Jump to content
Islamic Forum
andalusi

Non-religious Evidence That God Exists

Recommended Posts

PropellerAds

Wizard animal :D totally amazing

 

Edited by andalusi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The “dying” leaf-mimic katydid
1210_5137.jpg


 

1.jpg


 

mimetica3_wide-8c7b4f2afe3341fdd560805c5


 

6249938006_96c3811bd5_z.jpg


 

dead leaf -mimic katydid
2_custom-d3ca427cd97c992f9191ac1785a99d3


 

k-LeafMimic2.jpg


 

Leaf mimicking katydid with amazing leafy legs showing some fantastic camouflage. Found during a night hike in Danum Valley, Sabah, Borneo.
3430798861_e521f5a707_b.jpg


 

 

5418985335_6513ef87d6.jpg

 

 

do animals know that they need such amazing comuflage? NO

do non-thinking nature know tha they need such camouflage so it equips them with it? NO

do mutations do this? experiments show that mutations are allways harmful, so answer is NO

so answer is God designed them like this in the first begining.

 

 

Edited by andalusi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fish make their own Hajj (pilgrimage) circuling just like muslims do, just in other direction

 

610x.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

one of the best videos i have seen on this topic, and done with very modern graphic  :yes:  :yes:  :yes:

 

Does God Exist? Evidence from Nature 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Although he is a Christian, I think Saint Thomas Aquinas' "Five Ways" is perfect proof of a super intelligent God. Particularly the argument of the unmoved mover (everything has something that causes it, and all must be traced back to an un caused causer that started the chain reaction!)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Although he is a Christian, I think Saint Thomas Aquinas' "Five Ways" is perfect proof of a super intelligent God. Particularly the argument of the unmoved mover (everything has something that causes it, and all must be traced back to an un caused causer that started the chain reaction!)

And?

So what?

How is this evidence?

How is this non-religious?

How is this evidence of a particular god?

The unmoved-mover or uncaused-causer argument has been shown millions of times to be faulty, primitive, wrong and irrelevant for over 2000 years.

What "chain reaction" exactly are you talking about?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And?

So what?

How is this evidence?

How is this non-religious?

How is this evidence of a particular god?

The unmoved-mover or uncaused-causer argument has been shown millions of times to be faulty, primitive, wrong and irrelevant for over 2000 years.

What "chain reaction" exactly are you talking about?

There's no way it could be proven faulty? Everything traced to the point of the Big Bang had a natural reason that it happened. This is basically stating that the Big Bang was caused by an ultimate force that did not have anything affecting it. It couldn't, because it was out of our universe and human comprehension. We know this to be God.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's no way it could be proven faulty? Everything traced to the point of the Big Bang had a natural reason that it happened. This is basically stating that the Big Bang was caused by an ultimate force that did not have anything affecting it. It couldn't, because it was out of our universe and human comprehension. We know this to be God.

Why are you not answering my questions?

Why do you run away from them?

What are you talking about? What about anything after the Big Bang had a "natural reason"? What do you mean when you say "the Big Bang was caused"? Where do you get this from?

Why can anything exist outside of our perception of this Universe? Made from what? Existing in what time dimension?

 

All you have is wishful thinking, no knowledge in cosmogony and the built-in tendency to repeat stuff you don't really understand. Why can't you be more precise in your claims?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

StopS

 

i have question for you

 

if you dont beleive in God and that quran is not fom God, then explain to me, how could program chemical elements in the text of quran in the chapter Iron, with their atomic number or atomic mass? How could we know quran speak about neutron and proton, television, DNA; RNA and many many other stuff from our time?

 

from where did that information come, from alien maybe? then it would mean that aliens would know future so they told us that in the quran?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Andalusi

 

Do you want to know how many times I found references to TV, DNA and RNA in "Moby Di-ck"?

 

Russell

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Andalusi

 

Do you want to know how many times I found references to TV, DNA and RNA in "Moby Di-ck"?

 

Russell

 

 

show us evidence so everybody can check and verify that.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Andalusi

 

Sorry I didn't see this post till just now.

 

TV appears 126 times in "Moby Di-ck", DNA appears 45 times and RNA appears 195 times and all before any of those terms were created.  I posted elsewhere where to find a copy of "Moby Di-ck" free for anyone who'd like to check these figures.

 

Russell
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Andalusi

 

Sorry I didn't see this post till just now.

 

TV appears 126 times in "Moby Di-ck", DNA appears 45 times and RNA appears 195 times and all before any of those terms were created.  I posted elsewhere where to find a copy of "Moby Di-ck" free for anyone who'd like to check these figures.

 

Russell

 

 

absolutely not true beacuse i have seen that about DNA in other topic, and nothing support it, while in quran it has support eighter from chapter and verse number or from the text in the quran.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Andalusi

 

Which bit of my statement is not true?  Do you want me, as I did for the periodic table, to extract these occurrences and post them here?  Sorry I just tried that and this board freaked out about how long the post became. I can post them here bit by bit if that's what you want or you can just download "Moby Di-ck" and check for yourself.

 

Russell

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Andalusi

 

Which bit of my statement is not true?  Do you want me, as I did for the periodic table, to extract these occurrences and post them here?  Sorry I just tried that and this board freaked out about how long the post became. I can post them here bit by bit if that's what you want or you can just download "Moby Di-ck" and check for yourself.

 

Russell

 

everything, beacuse you post letters DNA next to eachother even though i claimed why it is not miracle beacuse nothing support it from the side or the text, like in quran chapter number and verse number joined together you get the year when science of genetics officialy began. and that was year 1865. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Andalusi

 

Yes but we've shown that the year you link to does not add up leaving the quran with no reference other than the letters DNA and "Moby Di-ck" can match that as those letters show up time and again in there.

 

Russell

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Andalusi

 

Yes but we've shown that the year you link to does not add up leaving the quran with no reference other than the letters DNA and "Moby Di-ck" can match that as those letters show up time and again in there.

 

Russell

 

i really dont know what games are you playing here, are you maybe joking here or trying to be blind or i really dont know what you intenetions are

 

even though all scientific community says year 1865 was science of genetics officially began when Mendel presented (not published), he published 1866 in paper. but oficially it was year 1865, we cant say it was oficially year 1866 when he already presented at univeristy year 1865, and we cant say that it was before since nobody presented it before him.

 

there is no point to discuss this stuf with you anymore, you believe what you believe i will believe what i believe, end of the discussion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Andalusi

 

I believe that games are being played here, though I’m not sure the perpetrator is actually aware of that, but please look at the previous posts on this question.  You posted a few lay web sites, what was it a charitable organization and a marketing group and I posted the Nobel Committee and Nature magazine.  Which of those sites do you feel more accurately represents the beliefs of the scientists involved and why?  This seems so much like your claims on the proton / neutron mass ratios, sure you can find sites that support your view but when you go to the source, to the scientists themselves, you get a different view.

 

Russell

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Before Reading:  
There are 2 fundamental principles underlying Islam. These principles highlight the base of Islam! The principles that must be applied are that:

1.) The Quran must be clear so that it compels those whose hearts are open, but it must be sufficiently vague so it doesn't compel those whose hearts are closed (or unwilling to believe).

2.) The Quran is meant for all times and places, therefore, it must logically follow that it must support 7th century belief  and modern belief simultaneously without contradicting either belief. 



3.) The Quran's language is in Arabic. Arabic is a rich language which allows for multiple valid translations. Therefore the Quran maintains multiple valid translations. If you think there is a contradiction in the Quran, you must ask yourself:
  •           -Have I made any unverified assumptions?
  •           -Have I considered all possible definitions of the words?
  •           -Have I considered all possible translations of the words?
  •           -Have I considered all grammatical syntactic definitions/renderings?

Explaining the first principle: 
(The video posted below highlights the main points expressed here)

"The Quran must be clear so that it compels those whose hearts are open, but it must be sufficiently vague so it doesn't compel those whose hearts are closed (or unwilling to believe)"

It is absolutely important to note that there is no full complete physical proof of Allah's existence. Many Atheists see this as proof that God doesn't exist and therefore they make that assertion. Contrary to their beliefs, Islam has an answer:

Life is like a multiple choice exam. If you pick the wrong choices throughout the exam, you will be punished. If you pick the right choices throughout the exam, you will be rewarded! The exam is going to be very difficult and it will have many tricks in it to test you. If the Quran or the universe were presented with clear, 100% proof of certainty in God's existence, then everyone believes in the Quran and in God. It would be like the professor decides to give you the answers to the exam. The whole point of your existence is to not have 100% proof of certainty that Allah exists. 

What is necessary to pass the test?
1.) Belief in God and the oneness of God
2.) Belief that God's final revelation onto mankind is the Quran
3.) Adhering to the laws and duties put forth by the Quran

You must believe in God and you must believe the Quran is the word of God. That is how you pass the test. Allah will not give you proof of his existence nor will he give you complete proof that the Quran is from him, because if he had done so, it would violate your purpose in life. (Note: The third necessary item requires that you believe in God and the Quran being his word). 


A good professor is one that does not give you the answers to the exam, rather, the professor provides you with the tools and information and lets you analyze, interpret and apply that information to reach a conclusion on the exam question! If the professor were to give you the answers to the exam, it would violate the purpose of the exam. If Allah were to give you proof of his existence it would violate your purpose in life-to worship Allah without proof of his existence. Instead, he gives signs and hints that point to his existence! 

Therefore it must logically follow that those signs and hints must not clearly prove with complete certainty the existence of Allah or that the Quran is from him, rather they must hint at the existence of God and the Quran. And those signs and hints, must therefore be sufficient to that it compels those whose hearts are open, but they must be sufficiently vague so they doesn't compel those whose hearts are unwilling. 

Quranic Analysis Corresponding to the first principle:
(Quran 76:3) Verily, We created man from a drop of mingled sperm so that We may test him; 
(Quran 67:2) [Allah is he] Who created death and life to test you [as to] which of you is best in deed.
(Quran 29:2) Do the people think that they will be left to say, "We believe" and they will not be tested?

We are created so that we get tested and to see how well we would be obedient to Allah:
(Quran 51:56) And I did not create the jinn and mankind except to worship/be obedient to Me.

^Out of ALL of Allah's creations, we were created with the purpose to worship Allah (other creatures may have different purposes). So if the purpose of our creation is to be tested, and Allah proves his existence to everyone: Then everyone passes the test. It would be like a college professor giving you the answers to the exam--What's the point of the exam? 

Further, the Quran highlights how people were asking the prophet for proof of God and Allah has refused. Instead, Allah points the disbelievers at a sign and asks them to reflect:

(Quran 26:3) Perhaps, [O Muhammad], you would kill yourself with grief that they will not be believers.
(Quran 26:4) If We willed, We could send down to them from the sky a sign for which their necks would be forced to bow
(Quran 26:5) And no revelation/signs comes to them anew from the Most Merciful except that they turn away from it.
(Quran 26:6) For they have already denied, but there will come to them the news of that which they used to ridicule.
(Quran 26:7) Did they not look at the earth - how much We have produced therein from every noble kind?
(Quran 26:8) Indeed in that is a sign, but most of them were not to be believers

^In here you have a case in which Allah reassures the prophet Muhammad to stop grieving because people disbelieve.  Allah could have sent a strong piece of evidence or proof of his existence, but Allah says that he only sends signs and that those signs are not meant to make everyone believe and worship Allah. Then Allah points them to a sign of his existence-not complete proof. 

The signs are there for those who think, ponder and wish to surrender to such a formidable force. While those who do not wish to obey, they are given their excuses to keep themselves aloof a satisfaction. Notice how the Quran is vague and indirect on this topic. The Quran didn't directly specify why Allah refuses to give us proof he exists, rather, he chooses to only give signs of his existence. The Quran lets the reader apply and interpret this information to reach a conclusion (remember, life is a test-an intellectual journey). A good professor does not give you the direct information needed to pass the exam, rather, he gives you bits and pieces of different information and allows you to analyze and interpret that information to reach a conclusion in the thought provoking exam question. If Allah were to directly  give you his reason as to why he refuses to give proof of himself, then it would the test easy for humans. The test is not designed to be easy. Allah allows those who are sincerely searching for truth to interpret, apply and analyze this information in the Quran to reach a reasonable conclusion. Allah also simultaneously allows those who are arrogant, intellectually dishonest or not looking for truth to have their excuses and reasons to reject Allah and the Quran. This is also analogous to how a professor designs the exam (with the right difficulty) so that it allows those who studied well in getting the right answers and simultaneously allows those who didn't study well in getting the wrong answers to the thought-provoking questions. 

Edkip Yuksel has said: "In order for any test to be valid, the receiver of the test must have the option of different choices. If the receiver had no choice there would be no test. The choice of the receiver determines his success or failure in the test that has been set. As an example, suppose you would like to test your 6 year old son and see whether he will obey you or not. You take him to his room and ask him not to leave the room. You leave the door open so he is given the choice whether to obey you and stay, or to disobey you and leave the room. The fact that you have given him two choices: the good (obey you), and the bad (disobey you) means that there was indeed a valid test. Now let us suppose you have done the same as above but this time you locked the door. In this case your son does not have the option of disobeying you. You come back after one hour and find him still inside the room, but this time, was he really tested? The answer is no, because your son had no option of disobeying you, and thus he had no choice.When we import this logic to the multi-meaning verses in the Quran, we find that among various other ways God has tested us, one test is by deliberately including the multi-meaning verses in the Quran."

In 3:7 we read:
(Quran 3:7) He sent down to you this scripture, containing straightforward verses - which constitute the essence of the scripture - as well as multiple-meaning or allegorical verses. Those who have perversity in their hearts will pursue the multiple-meaning verses to create confusion, and to extricate a certain meaning.

The ones who are honest are those who apply the Quranic verses to reach a reasonable conclusion, and then there are the ones who's hearts are perverse will abuse these multi-meaning verses to create confusion. Therefore, the verses in the Quran are a deliberate test set by God. 

In conclusion, the Quran explicitly states that Allah refuses to give proof of his existence and rather he wants humans to reflect upon the signs he has given to choose whether or not to worship Allah. In which case, it would be required, In order to maintain the structure of the test, for the signs to be clear so that it compels those whose hearts are open, but they must be sufficiently vague so it doesn't compel those whose hearts are closed (or unwilling to believe). A good analogy would be a professor giving you hints and information on the exam that don't reveal the answer to the exam for those who didn't study, but sufficiently guides those who truly studied in getting the right answer. 

Please watch the following video on this topic:
Side note: The test which we are to undergo is not meant to add to the knowledge of God. Although God knows everything, it still is necessary that all men and women be put to test so that the true form of God's justice and mercy may emerge on the Day of Judge­ment. If God were to send all persons to Paradise or Hell according to His own knowledge without put­ting them to test for their beliefs and deeds, then those sent to Hell could rightly complain that why were they being punished without any sin on their part while others enjoyed bliss of Paradise without any good deed in their credit? So in order to uphold the principle of justice and fairness, it was necessary for God to test all persons before sending them to Hell or Paradise.
Explaining the second principle:

The general Idea is that it would be illogical to expect the Quran to give you direct answers to the world because if it did, it would contradict the beliefs of those who lived in the 7th century. For example, the common belief at that time is that the Earth was flat. If the Quran had told them that the Earth was actually round, they would have ridiculed the Quran because according to their observations the Earth is clearly flat. If the Quran had told them that the Earth is flat, it would have supported their beliefs, but it would contradict our beliefs. So it is a requirement for the Quran to be vague enough in its natural descriptions so that it doesn’t contradict both 7th century belief and modern belief.

The Quran is meant for all times and places. The Quran supports 7th century belief and modern belief simultaneously without contradicting either belief. 

Analysis of the Quran’s timelessness:

It was stated earlier that the Quran doesn’t give direct answers to questions, rather, it allows the reader to interpret the indirect Quran in light of other Quranic verses and to reach a conclusion. The Quran did not directly tell you it was timeless. Its timeless nature should be the conclusion that follows from an interpretation of the Quran. 

According to the Quran, the Prophet Muhammad is the final prophet for humans.

[Quran 33:40] Muhammad is not the father of [any] one of your men, but [he is] the Messenger of Allah and last of the prophets. And ever is Allah , of all things, Knowing.

 If the prophet Muhammad was the final prophet for humans, then no more prophets would be coming. 

Further the Quran reveals that prophets come down with scripture:

[Quran 2:213] Mankind was one community and Allah sent Prophets with glad tidings and warnings, and with them He sent the Scripture

 If the prophet Muhammad was the last prophet, then he is the last one who comes down with scripture. This means that no new scripture will come. It must follow then, that the Quran is timeless as it must be relevant to the people at the Prophet Muhammad’s time and it must be relevant to modern times. 

The Quran claims to be timeless, but, is the Quran timeless? The dynamics of the Quran and some examples will be discussed to reveal the Quranic timelessness. 

The mechanism of the Quran’s timeless nature: 

The Quran maintains its timeless nature by verse applicability. For example, there are verses that address only the prophet Muhammad, there are verses that address only men, there are verses that address only women, and there are verses that address people of the future. This allows the Quran to be relevant to everyone. There are certain laws that women follow that men don’t and vice-versa. 

This is an example of a verse that was not applicable to the prophet himself, but it is applicable to the people of the future:

[Quran 55:33] O assembly of the jinn and the men! If you are able to pass through the regions of the heavens and the earth, then pass through..

The above verse is a direct commandment to us in modern times to travel through space. This verse was not applicable to the Prophet Muhammad himself, but it is applicable to us now. 

The Quran maintains this timeless and universal nature through giving out multiple verses with varying applicability so that it is relevant for all humans at all times and places. 

Timeless interpretations of the Quran:

It has been described earlier that the Quran must be vague for two reasons. One that has been discussed in detail earlier is that it must not provide complete certainty in the existence of God. The other reason is that the Quran must support 7th century belief and modern belief without contradicting either belief. This is a requirement because the Quran is timeless. But, does the Quran live up to that requirement?

The short answer is yes. The Quran’s vagueness gives it its ability to be timeless. Here is an example:

[Quran 21:33] And He it is who has created the night and the day, and the sun and the moon, each in an orbit floating.

Imagine this verse has said that they are in an orbit floating around the earth. This would be a case in which the Quran supports 7th century belief but contradicts modern belief. Those words were conveniently not placed there so that the Quran maintains its timeless nature. 

Does this verse support 7th century belief that the Sun and the Moon travel around the Earth: Yes

Does this verse support modern belief that the Sun and the Moon are each traveling in an orbit: Yes

The Sun definitely travels in an orbit. You will find many examples like this throughout the Quran. Certain words were avoided so that the Quran maintains its timeless nature! The mechanism the Quran does this is through vagueness and word avoidance! 

Also notice how the Quran allows room for those who are unwilling to accept Islam to have their reasons to reject Islam. People may say that the author of the Quran did not know that the Earth has an orbit because the Quran didn’t explicitly state it. The response to that claim is that if the Quran has stated that the Earth has an orbit around the sun, it would contradict 7th century belief and they wouldn’t be compelled in accepting Islam. It’s a requirement for the Quran to maintain vagueness so that it becomes timeless. To some this is a strong piece of evidence that the Quran has a divine origin, to others this is just the Quran displaying its ignorance. This further alludes to the point previously made that the Quran must have sufficient evidence to compel those whose hearts are open but they must be sufficiently vague so that it doesn’t compel those whose hearts are closed. Those who are unwilling to accept Islam would say that the Quran was wrong on its account for the dynamics of the solar system. Those willing to accept Islam would search for greater answers and realize the Quran has avoided to clearly state the geocentric model so that it remains timeless. 
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Scientists give evidence for existence of God-Designer, inteligent design 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kinesin protein robot
 

Kinesin_walking.gif

 

Kinesin preotein robot inside the body


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7sRZy9PgPvg[/youtube


 

Kinesin motor
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinesin


 

nrm1000_050a_f1.gif

 

The actin-based motor skeletal muscle myosin in the centre is flanked by the microtubule motors conventional kinesin on the left and cytoplasmic dynein on the right. All three motors consist of a dimer of two heavy chains whose catalytic domains are shown in yellow, whereas the stalks, which form extended coiled-coils in both myosin and kinesin, are shown in blue. Associated polypeptides (four light chains in skeletal muscle myosin, two light chains in conventional kinesin, and a complex set of intermediate, light-intermediate and light chains in dynein) are shown in purple. The 'antennae' extending from the dynein heads contain the microtubule binding site, which in myosin and kinesin is part of the compact head. (Drawn roughly to scale.)


 

 

]The 20-nanometer motor (height), ATP synthase (one nanometer is one thousand-millionth of a metre). These rotary motors in the membranes of mitochondria (the cell’s power houses) turn in response to proton flow (a positive electric current). Rotation of the motor converts ADP molecules plus phosphate into the cell’s fuel, ATP


 

ATP synthase


 

synthase.jpg

ATP synthase is just one of the many molecular machines at work in your body right now. Scientists are inspired by these natural molecular machines and are using nanotechnology to create molecular machines and motors in the laboratory

Edited by andalusi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Incredible Kinesin! Biological ‘robots’ will blow your mind!

by Calvin Smith

Published: 26 June 2012 (GMT+10) Stand and deliver

Kinesin molecules are motor proteins found inside living things. Known as the ‘workhorse of the cell’, they haul vital cargo along roadways in cells called microtubules. Steven Block (professor of applied physics and of biological sciences at Stanford University) has described kinesin this way; "Kinesin functions like a locomotive in cells to ferry cargo back and forth.”1

8659-kinesin-3.jpg

Illustration by Caleb Salisbury

 

A typical kinesin molecule is a mere 70 billionths of a metre (three-millionths of an inch) long and has an amazing likeness to a person! A typical kinesin has two ‘arms’ on one end (that hold onto the cargo) and two ‘legs’ on the other end that walk along the microtubule, pulling the cargo toward its final destination. In a sense they are like the ‘postman’ delivering mail inside cells.

Biological robots?

Inside all life forms that have nuclei in their cells (eukaryotes), proteins and other parts need to be delivered to specific places within the cell at specific times. If the needed part is a protein, a manufacturing plant (called the ribosome) receives blueprints for the part from the nucleus (the information is stored in the nucleus on a strand of DNA, but the blueprint is sent in the form of an RNA copy of that section of DNA).

A typical kinesin has two ‘arms’ on one end (that hold onto the cargo) and two ‘legs’ on the other end that walk along the microtubule, pulling the cargo toward its final destination.

This is a complex coordinated effort, as something must first access the creature’s DNA library, unzip it at the exact location needed for the specific information required (for whatever part is to be manufactured), create a duplicate of the information for the part and deliver it to the factory. (See animation, below left.)

Then another organelle in the cell (called the Golgi apparatus) packages the needed part by wrapping it in a bag (called a vesicle) and imprints the ‘address’ where the part is to be delivered in the cell onto the outside of the vesicle ‘parcel’.

Then a kinesin is summoned. It picks up the parcel and ‘walks’ along microtubule roadways in the cell and delivers the parcel where it is needed. (Many different types of kinesin [and kinesin-related proteins] with different specifications and functions have been discovered in various organisms from yeast to humans. The above example was simply an example of a ‘common’ task.)

A view from above

Kinesin is the miniscule longshoreman (stevedore) of the cell, toting parcels of cargo on its shoulders as it steps along a scaffolding of microtubules. Each molecule of ATP fuel that kinesin encounters triggers precisely one 8-nanometer step of the ‘longshoreman’.

To grasp the complexity of what scientists are observing kinesin do, we could use the following hypothetical scenario as an analogy from a more familiar point of view:

Joe is working at his job one day when his machine breaks down. He identifies the broken part and makes a call from his cell phone to a local manufacturer requesting a new one, giving them the part number.

The manufacturer agrees and records Joe’s address. The manufacturer has a list of all the part numbers on hand but not the schematic for them so they send an email to another company (that has a copy of all of the blueprints for every part needed in the industry) requesting the blueprint. A person there makes a photocopy of the needed section and delivers it to the manufacturer.

From the instructions in the blueprints, the factory then manufactures the part and puts it in a package marked with the postal address from its database.

A courier is contacted. He comes to the factory and picks up the package. Having detailed maps of the city, the courier plots out and travels along the most convenient route and delivers the package. Mission accomplished!

Most would agree that the level of complexity just described is pretty impressive. The technology and integrated components (such as the specialized knowledge, communications systems, manufacturing capability, and databases) needed for such intricate procedures are incredibly sophisticated, and all of these steps were coordinated by intelligent people at every stage. However, the actual processes involving kinesin are far more complicated than what ‘Joe’ experienced above.

All in a day’s work

As astounding as this is, research is showing that kinesins do far more than initially thought. Kinesins are now known to support mitosis (cell division) and meiosis (cell division in which a nucleus divides into four daughter nuclei to make reproductive cells). In addition to transport of ‘mundane’ cellular cargo, kinesins transport the neurotransmitters needed for neurons to communicate with one another.

Certain kinesins can dismantle the microtubules after their journey. Controlling the length of microtubules is particularly important during cell division2—lack of control can cause chromosomal instability, which is in turn linked to human cancer.3

Professor Matthias Rief (from the Physics Department of the Munich University of Technology) says, “Our results show that a molecular motor must take on a large number of functions over and above simple transport, if it wants to operate successfully in a cell. It must be possible to switch the motor on and off, and it must be able to accept a load needed at a specific location and hand it over at the destination.”4

8659-power.jpg

123rf.com/Viktor Gmyria

Fast and efficient

Not only do these incredible kinesin robots perform a variety of tasks, they also do so with incredible efficiency! Check out these ‘state of the art’ features:

Power—“Not only is it tiny, but kinesin’s motor is about 50 percent efficient, which is about twice as good as a gasoline engine. And pound for pound, kinesin produces nearly 15 times more power than that man-made engine.”5

Speed—The kinesin motor is impressively fast, capable of 100 steps per second. “Scaled up to our own dimensions, a motor with corresponding properties would travel at similar speeds and produce as much horsepower per unit weight as the jet engines of the Thrust supersonic car6, which recently broke the sound barrier.”7 (This would be proportional to a person moving 600 meters per second or 1,300 miles per hour!)

Energy efficient—Kinesins are powered by the universal energy compound known as ATP (which is produced by another incredible molecular motor called ATP synthase—see animation, below right. Each molecule of ATP “fuel” that kinesin encounters triggers precisely one 8-nanometer step of the ‘postman’, but kinesins go into ‘sleep mode’ when cargo isn’t attached to prevent ATP from being wasted. Similar to how modern computers shut down after a period of un-use to conserve energy, kinesin have a hibernation feature as well. (Although scientists know that the motor folds over in an “autoinhibited” 8 state when resting, the molecular mechanism remains unclear.)

Team players—Kinesin molecules also work together when the going gets tough! If the load needing transport is too heavy for one ‘postman’ to handle, there is “ … significant evidence that cargoes in-vivo are transported by multiple motors.”9

They also demonstrate ‘multiple handling’ of their cargo. Similar to runners in a relay race, kinesins can ‘hand off’ their cargo to a ‘fresh’ bystander after delivering it a certain distance, and the other kinesin will finish the delivery process.

Flexible planning—Kinesins also have a ‘bypass mode’ ability that allows them to navigate around obstructions they may encounter. Similar to a GPS system ‘re-computing’, kinesins have demonstrated the remarkable ability to re-route automatically when needed.

Recycling—The most ardent champion of the ‘green’ movement would be jealous of the kinesin’s conservation and recycling capability. There is good evidence they are either transported back to the cell center in groups by large transport units (like mass transit in cities) or alternatively dismantled and their parts recycled when done their tasks.10

Committed to naturalism

Of course such incredibly sophisticated bio-technology screams “Design”, but does God get the glory in the scientific literature describing these amazing machines and processes? No, ‘nature’ does:

 

“It is impressive how 
nature
 (emphasis mine) manages to combine all of these functions in one molecule. In this respect it is still far superior to all the efforts of modern nanotechnology and serves as a great example to us all.” 

Why is it that at a time when science is revealing such telling evidence of God’s handiwork that intelligent people can see the evidence and deny the Creator? It’s because of the atheistic, evolutionary indoctrination that most people in the Western world receive, of course. Atheism is committed to naturalism, and so as Dr Scott Todd (an immunologist at Kansas State University) said: “Even if all the data point to an intelligent designer, such an hypothesis is excluded from science because it is not naturalistic”. (This would have been surprising news to the many great God fearing scientists of the past such as Sir Isaac Newton and Louis Pasteur).

Evolutionists are willing to believe that such astoundingly sophisticated technology like molecular motors and their operating systems arose through natural processes (with no intelligence) very early on in their imaginary timeline.

Of course, according to evolutionary theory, eukaryote cells supposedly evolved well over two billion years ago12. This means evolutionists are willing to believe that such astoundingly sophisticated technology like molecular motors and their operating systems arose through natural processes (with no intelligence) very early on their imaginary timeline. But this is technology far superior to anything the most intelligent scientific minds on the planet have ever produced!

Is ‘evolution’ the answer to our beginnings?

“Motion at the cellular level is a hallmark of being alive,” Block has said. “A fundamental question is, how did living organisms figure out how to move? The answer is they developed kinesin and several other very efficient protein motors. If kinesin were to fail altogether, you wouldn’t even make it to the embryo stage, because your cells wouldn’t survive. It’s that important.” 13

Evolutionists have no plausible theory on how something as sophisticated as kinesin (and the required operating and communication systems) could have evolved in a gradual fashion (let alone all of the countless other functions and features we know of in so called ‘simple’ living things).

However, when we see similar machines and operating systems (robots, computers, the Internet, etc.) in our everyday life at work or home they are always the result of intelligent and intentional design. How much more logical to believe that the ultimate mind we are able to conceive (the Creator God of the Bible) created all of the marvelous machinery within us and the world around us!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Germ with seven motors in one!

by Jonathan Sarfati

Published: 15 January 2013 (GMT+10)

www.pnas.org

9018flagella.jpg

 

Over the last two decades, scientists have uncovered some of the amazing machinery in microscopic living cells. These include germs with a miniature motor that generates waves in a tiny tail that allows germs to swim—thebacterial flagellum.1 This even turns out to have a clutch to disconnect the motor from the tail.2 Even more miniaturized is the tiniest motor in the universe, ATP synthase, which makes the vital energy molecule ATP (adenosine triphosphate).3 Remarkably, a virus has a tiny motor used to wind up DNA into tight packages.4

 

This design must be playing an essential role in the fast, smooth rotation of the flagellar apparatus that allows the rapid swimming of MO-1.—Juanfang Ruan et al.

 

Some germs have more than one flagellum. Sometimes they work individually but still the germ manages to coordinate the motors. Other germs have the tails loosely bundled. But the marine bacterium MO-1 is different again. Here, seven flagella are tightly bundled in a sheath.

The mystery was how they could all rotate in the same direction without interfering with each other. Now a research team from French and Japanese universities5 has worked out how. They produced a series of 2-dimensional images of cross sections to build up a 3-dimensional picture (electron cryotomography—like a CAT scan, but with an electron microscope and very cold temperatures).

The seven flagella are actually surrounded by 24 fibrils (tiny fibres), in a hexagonal array. And these fibrils rotate in the opposite direction to the flagella, allowing them to rotate freely. The researchers’ diagram shows the flagella as large gear wheels with the fibrils as smaller gear wheels. These gears or bearings enable the flagella to spin very fast—so the germ can swim about 300 μm/s, or 10 times faster than E. coli and Salmonella.

www.pnas.org

9018model-flagella.jpg

Schematic model of 7 flagella and 24 fibrils rotating in a tight bundle smoothly within the sheath by the counter rotation of neighboring flagella and fibrils.

Click here to view an animation.

 

The researchers evidently had no use for evolution in their research. Instead, they referred to “complex and exquisite architecture”, and said:

“This design must be playing an essential role in the fast, smooth rotation of the flagellar apparatus that allows the rapid swimming of MO-1.”

 

Famous evolutionist J.B.S. Haldane predicted that we would find no wheels or magnets in living creatures. This is because these would not work unless fully formed.

 

But in the last paragraph, the researchers paid the obligatory fact-free homage to goo-to-you evolution:

“Taken together, these features of the MO-1 flagellar apparatus represent an advanced level of evolution of a motility apparatus. It is also intriguing that the same pattern of an intertwined hexagonal array in two evolutionary distant systems: the basal bodies of flagella and fibrils of the MO-1 flagellar apparatus, and the thick and thin filaments in vertebrate skeletal muscle. Similar architectures of filamentous structures presumably evolved independently in prokaryotes and eukaryotes to fulfill the requirements for two very distinct mechanisms to generate motion: counter rotation and axial sliding.”

This is yet another example of appealing to ‘convergence’: the same design feature allegedly evolved not just once but twice. But more to the point: in the late 1940s, the famous evolutionist J.B.S. Haldane predicted that we would find no wheels or magnets in living creatures.6 This is because these would not work unless fully formed. Thus natural selection could not have produced them step by small step, each an improvement over the previous one. Such motors thus falsify evolution by Haldane’s own words. MO-1 also senses magnetism,7 following Earth’s magnetic north pole in a helical path. So MO-1 provides two strikes against evolution.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Andalusi, your statement...

 

Many atheists say that life was created by chance. Now i ask them , can you take numbers from 1 to 20 in a row, shake it a throw numbers out and what is the chance, that 20 numbers are in order 
1,2,3,4,5....20 and not like this 3,5,1,9,15, 17... 

The chance that such event happens is 0%

 

...is 100% incorrect.  The probability of the numbers being in sequential (numerical) order are just the same as they are for being in any other order i.e. non-sequential.  There are 20! (twenty factorial) possible permutations of twenty numbers, hence the chances of them being in any one of those permutations i.e. 1, 2, 3, 4,....20 or 17, 3, 5, 19, ...etc., are just the same: 1 in 2.43 x 1018.  If you don't believe it, try this experiment for yourself: determine a random arrangement of numbers from 1 to 20.  Write the numbers from 1 to 20 on ping-pong balls or pieces of paper (or what have you),  Put them in a box and draw out 20 balls one at the time and note down the order.  I think you'll find that you'll be drinking lots of cups of coffee before YOUR numbers come up!  What's more, there's an equal chance you might draw out a perfect numerical sequence before your numbers come up.  Play X-Lotto, and see how just often your six number come up, to give you some idea. 

 

The trouble with your rebuttals of random natural processes is that you are making arguments from ignorance.  I don't mean that in an unkind or insulting way.  it's just that it would seem as if you have not taking the time to read even the basics of biology (or mathematics) to gain some insight into what IS possible.  But because your views are so heavily influenced by your BELIEFS, and because you don't understand something, you're simply closing your eyes (and your mind) and saying: it can't be possible!!  Well, the fact is, there's a considerable amount of evidence and knowledge 'out there' that can demonstrate beyond doubt that certain things ARE possible.

 

What I personally always find so baffling is that people who hold attitudes similar to yourself, be they Muslims, Christians or Hindus or whatever etc. etc., is that you cannot believe that an eye could evolve and be formed to it's present state by small incremental steps over a long period of time, but you can believe that an invisible, unknowable being, somewhere in the sky, can create billions of galaxies, each containing billions of stars, and can somehow create millions of living organism and human beings out of a handful of dust.  Yes, THAT you can believe!  Doesn't it ever worry you that your explanation has absolutely no evidence to support it? The only thing  you've got to go on is what you were taught to believe: a religious doctrine which you keep on reinforcing by talking to yourself, instead of looking to the evidence that overwhelmingly refutes what you believe.   Have your beliefs by all means, but please, don't try to make them scientific.

 

Cheers,

 

Olaf.      

Edited by Olaf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×