Do you claim a fish as your ancestor?

Radrook said:
True, a code received by SETI proves nothing in reference to the existence of God or a God. Never claimed that it did. I simply and very clearly pointed out that there is a glaring discrepancy between their policy toward the detected code from space and the way that they inconsistently react to the DNA code. Anything else is totally your idea.
Click to expand...
A detected code from space has to have a source, maybe the source can be faked. We will only know what we are told.
Our DNA had to have a source, the source maybe being the parent DNA going back forever to the single cell and beyond. We don't know its source, but electricity and water and time and other magical things that we don't understand yet... but that doesn't signify either because it may have been God's method. It's all speculation.
 

gruntlabor said:
A detected code from space has to have a source, maybe the source can be faked. We will only know what we are told.
Our DNA had to have a source, the source maybe being the parent DNA going back forever to the single cell and beyond. We don't know its source, but electricity and water and time and other magical things that we don't understand yet... but that doesn't signify either because it may have been God's method. It's all speculation.
Click to expand...
Well, please note that SETI personal would never consider a code detected from space that meets all the necessary characteristics of being transmitted by mind as being debatable. . The only debatable aspect of it would be:

What does it mean?
Who sent it?
What are their motives?
Do they pose any danger to us?
 

Last edited:
tonyr said:
Who knows really? No one knows -- truly.
Click to expand...
Would we say that about a code from space? That nobody knows whether it came from a mind or not? SETI personnel don't think so. Neither do those who support their efforts. Know why? Simple, because such a code is indisputable evidence of a mind at work. Now, the problem arises when the code is DNA. Then suddenly, the criteria is nonchalantly dismissed as inapplicable. Well, that is not science. Why? Well, because science demands consistency of criteria and not a sudden dismissal of criterion whenever the conclusion disturbs the sensibilities of the scientists involved.
 
Well, I love being near the water, though I can't swim. And have fantasized about being a mermaid, my favorite mythical creature, so if I didn't
believe in creation I'd say maybe...:)

f7d387338455b929b95bf616ac31dd40.jpg
 
gruntlabor said:
Sir, if I may I be so bold, are you AI? If not, I hope I have not offended you.
If so, please note that the SeniorForum rules require that, to join us, you must be a senior citizen.
Click to expand...
I think TonyR is okay, based on his posts and avatar. Not so sure about the OP. His/her posts have a false/pseudo ring about them.

YMMV
 
Radrook said:
In what precise manner? Pray tell?
Click to expand...
OOps, I am sorry. I was wrong. there is something that is further than the truth, but it is a super secret, very powerful, ritual that shows us what reality really is. This ritual is performed but once a year, in a hidden garden somewhere up north. So, whatever we were talking about is even further than this thing, way up north. :)
 
ElCastor said:
Radrook I am signing out of this thread. Believe what you like and I will do the same.
BTW Here is a lengthy article on the subject of evolution …
Evolution - Wikipedia
Click to expand...
OK! No problem.

BTW
I am familiar with the evolution idea. So your assumption that I am ignorant is incorrect..
Also, you never addressed the inconsistency of policy nor the issue of where the vast information that was coded into DNA came from. But neither do your "scientists". So that is not surprising.
 
Paco Dennis said:
OOps, I am sorry. I was wrong. there is something that is further than the truth, but it is a super secret, very powerful, ritual that shows us what reality really is. This ritual is performed but once a year, in a hidden garden somewhere up north. So, whatever we were talking about is even further than this thing, way up north. :)
Click to expand...
There is absolutely no similarity between the garbled nonsense that you just wrote and the basis for my belief in intelligent design.
 
Paco Dennis said:
Why it is the only position left, the jester for the King. Please spare my head. :)
Click to expand...

Not my intention to cause you or anyone else any mental distress by suggesting that there might be a creator of all things. But if indeed that is how you feel whenever the theist suggestion is made, then perhaps it's best to limit conversations with those who support the atheist view.
 
gruntlabor said:
Sir, if I may I be so bold, are you AI? If not, I hope I have not offended you.
If so, please note that the SeniorForum rules require that, to join us, you must be a senior citizen.
Click to expand...
How does one detect whether a person is an AI or not?
 
Paco Dennis said:
View attachment 375182
Click to expand...
First, such a practice of using a fish as a symbol for Christianity, was never taught by Jesus nor his apostles. It was gradually adopted when persecution ofChristians by the Rom,an State intensified and the need for secrecy in order to evade persecution arose. So using ita symbol made initially made detection difficult.

Most significantly, they were not claiming that Jesus was descended from a fish, as you might be trying to indicate. Why a fish? Simple! Because Jesus used phrases such as making his followers fishers of men, and miraculously had fed multitudes with fish.
 
tonyr said:
There is no way @Radrook. We can make any statement prejudicially. Factually no. Thank you.
Click to expand...
I was not agreeing with him, Just curious since I have often been suspected of being an AI myself.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top