POLITICAL THREAD

[Killswitch24]

Because it's making the assertion that America sucks now. It's negative and offensive to those of us who love America and already think it's a great nation right now.
It's also confusing to people from a historical perspective.
Make America great again like when black people weren't allowed to drink from water fountains and eat at white owned restaurants in the South?
Make America great again like when we had slave and free states?
Make America great again when we didn't allow women to vote?
Make America great again like it was during the Clinton, Obama and Biden years?
Make America great again like it was during the Vietnam War or Nixon Watergate trials?
Please tell me exactly what years of greatness is he referring to?

Well you certainly have those stupid talking points down. Offensive to those who believe it’s great right now? Have you been trolling? It’s a slogan, all politicians use them. And Who tf actually believes Trump means any of that crazy bullshit you’re saying anyway? Answer? Nobody because you made it up.

The truth is you didn’t even think of that bullshit until a few black Democrats started talking about it. That’s who initially ran it back by saying “we don’t want to go back” when it has nothing to do with that. You been brainwashed by your party trying to brand nonsense into the slogan lol.

It’s about strength and economy, mainly before Bush. Make America Great Again is largely about the 80’s and 90’s thanks to Ronald Reagan. He’s even said make it great “again” like the days of Reagan. Your stupidity on this matter is what’s offensive.

 

[HymanKaplan]

Interesting discussion, given the origin of life free for all from a few days back. It conveys, much more eloquently than I can, what I have been trying to say for years; which is that it is essentially a fairy tale that life arose and evolved through mere serendipity. IOW - If you hold to that, you are expressing far more faith than those that believe in a creator (and I'm not talking about religion here)

 

[Mike-McD]

Interesting discussion, given the origin of life free for all from a few days back. It conveys, much more eloquently than I can, what I have been trying to say for years; which is that it is essentially a fairy tale that life arose and evolved through mere serendipity. IOW - If you hold to that, you are expressing far more faith than those that believe in a creator (and I'm not talking about religion here)

View embedded media

In other words, it is statistically impossible for God not to have done this. It is 1 trillion times more likely that God created the universe than that it happened by chance.

 

[Mike-McD]

Well you certainly have those stupid talking points down. Offensive to those who believe it’s great right now? Have you been trolling? It’s a slogan, all politicians use them. And Who tf actually believes Trump means any of that crazy bullshit you’re saying anyway? Answer? Nobody because you made it up.

The truth is you didn’t even think of that bullshit until a few black Democrats started talking about it. That’s who initially ran it back by saying “we don’t want to go back” when it has nothing to do with that. You been brainwashed by your party trying to brand nonsense into the slogan lol.

It’s about strength and economy, mainly before Bush. Make America Great Again is largely about the 80’s and 90’s thanks to Ronald Reagan. He’s even said make it great “again” like the days of Reagan. Your stupidity on this matter is what’s offensive.

View embedded media

View embedded media

Village Idiot doesn’t understand how marketing and propaganda work. Everything in politics is done by focus groups. All those catch phrases are used to influence the small minded. Like “pay their fair share.” Or “threat to democracy.” Idiots like him simply fall for them.

 

[Mike-McD]

The New Democrat talking point is that Trump is old. Watch Village Idiot and our other resident commies start parroting that propaganda immediately.

 

[HymanKaplan]

In other words, it is statistically impossible for God not to have done this. It is 1 trillion times more likely that God created the universe than that it happened by chance.

It's exponentially more than 1 trillion times. In fact, it's functionally impossible (within the timeframe of earth) that it arose without a source of intelligence behind it. But yes, you're essentially correct.

The fact that life exists at all, IS, mathematically speaking, the much requested proof of a creator, that atheists are always clamoring for.

Also, bear in mind that it isn't life forms that this guy was talking about, with respect to the probabilities, he's just describing the chances of a single protein chain forming by chance, and it's a ridiculous leap from that, to even the simplest single cell organism. Picture what he's talking about as a single bolt (the protein chain) that is installed on a Saturn V rocket (a simple, single cell organism) and you get a clearer idea of the big picture. LOL

 

[Mike-McD]

No words for the pitiful state of this Republic. All because democrats can only gain power through lies.

View embedded media

Remember the difference between a conspiracy theory and the truth? About 4-6 weeks.

 

[Mike-McD]

View embedded media

That’s a really good point. It’s well known that the presidents signature is automated. How do we know someone didn’t sign this for him? Who knows whether or not Jill is being paid or threatened.

 

[HymanKaplan]

I'm going to go ahead and apologize, in advance, for the endless parade of posts, that my "creator" post will probably lead to.

 

[HymanKaplan]

That’s a really good point. It’s well known that the presidents signature is automated. How do we know someone didn’t sign this for him? Who knows whether or not Jill is being paid or threatened.

Has anyone even SEEN Joe since this story broke?

 

[Mike-McD]

Has anyone even SEEN Joe since this story broke?

Nope. If I’m Trump, I would put out a public statement stating that I don’t believe Joe has dropped out unless I hear it from him personally. This is a straight up coup, and it needs to be investigated.

 

[Dionysus444]

Interesting discussion, given the origin of life free for all from a few days back. It conveys, much more eloquently than I can, what I have been trying to say for years; which is that it is essentially a fairy tale that life arose and evolved through mere serendipity. IOW - If you hold to that, you are expressing far more faith than those that believe in a creator (and I'm not talking about religion here)

View embedded media

So there are obviously tons of critiques here. I'm going to start with the biggest one, that most of his assumptions about how DNA 'coding' functions is wrong. DNA does not work like computer code, where if you put one random capital F or the word Fail in the middle of a big block of code it stops functioning. It's a complex system with multiple layers of complexity and redundancy, itself built on multiple layers of older systems, that we're learning more about every day. That system uses the fuel of adaptation and mutation just like it does adenine, cytosine, thymine, and guanine. So obviously it has mechanisms to manage them. A mutation is not changing a random letter of a computer code and hoping it works. A more apt analogy would be testing several different coding solutions to a particular problem and comparing the data as to how efficiently each functioned and preferring those. He's answering the wrong questions that he made up for himself in his 'research'.

 

[Dionysus444]

It's exponentially more than 1 trillion times. In fact, it's functionally impossible (within the timeframe of earth) that it arose without a source of intelligence behind it. But yes, you're essentially correct.

The fact that life exists at all, IS, mathematically speaking, the much requested proof of a creator, that atheists are always clamoring for.

Also, bear in mind that it isn't life forms that this guy was talking about, with respect to the probabilities, he's just describing the chances of a single protein chain forming by chance, and it's a ridiculous leap from that, to even the simplest single cell organism. Picture what he's talking about as a single bolt (the protein chain) that is installed on a Saturn V rocket (a simple, single cell organism) and you get a clearer idea of the big picture. LOL

That chemistry had been happening for billions of years before Earth even coalesced. It did not all happen on our planet. Titan has lakes of methane, nothing to do with Earth.

 

[HymanKaplan]

DNA encoding is EXACTLY like computer code. A computer OS is actually the perfect analogy for DNA.

This wasn't HIS research

Your quote, "A more apt analogy would be testing several different coding solutions to a particular problem and comparing the data as to how efficiently each functioned and preferring those." intrinsically implies a "mind" behind all of it.

 

[HymanKaplan]

That chemistry had been happening for billions of years before Earth even coalesced. It did not all happen on our planet. Titan has lakes of methane, nothing to do with Earth.

The universe, so they tell us, is around 13.7 billion years old, which is the blink of an eye, with respect to the number of calculations necessary to, as I said, for a simple protein chain to be coded properly, as described in his illustration. IOW, the entire universe hasn't been around long enough for even the basic building blocks (we're not even up to actual life forms yet) to have been formed by chance. It's math, my man.

Look, you are you, and I'd expect nothing else than for you to argue over this, but you're way out of your depth here.

 

[Dionysus444]

DNA encoding is EXACTLY like computer code. A computer OS is actually the perfect analogy for DNA.

This wasn't HIS research

Your quote, "A more apt analogy would be testing several different coding solutions to a particular problem and comparing the data as to how efficiently each functioned and preferring those." intrinsically implies a "mind" behind all of it.

No it doesn't. The system reacts to environmental pressures itself. That's natural selection.

 

[HymanKaplan]

Natural selection applies to life forms, and we haven't even gotten that far. We're still talking about the "machines" that make a functioning cell possible. So there is no "selection", since those "machines" would need to develop independently (through random chance), and, as I said, the universe hasn't been around long enough to run that many trials.

It's mathematically impossible (within the time frame we're dealing with) for this to have happened w/o an intelligence behind it.

If we're going down this road, I implore both sides to leave religion out of it. For purposes of this discussion, I'm only talking about intelligent design/a creator. What exactly that creator is is a different discussion. I am only saying THIS, so far: It is ludicrous to believe that life spawned from nothing. It might have seemed like a possibility at one time (just like Darwin's theory, before they were debunked) until we started to realize just how complex even just PARTS of a cell are. And the more we discover, the more ludicrous it looks.

 

[Dionysus444]

Natural selection applies to life forms, and we haven't even gotten that far. We're still talking about the "machines" that make a functioning cell possible. So there is no "selection", since those "machines" would need to develop independently (through random chance), and, as I said, the universe hasn't been around long enough to run that many trials.

It's mathematically impossible (within the time frame we're dealing with) for this to have happened w/o an intelligence behind it.

If you're going to try and debate this, you need to do some more research.

No, we're talking about interactions. In this case of molecules. Chemistry. Specifically with carbon, organic chemistry. Why is that called organic chemistry? Is it magical? No, it's just what we happen to call what 'life' is made out of. Complex chemical interactions with "machines" definitely undergo "selection", through extremely complex processes involving environmental circumstances, not "random chance". Is it "random chance" that causes bubbles when you pour vinegar into baking soda like a grade schooler? He is creating a ridiculous strawman and saying it's proof. He even acknowledges the false premise of his own argument with the whole 'it's not a God of the Gaps argument because...X, Y, Z.' Yes, it is.

 

[HymanKaplan]

Is it "random chance" that causes bubbles when you pour vinegar into baking soda like a grade schooler?


No, but it requires an outside force to do that, in this case, "you" (getting the baking soda and vinegar, and then doing the pouring) which is the entire point chief... LOL