There's 3 paragraphs, so please read all 3 before posting answers.
"Information is not something derived from material properties; in a sense, it transends matter and energy. Naturalistic theories that rely solely onmatter and energy are not going to be able to account for information. Only intelligence can. I think that realization is going to progressively dawn on more and more people, especially younger scientists who have grown up in the age of information technology.
"Today we buy information, we sell it, we regard it as a commodity, we value it, we send it down wires and bounce it off satellites--- and we know it invariably comes from intelligent agents. So what do we make of the fact that there's information in life? What do we make of the fact that DNA stores far more information in a smaller space than the most advanced supercomputer on the planet?
2007-12-01
06:11:44
·
13 answers
·
asked by
Yoda's Duck
6
in
Society & Culture
➔ Religion & Spirituality
Third paragraph--
"Information is the hallmark of mind. And purely from the evidence of genetics and biology, we can infer the existence of a mind that's far greater than our own--- a conscious, purposeful, rational, intelligent designer who is amazingly creative. There's no getting around it."
2007-12-01
06:12:08 ·
update #1
I'll add the title/author in a bit... I'd like to see what people think of this, without getting biased by the title...
2007-12-01
06:13:50 ·
update #2
These three paragraphs are a direct quote from an interview. I've transcribed them as they appeared in the book- sequential, without interruption (or at least with as little interruption as YA will allow
to T-Rex-- Something to consider, though-- Have you ever encountered organized information with no mind that organized it?
2007-12-01
06:42:08 ·
update #3
allure45- Ok, then let's take out the words "in a sense"... how would you feel about the statement then?
2007-12-01
06:56:36 ·
update #4
Title and author, as promised...
"The Case for a Creator"
Lee Strobel
This quote is from the author's interview with Stephen C Meyer, PHD in chapter 9.
Mr Meyer has a doctorate and a master's degree from Cambridge. He's studied origin-of-life biology and the history of molecular biology and evolutionary theory.
He has written a number of books on these subjects, and one I'd like to find is "DNA by Design: The Signature in the Cell."
2007-12-02
10:18:57 ·
update #5
I agree. The evidence in nature is immensely evident. Also, there has not been found ANYTHING in nature or true science that denies a Creator; neither can there be.
Regardless of the view of evolutionists, true scientific evidence supports the fact the complexity of all that exists cannot be the result of anything except a vastly higher intelligence.
2007-12-01 06:37:46
·
answer #1
·
answered by Molly 6
·
2⤊
1⤋
"we can infer the existence of a mind that's far greater than our own--- a conscious, purposeful, rational, intelligent designer who is amazingly creative. There's no getting around it."
You would be wrong to to infer this . You CAN get around it . There is no logic behind it . Could there be a designer around it ? Yes , but you can prove it is NOT an all powerful AND all good designer . There is too much suffering and too many defects in this world .
"Information is not something derived from material properties; in a sense, it trans ends matter and energy."
This is nonsense to say "Information is NOT derived from material properties" .
And when you are talking scientific facts it is not very scientific to say "in a SENSE it transcends..." It either does or it doesn't .
I think this is a piece of work by an illogical person trying to sound smart by dressing up his disproved Intelligent Design Theory with big words , nonsensical sentences that have nothing to do with the premise , and repeating the words "science" and "scientists" .
The concept of Intelligent design has been disproved as science . It is Religion and not allowed to be taught as science in US public schools . google : Intelligent Design on Trial PBS for the full story .
This speaker/writer still trys to hide his message behind too many meaningless statements . His statements all boil down to what I first quoted and responded to (above) .
2007-12-01 06:42:43
·
answer #2
·
answered by allure45connie 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
"And purely from the evidence of genetics and biology, we can infer the existence of a mind that's far greater than our own--- a conscious, purposeful, rational, intelligent designer who is amazingly creative. There's no getting around it."
That line is nonsense. Sorry but the fact that DNA exists and holds information does not in any way infer a creator or designer.
The writer obviously believes that there is one and is grasping for something to back up that belief. The existence of DNA proves nothing about any creators.
2007-12-01 06:26:34
·
answer #3
·
answered by t_rex_is_mad 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
Abraham 3:19
19 And the Lord said unto me: These two facts do exist, that there are two spirits, one being more intelligent than the other; there shall be another more intelligent than they; I am the Lord thy God, I am more intelligent than they all.
Thus it is that a supreme intelligence has organized all that we see, feel and experience around us.
Your quote comes from somebody contemporary because of the reference to DNA and supercomputers. I am going to guess Stephen Hawking
2007-12-01 07:02:05
·
answer #4
·
answered by rac 7
·
1⤊
1⤋
I agree -- all things simple and complex, denote the wisdom and intelligence of God. All laws and properties of science we 'discover' are things He's known and dealt with for untold millenia.
I also really like the point that information is what it is -- but it takes intelligence & wisdom to utilize it and shape it into all things explored or undiscovered.
2007-12-01 08:20:26
·
answer #5
·
answered by strplng warrior mom 6
·
0⤊
1⤋
We have come a long way in understanding how things work, and so far none have pointed to a creator. Just because things are complicated, does not mean a God was responsible, it just means things are complex.
2007-12-01 06:18:09
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋
First 2 paragraphs are pretty standard 'information theory' (yes there is such a thing).
Third paragraph is vaguely theological speculation.
2007-12-01 06:22:24
·
answer #7
·
answered by za 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
I do believe in an "intelligent Designer" but i do not refer to
the "intelligent Designer" as "God"
2007-12-01 06:28:49
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Thank you. I'm glad someone can explain the existence of the mind reasonably..
2007-12-01 06:18:51
·
answer #9
·
answered by Uncle Remus 54 7
·
1⤊
1⤋
Boy are you in for it. Interesting quotes. Would you mind sharing what it's from please? If not here, just email me. Have a great afternoon.
2007-12-01 06:16:37
·
answer #10
·
answered by Q&A Queen 7
·
0⤊
0⤋