=14f490b558e12d2146ee64bf53d68627d16a9311)
Can we just cut to the chase and start talking about shampoo now? My wife likes Pantene 2 in 1. She says it does the best job in the shortest time to keep her hair clean and under control. It's quite unruly otherwise.
Can we just cut to the chase and start talking about shampoo now? My wife likes Pantene 2 in 1. She says it does the best job in the shortest time to keep her hair clean and under control. It's quite unruly otherwise.
Title: Re: Scientific method proves order cannot exist w/o intelligence
Post by: Whitney on December 01, 2009, 04:08:08 PM
Post by: Whitney on December 01, 2009, 04:08:08 PM
Quote from: "McQ"Can we just cut to the chase and start talking about shampoo now?I'm not expecting much out of this thread either....
Title: Re: Scientific method proves order cannot exist w/o intelligence
Post by: OldGit on December 01, 2009, 05:44:18 PM
Post by: OldGit on December 01, 2009, 05:44:18 PM
I dunno. We could always enquire where the order comes into supernovas, soup or indeed Testicleene free-range organic genital shampoo. That would be the scientific method. 
Title: Re: Scientific method proves order cannot exist w/o intelligence
Post by: SSY on December 01, 2009, 06:21:38 PM
Post by: SSY on December 01, 2009, 06:21:38 PM
Quote from: "McQ"(https://www.happyatheistforum.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi11.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fa184%2FMcQ14%2FMisc2%2Fpicard-no-facepalmbig.jpg&hash=14f490b558e12d2146ee64bf53d68627d16a9311)
Can we just cut to the chase and start talking about shampoo now? My wife likes Pantene 2 in 1. She says it does the best job in the shortest time to keep her hair clean and under control. It's quite unruly otherwise.
Look, up there, order coming from in-organic shampoo!
(https://www.happyatheistforum.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.mediawhorenetwork.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2009%2F06%2Ffacepalm1.jpg&hash=a4cb30c0f75ca2b650869a9cd306091d312dbfc3)
Title: Re: Scientific method proves order cannot exist w/o intelligence
Post by: Squid on December 02, 2009, 01:38:55 AM
Post by: Squid on December 02, 2009, 01:38:55 AM
Why is it always those who know the least about science are the ones who proclaim the loudest that they are the ONLY ones who use it "correctly"? The OP is laughable as far as being "scientific".
Title: Re: Scientific method proves order cannot exist w/o intelligence
Post by: Ellainix on December 02, 2009, 08:06:35 AM
Post by: Ellainix on December 02, 2009, 08:06:35 AM
Quote from: "scientist"the fundamental flaws of atheism lead to their consistent defeat.
I'm sorry, this is where you lost me.
Title: Re: Scientific method proves order cannot exist w/o intelligence
Post by: templeboy on December 02, 2009, 08:29:54 AM
Post by: templeboy on December 02, 2009, 08:29:54 AM
Folks, when a new post like this comes out, google a phrase in it like ""Atheists will resort to giving examples of order in nature"
This time it comes up with this result, posted more than a week ago: http://ravingatheists.com/forum/showthread.php?t=15678
He is a ctrl+v troll: ban him and forget him.
This time it comes up with this result, posted more than a week ago: http://ravingatheists.com/forum/showthread.php?t=15678
He is a ctrl+v troll: ban him and forget him.
Title: Re: Scientific method proves order cannot exist w/o intelligence
Post by: Whitney on December 02, 2009, 04:43:45 PM
Post by: Whitney on December 02, 2009, 04:43:45 PM
Quote from: "templeboy"Folks, when a new post like this comes out, google a phrase in it like ""Atheists will resort to giving examples of order in nature"
This time it comes up with this result, posted more than a week ago: http://ravingatheists.com/forum/showthread.php?t=15678
He is a ctrl+v troll: ban him and forget him.
OP adjusted
Oh, and I gave him a warning for spam since that is normal procedure for trolling/preaching copy paste stuff.
Title: Re: Scientific method proves order cannot exist w/o intelligence
Post by: G-Roll on December 02, 2009, 07:41:54 PM
Post by: G-Roll on December 02, 2009, 07:41:54 PM
what does ctrl + v do? yeah i really am that slow. 
Title: Re: Scientific method proves order cannot exist w/o intelligence
Post by: OldGit on December 02, 2009, 07:55:49 PM
Post by: OldGit on December 02, 2009, 07:55:49 PM
Quote from: "G-Roll"what does ctrl + v do? yeah i really am that slow. :D
Title: Re: Scientific method proves order cannot exist w/o intelligence
Post by: Tanker on December 02, 2009, 08:03:44 PM
Post by: Tanker on December 02, 2009, 08:03:44 PM
Quote from: "G-Roll"what does ctrl + v do? yeah i really am that slow.
Its a short cut for 'paste' while 'copy' is ctrl + c. In other words his "argument" is copy and pasted.
Title: Re: Scientific method proves order cannot exist w/o intelligence
Post by: templeboy on December 02, 2009, 10:40:38 PM
Post by: templeboy on December 02, 2009, 10:40:38 PM
Quote from: "Whitney"Quote from: "templeboy"Folks, when a new post like this comes out, google a phrase in it like ""Atheists will resort to giving examples of order in nature"
This time it comes up with this result, posted more than a week ago: http://ravingatheists.com/forum/showthread.php?t=15678
He is a ctrl+v troll: ban him and forget him.
OP adjusted :D