Post reply

Reply to the message by dhw

Name:

E-mail: (optional, won't be displayed directly)

Leave this field empty:

Homepage: (optional)

Leave this field empty:

Location: (optional)

Remember me (cookie)

Category:

Subject:

Formatting help

skip to input

format text bold: [b]bold text[/b]
format text italic: [i]italic text[/i]
insert hyperlink: [link=http://example.com/]link text[/link] / [link]http://example.com/[/link]
set text color: [color=#rgb]colored text[/color]
font size: [size=small]small text[/size]; [size=large]large text[/size]
insert list: [list][*]list item[/list]
insert image: [img]http://example.com/image.jpg[/img]; left: [img=left]http://example.com/image.jpg[/img]; right: [img=right]http://example.com/image.jpg[/img]; thumbnail: [img=thumbnail]http://example.com/image.jpg[/img]; thumbnail left: [img=thumbnail-left]http://example.com/image.jpg[/img]; thumbnail right: [img=thumbnail-right]http://example.com/image.jpg[/img]

:-)
;-)
:-P
:-D
:-|
:-(

Message:

> [b]Cancer and cellular autonomy[/b]
> 
> dhw: [i]If cancer cells are able to take their own autonomous decisions, then there has to be some kind of decision-making mechanism that directs their molecules to “rebel”. Why would your God give them that mechanism, but not give it to “normal” cells? [/i]
> 
> DAVID: [i]They become this way through a bad set of mutations. God does not do it. Don't you realize cells come from organized proteins, all of which are free-floating and those actively producing product are the point of mistakes happening?[/i]
> 
> I have no idea what you mean by free-floating proteins that produce product are the point of mistakes.You wrote cancer cells "act autonomously as rebels”. If your God created them and gave them the ability to act autonomously as rebels, where do “bad mutations” fit in? You keep telling us that normal cells follow your God’s instructions. If his instructions lead to mistakes, then it’s his fault. If he gives cells the freedom to make mistakes, it’s their fault. 
>  
> [b]God’s purposes for creating life[/b]
> 
> Covered on the “evolution” thread
> 
> [b]Double standards[/b]
> 
> DAVID: [i]Wrap yourself in a nice safe no-position stance. I choose faith with reasoning 'beyond a reasonable doubt' as a juror would.[/i]
> 
> We are talking about the vastness of the universe. So it is “beyond all reasonable doubt” that God needed to create billions of stars and planets and galaxies extant and extinct for the sole purpose of designing humans plus food, but you can’t think of a single reason why. Belief devoid of reason is irrational. But if an atheist suggests that the vastness of the universe would allow for chance beginnings to life, you would regard the theory as irrational, and would dismiss it. It’s OK for you to accept an irrational theory, but it’s not OK for you if atheists accept an irrational theory. Double standards.
>   
> [b]Human evolution: Lots of interbreeding[/b] and [b]Early Hand Use[/b]
> 
> dhw: [i]All these comings and goings look like a free-for-all to me, or possibly – still with your designer – lots of experimenting.[/i]
> 
> DAVID: [i]Perhaps He allowed nature to do some experimentation. [/i][…]
> 
> dhw: […] [i]Do you regard nature as a conscious mind separate from your God?[/i]
> 
> DAVID: [i]I believe a designer God manages nature.[/i]
> 
> dhw: [i]If nature doesn’t have a mind of its own, then it’s the “manager” who does the experimenting.[/i]
> 
> DAVID: [i]No, God has let organisms do minor adaptations which you can call experimenting.[/i]
> 
> So your God gave organisms (= cell communities) the autonomy to do their own experimenting. We are making great progress towards the theories of cellular intelligence and evolution as the history of a free-for-all, and also the possibility of a God experimenting. You can accept all of them, and the only question is one of degree.