₦airaland Forum

davidylan: what should bother you is the clearly laughable babble that your fellow atheists here seem to have reduced science to.

yes it bothers me sometimes that lots of atheists have no idea of scientific principles they are trying to argue, but what bothers me most is the confusing babble(babel) by your Christian brothers of not only science but also of Christianity itself. Most have no idea what the gospel of Christ is, and treat Christianity as an alternative to the local deities (a means of achieving selfish aims through rituals, sacrifices and devotion)

@ George,

i have been following your posts and i am quite impressed with your practical knowledge of solar energy. I have learnt quite a few things from you.

I am an alternative energy afficianado and i have done a few small installations, i am thinking of going into it full time. I have been searching for durable components, like solar panels, inverter, controllers, batteries and monitors/meters. I will contact you for advice on some component i am looking at.

But my main reason of posting this is for you to share your experience with one small overlooked issue in solar energy usage but which can have a profound influence on its reliability - which is the problem of DUST. How do you handle the issue of dust?

I did a 800 watts solar installation for a friend late June, and everything went well till December. The solar panels were supply expected power, but with the coming of harmatan dust, the supplied power has greatly reduced. Now we hardly get up to 40% of expected power as the panels are covered with a brown layer of dust. So we are thinking of hiring people to climb the roof and physically wash the panels (the building is one storey building so it would not be easy). This means incuring unexpected maintenance costs. Also we do not know how often we would need to wash the panels to achieve maximum power harvest during the harmatan period.

Considering this is lagos and a small installation, how would this problem be tackled in the case of a large installation in the very dusty north?

I just want to know your experience with the dust issue.

chukkynwob: I believe I told you before that I yes BLINDLY FOOLISHLY believe in God without empirical proof believe that God exists,but you trying to use evolution to disusade me when the orignal life form,that simple cell that according to Darwin,evolved into complex life forms has not been ascertained. This will only leave us to continue an arguement that has gone on for years.like I said I only went into this arguement when ooman said science has proved the origin of live forms. Many scientists are still working on the theories of evolution and it has a lot of inconclusive,and incoherent pieces. So until it goes from theories of evolution to the laws of evolution my dear let's agree to disagree respectfully.

I am not bothered by what you FOOLISHLY and BLINDLY wish to believe, what bothers me is the false representation of science and the mis interpretation of the meaning of hypothesis, theory and laws as you have done here.

I am appalled that a so-called qualified electrical engineer cannot differentiate between an hypothesis, theory and law in science and equate a well established theory to an hypothesis. Anyway i should not be surprised, nigerian universities are known for producing world renown pastors than world renown scientists.

In science there is nothing like absolute truth or absolute proofs, what you have is explanations that best describes AVAILABLE DATA and observation, an hypothesis is propounded to best explain the observation, the hypothesis is then tested again and again by other experts in the field and if it satisfied the peer review mechanism it is accepted as theory, it can be further described as a law if the theory can be explained in very simple terms or mathematical models. (gosh! We learnt this in form 3 basic science)
In science there is often very little difference between a law and a theory. And because a theory is described as a law does not mean it cannot be discarded once it fails to predict observed data. A vary good example are newton's laws which is discarded under relativistic conditions.

Furthermore, because we still call the germ theory, a theory does not make it false or suspect and so resort back to spirits as being the cause of leprosy.

The theory of evolution is a well established and accepted theory of science. It has stood for over 150 years, it is been confirmed by other fields of science like molecular biology, genetics, paleontology and other related fields. If you have an alternative theory or links to an alternative theory on the origin and diversity of species on earth, then lets have it.

The beginning of life, which is how inorganic elements and compounds formed the first organic compound is not included in the theory of evolution, it is a different field called abiogenesis, and there are a few hypothesis out there with the predominant one being the "the organic soup" hypothesis.

So i view it as harakiri for a "scientist" to say that because something is described as a scientific theory and not a law makes it inconclusive and unacceptable.

I do not think the problem is with the judiciary per se, the problem with Nigeria is that there is a sort of class apartheid within the nigerian society. The poor class envy, admire and at the same time hate the rich. The rich class loath and hate the poor class. They do not even want to see them - except to take advantage of them or exploit them. This class discrimination runs in all strata of the society, from the judiciary to our churches and mosques.

That is why i believe a class war is a possibility in Nigeria, where the poor class would attack the rich class, if there is a breakdown of law and order in Nigeria.

If you like yourself steer clear of any diamond or gold business from south Africa. I have an aunt whose entire life savings including mortgage was duped by a very close relative and her husband, all in the guise of getting raw gold from south Africa.

A sentence is enough for the wise.

davidylan: So i decided to watch the entire video as Anony suggested and i will start with these general observations...

1. If this man is the reason most atheists consider themselves full of logic and reason... then really i just have to shake my head in pity.
2. Even Ben Stein noted the BLEEDING OBVIOUS - Richard Dawkins AGREES that some form of intelligent design was REQUIRED to create the type of complexity that we see in nature today (watch from 4:00)... his only problem really isnt about intelligent design JUST CERTAIN TYPES OF DESIGNERS SUCH AS GOD!

The problem with Richard Dawkins is quite obvious, he hates God QED. Every other argument is an excuse to wipe God out of the equation. It is amazing that someone who mocks christians for placing blind faith in myths is fumbling in the dark with ridiculous myths such as "some super race somewhere that evolved in another planet by some darwinian mechanism and then seeded our planet with life...". Incredible! For someone who insists on science, logic and reason... the above explanation for life (that he honestly admits he cannot prove even though he keeps bleating at christians to prove God exists) is an exercise in eye-popping demagoguery.

Note how very little confidence he himself has in the idea that somehow life is merely a product of some self-replicating DNA... I suppose as a scientist himself, he understands how unserious that notion is. We fumble around with RNA molecules all day in the lab, no serious scientist worth his salt believes we can create life our of primordial soup.

your statement of Dawkins being the role model of atheists fallacious and at best ridiculous. I for one have never read any of dawkins books, in fact nairaland is the only place i have ever heard of Richard Dawkins. My role models as far as atheism is concerned are Carl Sagan (i have read lots of his books) and our own Tai Solarin (who is not even a scientist).

I cannot even watch the said YouTube video as i am using a mobile phone, but from what i have read from other posters, i disagree with many of his populations and answers to many questions.

I also reject the idea that seeding is needed from another planet to kickstart life on earth. It is an hypothesis i disagree with. And i do not believe in some super intelligent extra terrestrials visiting us either.


I disagree entirely that there need to be any sort of intelligent design to explain the perceived complexities we see in nature.

I have 100% confidence that life itself is a self contained, self duplicating process and consciousness is a product of this system, to enable the living system respond and interact with the external environment.

Yes no scientist believes we can create life out of a primordial soup, but most biologist accept that the first self duplicating system (RNA and DNA) was created in a primordial soup about 3.5 billion years ago, given the conditions on earth at that time.

The basic incidents for life can be produced in the lab, ie, amino acids and proteins (Google the miller-Urey experiments), the only limiting factor is the time required and right condition to form complex organic molecule such as RNA and DNA.

truthislight: wise guy wanna be?

I suppose you are saying it ant an intelligent design, right?

1. Cold water we know is denser for the lack of kinetic energy and lose of heat and hence goes below the surface water while the hotter water (H20) goes to the surface and ready for evaporation. Is this rational to you?

2. Ok, please tell me the reason/rationale for the anomalouse character of water.

3. And tell me the impact of the lack of such property of water to living things in the sea.

4. Tell me the reason that matter should attain such characteristic for the benefit of things if any? (deviation)

5. Does matter have BRAIN(mind)?

6. If matter does not have brain, what and how did that process came about?

Please explain, am waiting.

(any other atheist can help him).

Wonderment. There is nothing we will not heart from Christian theists. So the freezing of water is now evidence of intelligent design?

1. My friend you need to go back to school (probably SS2) to learn basic physics or chemistry. Because you do not understand a think about freezing characteristics of water.

Yes, cold water is denser than warmer water and thus sink below the warmer water; but there is a caveat, at 4'C the situation begins to reverse, so that water colder than 4'C begins to expand as a result of hydrogen bonding. This makes water at 4'C less dense (lighter) than water at 5'C, and therefore floats on warmer water.

At 0'C water (ice) is almost 9% lighter than water at say 1'C. That is why ice floats on water.

2. Water exhibits this property because at 4'C positively charged hydrogen atoms begins to repel the negatively charged oxygen atoms, It is the nature of hydrogen bonding.

3. It is this unique property of water that allows ice to form an insulating layer over seas and oceans thereby not allowing the seas to freeze up, making it possible for fishes and other living things to survive in frozen oceans and waters.

Honestly, the governments needs to declare a state of emergency in science education in Nigeria. This will reduce the high level of superstition and religiously in the country. It is unbelievable that the freezing of water is now attributed to God. I wonder what they would attribute the caurse of mental illness, Satan?

davidylan: makes zero sense. The purpose of these precise laws of physics is? What purpose does it serve nature for water to freeze?

Maybe it is me that does not understand your question or the relevance of the question, so you might have to expanciate better.

But i can tell you why water freezes. Nature freezes water the way it freezes all other elements or compounds. This is because at the temperature of a material is directly related to how fast and close together its atoms are vibrating, and below a certain critical temperature (0`C for water), the molecules will be vibrating so slowly and packed together as to take a solid form.

That is the inherent nature of matter.

davidylan: what is the purpose of water freezing?

davidylan: that's quite silly actually since you have no explanation for WHAT PURPOSE this behavior evolved. It just spontaneously occurred? The precision with which it occurs was "designed" from an environment that tends mostly to entropy?

The purpose of water freezing is the same purpose every other matter freezes.

All matter is capable of expressing itself in 3 states - solid, liquid and gas, and which ever state is expressed depends on the temperature, occupied volume and pressure. Remember basic physics - PV/T is constant.

Nigerian judicial system is a farce. How can someone launder the proceed of crime perpetuated by ibori, when the courts have declared ibori is crime free. So who committed the crime that Babalakin is said to benefit from?

davidylan: Ice crystals are not created by chance, it is the fine-tuning of precise physical laws. Is temperature by chance?

i am tired and i do not have time for lengthy explanations now, but water crystals occur by chance.

First the shape of each water crystal cannot be predicted and no two water crystals are identical.

Secondly, for water crystals to form at all the planet must be of the right size, temperature and atmospheric pressure to allow liquid water rise in the atmosphere and allow it to fall again in solid form in the shape of ice crystals.

All these parameters occur by pure chance.

davidylan: This statement is the epitome of idiocy. Read this 2-3 times... does it make sense?

The purpose of life is the creation and preservation of more life? What does that mean? The purpose of rain is to create and maintain rain? Senseless

My brother, you do not get understand it yet. I will try and explain it to you.

First, let me deal with your rain example. Using rain to compare life is at best nonsensical. We all know what rain is, it is just liquid water falling from the sky. Rain does not have self duplicating ability like life. So rain cannot create more rain or preserve itself.

Life can be defined as a self duplicating and preservating system. All its functions and processes is geared towards these two functions. I am talking about life in general and no just human life. I know you are thinking only of human life and so assume another purpose to human life based on the dogma you subscribe to. But you should stop and think, what is the purpose of viral life, of bacterial life, of plant life, of insect life, of fish life, etc, you will find that it is the creation of more virus, bacteria, plant, etc, and the preservation of self and the newly created life.

So even for a human, the first and most important purpose is self preservation, so over half of mans energy is spent on looking for food, water and physical protection(house and clothes). The other half is spent making sure we produce healthy offspring (preserve our DNA) and ensure preservation of these offsprings.

Even the refusal of theists to accept death by creating the concept of soul surviving physical death capable of living forever in heaven, has its roots in the powerful survival and self preservation instinct hard wired to our genes.

I hope you understand now.

plaetton: This is the best summary of religious irrationality i seen so far.
May I have your permission to borrow some or all of the phrases in the future?

Of course you i freely give you full copyright permission, you would need to rephrase some sentences and do some corrections. I am posting with my mobile phones, because of the tiny screen and buttons, i do not bother to proofread after typing.

Thanks for appreciating my write up anyway.

Governor fashola sometimes talk as if he is high on something. With an average federal allocation of N15 billion( minus subsidy and excess crude account bonuses), an IGR of about N20 billion monthly, and a rising external debt profile of about $500 million (N80 billion) which requires servicing. He can open his mouth and say he can do without federal allocations. Then he will come back and tell us lagos does not have enough money to embark on infrastructural developments and that is why everything is done using private-public partnership.

Ordinary local government money that was seized by OBJ, and local government staffs were not paid for months and Tinubu borrowed heavily from banks to survive, now imagine if the state and local governments allocations are stopped, how will fashola pay government workers?

Which industries are in lagos? And how much do they contribute to the state's IGR? Most of the biggest industries are outside lagos. If the federal government should invest heavily in calabar ports, warri ports, sapele ports and onitsha ports, lagos ports would die a natural death.

I think the middle belt states have a better chance of surviving without oil as their economy is agric based, as as we all know, agriculture contribute close to 60% of our GDP.

Cheap Oil money still run the nigerian economy including that of lagos. Remove oil money and very little economic activities would take place.

I think theism (the Abrahamic version) is the most irrational state of mind a mind can descend to. In that state of mind everything is possible as long as it supports its idea of God, and every other thing is impossible if it contradicts its notion of God. If a natural phenomenon is not understood due to its chaotic and unpredictable manner it expresses itself, the theists would say it is evidence of God, and only God understand his creations. If the natural phenomenon is so well understood, that it can be explain in details and used to make things that add value to human life, the theists would say the intricate and perfect order of nature is still evidence that God is a perfect designer, and if one single known parameter of nature is not fine tuned, then we, our world or our universe could not exist. Then when the laws governing these same natural phenomena is purported to be broken(natural anarchy) with no known explanation, they still shout it is evidence of God being able to break his natural laws.

So in summery, we understand the complexities of nature - evidence of the Abrahamic God. We have no ideas (or they reject the scientific explanation) of the nature of the universe - still evidence of the Abrahamic God.

Can someone please help me define irrationalily.

If the above phenomena could be created by chance, why not the universe as a whole?

This is one of my post to show a few designs in nature that does not require a designer, but happens but happens by chance.

https://www.nairaland.com/915300/chance-intelligent-design-creation

frosbel: Some more questions for our atheists in Nairaland :


1. Does the universe have a beginning that requires a cause? If so, what was this cause?

2. Is materialistic determinism compatible with the intrinsically probabilistic nature of quantum mechanics?

3. How do you account for the physical parameters of the universe (the gravitational constant, the strong nuclear force, the mass and charge of a proton, etc.) being finely tuned for the existence of stars, planets, and life?

4. Why is the human mind naturally fluent in the language of mathematics, and how do you explain the eerie, seemingly unreasonable effectiveness of mathematics in describing the laws of nature?

5. Do you believe that DNA repair mechanisms, catalytically perfect enzymes, and phenomena such as substrate channeling are best explained by naturalism? If so, why are rational human scientists and engineers so woefully incapable of imitating the precision and complexity of cellular machinery that (presumably) arose via strictly irrational processes?

Source

Mr Frosted, you have shifted the goal post again without concluding on the evolution question. I hope you are learning something. Even if you have a mental block against learning any scientific concept, i am consoled by the fact that i know others reading this thread are learning.

Before i answer your question, i want to explain that atheism is simply a disbelieve in all deities, Gods, spirits, mammy water, etc. And there are varied reasons for adopting an atheistic worldview. Some adopt atheism because of disappointments, tragedies and ill luck despite years of dedication and worship of a God or series of gods. Others still turn to atheism because of hypocrisy, lies, greed, power play, hatred, etc, exhibited by the priests and adherents of the god they are worshiping. Others still reject the idea of god based solely on the characteristics ascribed to the God or God in general. Then there are those that seek answers to the mystery question of when, how and purpose of the universe. These last group are the scientifically minded individuals and it includes me. You can see that even here in nairaland, science is not the main reason people turn to atheism, and they understand as much science as theists.

Now to your questions;

1. Beginning of the universe. No body knows if the universe has a beginning, to me i believe it is unknowable whether the universe has a beginning or not. The best science can do is to estimate the time of the beginning by using the present expansion rate of the universe and working backwards. (assuming the expansion rate had been constant throughout). To me we might even have an oscillating universe. Expanding and contracting over a 20billion yr period.

Even the biblical version did not tell us when the beginning was. It just made a bracket statement "in the beginning". More like "happily ever after" in fairy tales.

2. Materialistic determinism with intrinsically probabilistic nature of quantum physics?

See grammar. She na Chris Okotie site you copy this one from. I know that even you do not understand what you copied. Ok let me try.

Yes, materialistic determinism is compatible with the intrinsically probabilistic nature of quantum mechanism, because quantum mechanics rules the micro world, while materialism is seen in the macro world. Even though even in the quantum level is random and can only be predicted by probability, the aggregate of all the probabilities is predictable as revealed on the materialistic level. A typical example is the radioactive decay of a piece of uranium, the disintegration of a single atom of uranium cannot be determined accurately, but only by using probability. But the total mass of uranium that would be destroyed over a given time can be known accurately if given the half life of uranium.

I hope you can grasp this science concept.

3. The third question is beyond me, you probably need a professor of fundamental physics to answer it.

4. Language of mathematics.

Human mind is fluent in the language of mathematics because as you said, it is a human language, like any other human language. It is a language developed to communicate the relationship between the shape, size, quantity, distances and energy between components of the universe. So you have to learn and be able to communicate with the mathematical language, just like English. So you would expect it to fit in and represent accurately what it describes.

frosbel: I start with mine :

1. Using logic, reason and scientific evidence, kindly trace back to the beginning , the origin of MAN.

2. In your own words, describe how you think human reproductive organs evolved into what it is today

3. If we came from monkeys , how come we still have monkeys around today


Thanks,

let me waste some energy this morning, i hope it is not a waste of time.

1. The origin of man. To tell someone to trace the origin of anything without providing the search parameters is ridiculous and meaningless. If i just say trace the origin of frosbel, what does it mean? Is it from the moment of your birth?, from your paternal or maternal roots (going back how long)? Or is it the history of your birth place or country?

According to evolution, all living things on earth share a common ancestor, so if you want to trace the origin of man, you have to say how far back in time we should trace from.

2. Human reproductive organ. Human reproductive organ has not evolved (because there is no need to). reproductive organs which was introduced by insects had been perfected by the mammals. Reproductive organ, evolved to enable sexua| reproduction on land (outside the oceans), as life took to land from the oceans

In a related issue, there is a problem with the hip size of women in relation to skull size babies, which should put a limit to the size of a baby's (human) skull, but ceasarean operation is used to bye pass that limit. So we are wondering what its effect on human evolution would be. (sorry for the digression).

3. Monkeys. This is the greatest fallacy of uninformed theists, and the reason they hate evolution with passion. Man did not evolve from monkeys, and monkeys can never evolve to become man. Evidence point to man (homo sapiens sapiens) and monkey split from a common ancestry about 5 million years ago, and have followed a different evolutionary path since then.

No need to thank me, just read up a bit on evolution so we can have a more fruitful debate.

If the purpose of this thread is to acquire some basic understanding of evolution as regards to biological life, i would have gladly put in some energy to explain some details. But from the attitude of the poster, it seems the purpose of this post is to attempt to ridicule atheists using evolution as a bait.

Even though it has been pointed out again and again that evolution and atheism are two different concepts, and that there had been atheists for thousands of years ever before the theory of evolution was proposed, some theists prefer to play deaf, dumb and blind to the fact. Even the father of evolution Charles Darwin was not an atheist.


It is amazing the poster and his supporters do not understand the word evolution, and are not willing to consult a dictionary or Google. Everything that exists evolves, the universe evolves, the sun evolves, the earth evolves, societies evolves, ideas evolves, businesses evolves and living matter evolves, even nairaland have evolved in the 8 odd years of it existence. So i honestly do not understand their hated for the biological evolution. Any thing that cannot evolve to cope with changing conditions dies or becomes extinct. The key word here is changing conditions.

Even the Christian God has evolved from Moses's days (despite the claim of remaining the same yesterday, today and forever), and is still evolving.

So my advice read up a little on biological evolution and you will be a little more enlightened.

If you are as young, energetic and hard working as you claim, then you have nothing to worry about. The journey of life is a marathon and not a hundred metres dash. Those that start our too fast almost always end up burnt out earlier, and those that move late slowly and steadily reach the highest crescendo later in life.

I assume you have no responsibility and is still being catered for by parents, so you should still be able to focus on improving your self, skill wise, educationally and socially. You need to move around and mix more with your friends, family and old contacts. The greatest mistake is to shy away from friends due to your unemployed status. Go to your friends and colleagues offices, put your ear to the ground. Tell them to help you in case of openings. Improve your social life, go to big churches, join groups where there are upward mobile members. Do anything but DO NOT SIT AT HOME FEELING SORRY FOR YOUR SELF. I am sure you will see opportunities.

davidylan: Here is the way i see the problem. Your parents are your parents... unfortunately and as harsh as it may sound, as long as they feed you and clothe you, you have no choice but to follow their rules and that includes attending church.

my old friend David, as much as i admire you new "born again" persona, in that you are a bit more tolerant of atheists, Muslims and others holding different opinions to yours, you still have some more transformation to undergo. I even took a swipe at you with a jibe or two at the evolution thread and you took it calmly.

Your response above to say the least is shocking -for a Christian(if it is from a Muslim or a Jew, i would understand.

Your parents feeding, clothing and housing you (at least till you are 18) is an obligation and not a consideration. So whatever the religious, mental, physical or psychological state of the child, the parents must provide for the child.

Secondly at what age do you prescribe parents throwing their children out of the house? 8 yrs, 12yrs or 15yrs? Because you have lots of 8 - 15yrs children who hate going to church. So if you drive children unto the street, do you think you can abdicate culpability if they commit crime?

Then what other reason do you justify to drive your children unto the streets, what of drugs, smoking or other deviant behaviours? Is it only refusal to go to church? What of if your child prefer another church to yours?

The problem here is that the teen in question has bought into the latest fad where children now stare down their parents, embrace a culture of disobedience... bravo to the parents in question! I'm not saying this from a religion perspective only... if my father where muslim and one of the rules for remaining his child and being fed, clothed and housed for free was to knock my head 5 times a day... so be it! When you are old enough to earn your bread, clothe yourself and buy your own house... then by all means refuse to go to church.

I am surprised further by your above posts, as a biologist, you should know that the teen years are the most difficult and important years both for the parent and the teen ager. It is the period of hormonal changes, behavioural formations and career building. This is the period we have a enormous amount of energy. So teenagers have a high tendency to buy into the latest fad or fashion, have a high propensity to be disobedient and socially deviant. It takes love, care and understanding to successfully raise a child through the teenage yrs.

That is why i insist Christians miss the message of Christ. The message of Christ was LOVE; the love for God and love of neighbour. And the love of neighbour can show the love of God. The day you get this message, i would be very happy.

I can authoritatively say that what drove 99% of people finally into atheism (including me) is hatred and intolerance from people we are closest to.

Just ask yourself... if you were a parent and your 14 yr old teen refused to go to school, would you just shrug and let it pass?

you cannot compare going to school and going to church, except the parent is saying the son must study a certain course or be kicked out into the streets.

Besides, lots of teenagers refuse to go to school and have to be forced to go, but i have never heard children being kicked out based on refusal to go to school.

Nigerians like thinking with their hearts instead of their head - as usual. Other people would investigate further the claim, instead of emotionally dismissing it.

The suspicion that nigerians in general (including pastors and imams) patronize babalawo is not new. Politicians, housewives, businessmen even job seekers, visa applicants and yahooze boys are regular clients of juju men. These same people will still fill our churches and mosques the very next holy day. Even our home movies do not portray any thing different.

A nigerian needs solution to problems and cares little about the source of the solution - God or Satan.

Where i live in ikorodu, there are all sorts of juju and semi-juju houses (i regard some socalled churches and some alfas as semi-juju), and we hear all sorts of stories coming from theses juju houses. We hear that politicians, pastors and prominent people in the society come in the dead of the night to avoid being seen.

unclenna: From the information at hand now it takes 40 - 50days to send goods by sea. That's why is adviceable to ship large quantity by sea.

what about port fees, custom fees, agent fees, etc, you will be required to pay when you ship through sea, which is not required using air freight. Can you please educate us a bit on this.

Uyi Iredia: Here goes. My favourite proof is the Cosmological Argument.

* Anything the begins to exist has a cause

* The universe begins to exist

* Ergo a necessary, non-contingent cause called God.

I presented the argument very simply and would like to see the OP's rebuttals if there are any.

here is my rebuttal;
in the first case, your use of begin to exist is highly misleading, because nobody knows when this beginning to exist happened, so every body is just speculating that there is a beginning; without proof.
Also your argument assumes we know "anything" or everything, meanwhile we have no idea of what makes up to 90% of the universe.

We have no proof that the universe begins to exist, all we know is that the universe exists.

If you posit that the universe requires a non contingent cause, you would be creating more problems than you can solve. First your non contingent cause would require another non contingent cause, - ad infinitum. Then why can the universe itself not be a non contingent cause. Because afterall everything in the universe can be denominated to energy, and that energy is constant but can express itself in various forms.

enilove: where you have millions of people testifying to an ocurrence then yiu have a proof of the existence of that case.
My proof that God exist is that :
It is written in the bible that God called moses and told him to take the Israelites away from the land of Egypt where they were slavrs. After many signs and plaques from God to show that He exisst, He then killed all the first burn of the Egyptians and finally God DIVIDED the red sea for the Israelites to escape and the Egyptians perished in the red sea.Egyptians are still living in Egypt till today likewise Isreal.Non of they has ever deny that the incident happened.

It is the creator of the sea that could only have given a command to the sea and the sea would obey for hundreds of thousands of people to pass before it creturns to its normal position.That person is the Almighty God.

where are the millions testifying to which occurrence? All we have is millions of people believing in oral traditional stories written down by unknown authors.

There is no proof outside the bible that the God of the Israelites divided the red sea and drowned the whole Egyptian army, there is no record anywhere outside the bible that the Egyptians were afflicted with plaques, and there is no record anywhereelse that the Israelites were taken into slavery by the Egyptians. The Egyptians were very literate and very good at record keeping, especially concerning their pharoah. Such momentous events would certainly have been worth a mention in their achives.

And FYI, Egyptians do not accept the biblical stories concerning the exodus stories.

davidylan: Oh dear... here goes nothing



Actually the genomes of C.elegans and drosophila were sequenced 4 and 2 years earlier respectively. The full human genome was not completed until 2006.

You should pay better attention to the websites you are copying.

if you now insist human genome was completed in 2006, why were you quoting 2002 gene estimate of 30,000 in your earlier arguments?

You know i do not copy and paste in my arguments, i have basic understandings of what i argue about, i use the web to get detailed information and recent updates.

Oh please... ok here we go - HDAC2, HDAC1, HDAC3, Wnt, NF-kB, p53... just a very short list of genes in man that have the exact same function in mice. What was your point?

you are shifting now aren't you? Your argument is now "have the same function". Genes having the same function does not mean that they are identical. It is the number and function of genes that were compared and not the actual DNA sequences.

Actually genes constitute 100% of the DNA... what you probably meant to say was CODING genes make less than 3% of human DNA, the rest is made up of non-coding genes, most of them mere tandem repeats.

the above quote further confirms my suspicion of your credentials as a Dr. In biology. You should know that i am talking about PROTEIN-CODING GENES. I hope you know that genome goes beyond protein coding genes.

Where did you get the information that the other 97% non protein coding genes are mere tandem repeats? What about RNA strands, virus strands and other so called "junk DNA"?

You are right there but it is not the reason mice are used routinely to study human genes... about time you researched that issue as well because you seem to be conflating two irrelevant issues. For example, the rat genome was sequenced barely a year after in 2003... so why exactly are rat knockouts not common? It doesnt take 90 yrs to develop gene knockouts you know?

I believe mice is used more than any other animal in gene studies (and other medical and scientific studies) because, mice are the scientist best friend when it comes to experiments. They prefer them to rats. I cant imagine that mice are used because they have the closest genome to man. I believe a knock out experiment with rat will yield similar result. If you have a source providing better reason why mice is preferred to rat, please share it with us.

Here is a sight that provide some information on rat, mice and human genome studies. http://www.genome.gov/11511308

your point?

my point is that your genes estimate of 30,000 for human protein coding genes is outdated and the total number is still being revised. Same with that of mouse. So it is senseless using a 10 year old data to compete human genes with mice.

that their genomes were sequenced at least 2-4 yrs BEFORE that of the mouse. That if the mouse is only being used as a gene knockout because it was the first mammalian genome sequenced then that would not make sense since we can easily study the same genes in the fruitfly. Infact most of the studies on epigenetics was done... NOT in the mouse but in the fruit fly.

i do not understand you o, are you now suggesting fruit flies be used in knock out experiments n relation to human genes? How many genes are homologues between man and fruit flies?

Then how come you now make a summersault to state that most studies in epigenetics is done with fruitflies? How does that reconcile earlier statement on mice being the most used animal in studies?

Now you want me to explain YOUR OWN science? Why dont you explain it... i believe in the bible.

my own science? You must have personality disorder. Am i the one claiming to be a Dr. In Molecular biology? And at the same time arguing again evolution as the reason for diversification of species. It is also crazy that you accept Micro evolution within species to adapt to little environmental variations but at the same time reject macro evolution between species to adapt to major environmental changes over millions and billions of years.

That is just rubbish my friend. If you are interested then grab the book of genesis and have fun reading it.

FYI, i have read the book of genesis, and in no way did it tell me about the diversification of species. It did not mention the origin of viruses, bacteria, fungis, non flowering plants, and millions of non middle eastern animals and plants. It did not provide the genome of any animal.
It did not even talk about the ability of animals to change to adapt to small changes in their environment. It talks about all animals being unchangeable. If it were so all living things would have been extinct by now, as the earth climate changes drastically over time.

earthgreeners: u dey mad for dis tin wey u just talk...liar...bakeries plenty for my area and none of dem dey use cassava even UAC sef

please learn to comprehend better, re read the post you quoted again and tell me where i said bakeries use cassava. What i said is that bakeries use wheat flour mixed with some percentage of cassava flour. Even the flour you buy in the market already comes pre-mixed, that is why there is a wide price disparity of flour in the market. Pure unmixed wheat flour is very expensive due to government tariff on wheat flour.

UAC does not hide the fact that they use cassava flour for their bread and gala sausage.

davidylan: sigh. you really are an ignorant one arent you?



1. I did not say that mice share more similarities that with other mammals. what i said was that of 30000 genes, only 300 are different between man and mice. I suppose you can read cant you?

2. For starters... the C. elegans genome was the first organism to have its entire genome sequenced. The rat genome was sequenced in 2004, the dog genome was sequenced in 2005, the chimpanzee genome was sequenced in 2005 - see here - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sequenced_animal_genomes

Its obvious you dont have a clue what you are talking about. Run along and read from your web cheat sheet again. Then come back and say something incredulous.

Obviously you are not aware that mouse, rats, dogs and rabbits are the animals most responsible for much of what passes for scientific research today.

Oh and you know the research into telomeres and aging? All that came from fruit flies and C. elegans... they share remarkable similarities in their genes with humans.

You really shouldnt be so lazy and dumb at the same time!

Mr David, i am now convinced beyond reasonable doubt that you are completely clueless about biology and an added challenge in English comprehension. Please i would like to know the university that granted you a PHD in biology and the professors. So that i can send some of your posts to them.

The story of humans having 30,000 genes of which only 300 are unique between man and mouse is very old news. It was written in 2002, when only man and mouse sequence had been sequence. comparism of human genome with other mammals have since been updated with the chimpanzee being the closest to human.

Where i believe you have comprehension challenge is when you equate 99% of mice genes having homologues in human to mean that the genes are identical or that it means that human share 99% DNA with mice. Do you even know what homology means? Is it possible to use the word outside the context of evolution? I even doubt you know that genes constitutes only 3% of human DNA. Please educate yourself on homology here - http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homology_(biology)

you can also read up on recent update on the number of genes humans has here -
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/01/080113161406.htm

About my statement about human and mice being the only mammal that had been completely sequenced, i admit not being wrong there, what i should have said is that human and mice are the most comprehensively and accurately sequenced. You should know that sequencing an ongoing process and the genome of most animals is updated regularly.

In 2002, human genome was estimated to be 30,000 genes, today it is put at around 23,000.

what exactly is your point on c. Elegans and fruit flies? Are you also saying they are closer genetically to human than chimpanzee or mice or even chicken?

Please explain to us (since you claim you are a biologist), the origin and diversity of species on earth.

If you are unable to answer the above question, My brotherly advice is quit calling yourself a biologist

bigfat02: @Gods300men you will need at least 4kva to power all of those .will cost around 250k if interested pm me (bigfat ) on 080 236825 32

are you sure you did not mean to type N2.5million because a 150watts solar cell sells for between N60,000 to N70,000 each. So imagine how many you would need to generate 4,000 watts, then you would need to take into consideration the batteries, a 4kva sine wave inverter, a 50 amp solar controller, cables, fuses, etc and of course the installation cost.

You all have been eating cassava bread (and biscuits, gala, other confectionaries) since the middle of last year. The policy is that at least 10% of bread and confectionaries should be replaced by cassava flour, but trust our bakeries who are trying to save cost, they sometimes mix their wheat flour with close to 30% cassava flour. Even the wheat you buy in the market for home use is already mixed.

You will notice the unplesant after taste of most biscuits, sausage roll(gala) and even bread sold today. You will also notice that most bread in the market is very crumbly and spoils within one or two days after purchase. To make matters worse, my wife always get constipation after eating some brands of bread which never use to happen before. We suspect it is due to too much cassava flour.

So almost everybody buying bread in Nigeria has already consumed cassava bread.

I was initially afraid that you are are ignorant of the basic facts of the theory of evolution, but now i know you are simply deceitful, like a handful of scientists who deliberately mislead the general public, using lies, misinformation and minor disagreements among experts, all in order to justify their religious convictions.

Yes, it is true that there are lots of pseudo-science out there, and through out the history of science, a lot of science theories were propounded and accepted because they fit pre-conceived ideas. As much as that is a weakness of science itself, it is also it greatest strength. Science is a self correcting system, overtime pseudo-science is weeded out and discarded, and better theories explaining observations and experiments are adopted (which is diametrically opposite to religious theories, which is unobsevable, unexperimentable and unquestionable and must remain immutable till eternity).

Charles Darwin (who incidently has a degree in divinity) wrote the origin of species in 1859, after 25 years of research, and up till today, after more than 150 years with new discoveries in anthropology, genetics, molecular biology, it still cannot be faulted. Is that not amazing? I think you should pick up and the read the book, maybe you can pick holes in Darwin's arguments.

Cockroaches, bugs, beetles appeared in the cambrian period and have changed very little since then(since they have adapted almost perfectly to their environment), if you want to study the evolutionary history of the cockroach you have to go further back. For sloths you have go back to the ediacaran period to begin your study.

Cats and all other mammals evolved from shrew-like or tupaia-like mammals which were able to flourish after the demise of the dinosaurs.

Your comment on the mice genome betray the very dishonest and deceitful nature of your arguments. Most other biologists see the similarities between the mouse genome and that of man as a confirmation of evolution, but you and a very few creationist "scientist" dubiously interprete it as evidence of creation.

Why are you lying that mice genome is used in research of human genome because the genes share more similarities than with other mammals? Why not tell them that mice genome is used only because human and mice genomes are the only two genomes of mammals that have been sequence. When the completed monkey genome is sequenced, then a comparism with human(and mice also) would be possible.

davidylan: I'm not at all sure you truly understand your own point here because it is seriously convoluted and does not convey a clarity of message that is required when it comes to issues like this.

sorry if you don't get my message, it might be due to the fact that i am posting with a mobile phone.

1. To the issue of the fossil record - it is true that the theory of evolution is not based on fossils (that is BECAUSE the fossil record itself exposes the lie that is evolution!). It is impossible to claim that man evolved gradually YET be unable to point to clear examples of these intermediate creatures in the fossil record. Where did they go? Thin air? It is scientifically impossible to calculate the true length of a chain just by looking at the first and last links and completely ignoring the fact that the middle links are all missing or perhaps do not even exist. this escapes logic.

you deliberately mislead, lie and misinformed just to discredit well established scientific facts, in order to massage your ego and psyche.

I said the theory of evolution was accepted in the academia before the discovery and study of fossils. The study of Fossils came much later and went on to support and compliment the theory of evolution. Furthermore other related field of science like geology, microbiology, paleontology, genetics, etc have cemented the theory beyond reasonable doubt.

i am sorry to say, but you talk like someone who had never taken a class in elementary biology, because if you did you would understand the fossilization process to the extent, that it is impossible to find all the evolutionary branches for a land based specie. For the fossiilization process to take place, an animal must fall inside water or mud first and mud, sand or silt must start to cover it almost immediately before the animal decomposes. The accumulated sand, silt or mud becomes pressurized to rock after a very long time with the fossilized animal embedded in it. Finally the rock containing the fossil must rise above the water to be able to be discovered (by pure luck) by scientists.

The fact that all the links on an evolutionary ladder for a few species can never invalidate the whole theory of evolution. And definitely the facts that there are missing links in the evolutionary tree of man does not discredit the whole theory of evolution.

2. What was your point on the DNA issue exactly?

My point is that the closer the genes of two species are, the closer their evolutionary relationship. For example, gorilla and man share 98% of their genes and so are referred to as evolutionary cousins. They shared a common ancestor a few million years ago. Meanwhile, man shares less than 60% of their genes with an earthworm and so shared a common ancestor way back in time, like a billion years ago.

Again you fail to explain HOW beyond just asserting an empty claim that you made earlier. How for example do we know that we evolved from monkeys and not from a mouse considering we share a tremendous amount of similar genetic information?

At times, i cannot believe you wrote the above, are you claiming that we share more genes with a mouse than a monkey? Honestly if a non scientist like an accountant or a lawyer wrote the above it would be understandable, but for a professed biologist, it is unbelievable. No biologist can ever claimed that we evolved from monkeys.

But this was what you said barely 5 lines ago - "The study of fossils is based on the theory of evolution."

Isnt that circular logic? How can the study of fossils give strong credence to the theory of evolution when the very study of fossils is BASED ON the theory of evolution?

It appears to me that you have not thought out your arguments very well.

it is a pity you do not have basic understanding of evolution. The evolutionary tree of a family might contain one or more extinct specie between two living species, the extinct species could only be identified by their fossil remains.