Prayer Requests

Prayer, the dictionary defines prayer as A solemn request for help or expression of thanks addressed to God. I recently went on a missions trip with my dad to Nicaragua and every night my mom would call and talk to me and my dad, I really enjoyed  being talked to and I caught myself thinking ,God enjoys being talked to way more than i do ,though he already knew what your going say and do before you were born.  Prayer is not a quick fix, or a click your heels three times, Prayer works, it wont always be yes. What kind of Father would he be if when his children asked for something, he said yes all the time. If you have Prayer requests for you or someone else, if its a private matter, just say you would like to be prayed for,and me and the prayer team will do our best to pray for you.

Hopefulone10 months ago
I have a prayer request, that people stop in wonder and gratitude to the inventor of the DNA programming language. I wish that people would stop at least once per day in wonder, and appreciation, on observing mind-blowing things like that.
Kiteman Hopefulone10 months ago
DNA wasn't invented, isn't a programme, and isn't a language. 

It's a pretty cool chemical, though.

Hopefulone Kiteman10 months ago
It most certainly is a programming language:
(Look at the Publications section on that Microsoft page.)
You can try arguing that DNA sequences just built randomly but you can never prove it.  It's like trying to prove that the Instructables Web site could randomly just appear on the Web.)  Pondering the opposite of your position is a far more amazing, and rewarding, endeavor.
DNA is not a "chemical," BTW, but a series of arrangements of chemicals (remember ATCG?) used to program every living thing, from the most beautiful flowers to the function of your eyes to behold them, and your brain to enjoy them.
"Enjoy?"  What is that?  Explain "love."  What's that?  You can choose to ignore the wonder in all these things, physical and ethereal, to write them off as "random," but you leave yourself out of the most amazing quest.
No, I'm sorry. DNA , and RNA are chemicals. They are both long-chain multipolymers. If you don't know basic chemistry, then you aren't compentent to claim expertise or try to assert your uniformed opinions as facts.

The mapping between trinuceotide combinations and amino acids wasn't invented, it developed over time via a deducible, and nicely documented, series of steps. That development wasn't random, it was driven by a combination of well-understood energetics and environmental pressures.
The chains are made up of chemicals. The DNA sequence for YOU is different from the DNA sequence for me.
"Nicely documented" theories are still theories. "Nicely documented" fantasies are still fantasies.
...and the biggest fantasy is that all these complex beings exist despite entropy. Alas, I can't help you. You will have to work it out.
I'm sorry. I am a professional scientist with 25 years of post-graduate experience in my field. I know _exactly_ what "chemical" means, and clearly you do not. The fact that two different long chain heterogeneous polymers are not identical is completely irrelevant to the fact that they are both chemical compositions (not "compounds", since they are non-stoichiometric).

Your comment about "nicely documented fantasies" is deliciously ironic, consider the fantasy you are using as the basis for your misunderstanding of the world.

Finally, pulling out the old trope about "entropy" reveals as clearly as anything that you're merely parroting what you've been told, without any understanding of thermodynamics, chemistry, or physics. Without either a basic knoweldge of those fields, or any interest in developing that knowledge, alas, I can't help you. You will have to work it out.
...because you are omniscient, based on 25 years of post-graduate experience, nobody else with an opposing view and the same or greater experience is allowed to dispute you. ...based solely on that statement. But wait, there are... Your distinction of chemicals and compounds is not the relevant distinction. It's even unlike like chirality. Your DNA is different from mine not because the elements are different. They're not the same because the building blocks are the same. It's the variations in the programming. You can say it doesn't matter but that is just avoiding the challenge, and the wonder. (That is "unscientific.")

I never claimed that I was omniscient. That is a property limited to your own nicely documented fantasy. I have experience and expertise in the field in which you are claiming knowledge but demonstrating ignorance. When you deliberately misuse technical terminology from a field of specialty, it is most assuredly in the purview of experts in that field to call you out, and to use their experience and expertise to clarify your mistakes.

I never claimed that different strands of DNA were the same. I claimed that all of the different strands are _chemicals_. You're the one who claimed, incorrectly and out of demonstrated ignorance, that the different strands of DNA are "not chemicals."

The wonder and awe of biology is _precisely_ in the fact that simple chemical compounds, combined together chemically into large, complex systems, can produce the infinite variety of nature.

Knowing the science behind it, instead of being limited to an ignorant "ooh isn't that pretty", makes nature even more awesome.
Kiteman Hopefulone10 months ago
Find out what "theory" actually means in science, please.
Kiteman Hopefulone10 months ago
I never said DNA built randomly. Claims that evolution is random only come from people who gave not bothered to learn about evolution, or eho are dishonestly trying to discredit it.

Mutations are random, but their continuity is not. It's called natural selection for a reason.

Arguing that evolution is false because Life could not have appeared randomly is simply an expression of ignorance.

No scientist writes anything off as random, except truly random entities like radioactive decay or the quantum foam. "Enjoyment", "love" and the concept of aesthetic beauty are wonderful things, but all have explicable, evolved origins.

To choose to ignore the wonders revealed through science, to limit yourself within the bounds of goddidit is to truly exclude yourself from the amazing quest to understand this amazing Universe, as well as its origins and that of the Life within it.

To simply declare that such things can only be ascribed to a deity is both dishonest and cowardly.

Hopefulone Kiteman10 months ago
So you are stomping your feet and calling me dishonest and cowardly while you twist what I have said. I see.
Kiteman Hopefulone10 months ago
No, I said that running away from the clear and obvious implications of the evidence, and pretending that a god did it is dishonest (there is no evidence of divine intervention, just of natural evolution) and cowardly (the lack of a god means that you have to take direct responsibility for your own actions, and cannot blame it on the will of a god or devil).

Whether that applies to you, I cannot know, because you are playing with pseudoscientific terminology and non-peer reviewed (or irrelevant) articles, and made no statements about a god.

If you do believe in a god, that is your business, but please do not misrepresent the facts to twist them into pretending they support the influence of a god.
Dakota Joel (author) 1 year ago
Question Goodhart: are you a christian simple yes or no question
It will only a "simple yes or no question" when the roughly 41,000 versions of christianity agree what "christian" actually means.

As it stands, they can't even agree how many books there are in the bible, or what order they go in.
Hopefulone Kiteman10 months ago
Your logic is broken, Kiteman. It doesn't matter why they think of themselves as Christian. If they think of themselves as Christian then they can say, "Yes" no matter how they define Christianity. They could be Coptic, in Egypt, being burned to death or beheaded for their Christianity, and answer "Yes." He could be Armenian Eastern Orthodox, and just seen his priest killed for his faith, and answer "Yes." He could be an average Christian posting on "Instructables," being subject to simple, unnecessary, mocking taunts by the truly intolerant, and answer, "Yes."
Kiteman Hopefulone10 months ago
Where is the mocking? All I did was state simple facts.
I think he misspelled "intolerant." That would be a simple "yes or no" question.
Ah, but it depends on what you're being intolerant of...
Irrelevant, and you're dodging the relevant question of how this is relevant to project construction.
Kiteman1 year ago
Dear Author - are you in any way associated with the member known as "zkids91"?

Goodhart1 year ago
Question: In what way does this foster or enhance the excitement and marvel of building things on one's own?
It is not unknown for makers to call upon a deity, especially just after striking their thumb with a hammer, or picking up their soldering iron by the wrong end...
Hmmm, that is normally in the form of a "curse" rather than a cry for help, however; point taken
hehe, i haven't seen someone combine predestination and prayer in the same paragraph in a while..

"God has planned everything out, knows everything you're going to do and say. he is the reason that anything and everything happens.....but.....if you pray, somehow that predetermined future will be changed"....if he knows everything you are going to say and/or do, then prayer would, by definition make no difference.
Calvinist troll is Calvinist :-)