>>16530847
>life can come from nothing
It came from something, that something just wasn't alive itself. Life isn't some magical essence (as far as we know), it's a byproduct of a certain arrangement of matter.

>>16532006
Okay, so go make some in a lab. Reproduce your results.

>>16532028
>Okay, so go make some in a lab. Reproduce your results.
Okay, so go make some god in a lab. Reproduce Genesis as described in the OT.

>>16530847
Mentally ill autistic terminally only weeb larps as a Christ-tard to own the libs...

>>16532043
I don't claim I or nature have that power, that's you. You say it can happen naturally. So show me.

>>16532061
>I don't claim I or nature have that power
By your own logic You have though.
You now must recreate Genesis to prove it isn't wrong.
Come on.
Off you go.

File: 140415billy-bob-thornton1.jpg (62 KB, 660x960)

62 KB JPG

>>16532071
Are you dumb?

>>16532080
>Are you dumb?
Are you Christ-tard anon?
I think the answer is a big resounding...
YES...

Come on. Where is your recreation of Genesis?

>>16530847
1)call me when you meet one
2) thats not what the big bang is
3) yes sure
4) that has little to do with atheism. Are you just anti science because of your ignorance and mental laziness? That’s most religious people after all

File: sailormoonredraw-Taimanin(...).jpg (403 KB, 1500x1067)

403 KB JPG

>>16530847
Taimaninbros...

>>16530847
Oh yeah another strawman thread

the universe literally doesn't matter. you can't even be certain if it really exists. the only thing you can be certain about is that your consciousness exists, because you need it to experience anything at all. so the very fact that you are experiencing means that your consciousness exists. but you don't know if what you're experiencing is really the objective material universe or even close to it.

>>16530847
There's not a single thing in that list that is illogical or impossible a priori. You just don't like it so you pretend otherwise.

File: unnamed.png (177 KB, 2000x1243)

177 KB PNG

>>16530847
>>consciousness can spring from dead matter if you make it complicated enough
This argument sure aged poorly.

>>16532006
>it's a byproduct of a certain arrangement of matter
the specific arrangement is a turing complete system in bulk.

>Life isn't some magical essence (as far as we know)
depends on what you mean by magical. A turing complete system in bulk is like a little platos realm, and it starts evolving immediately. The nature of platos realm is abstract, so you can regard this as spirtual. It's basically the same thing that the ancients regarded as spirtual, just given more precise language. The ancients didn't have computers, but they had mathematics, so they were able to identify the realm of abstractions, which includes all meaningfully defined mathematics and computer programs.

>>16532043
>Reproduce Genesis as described in the OT.
reproduce some mythical narrative? what kind of retarded request is that?

>>16533306
Nobody has given any justification for it, so by Occam's razor I strike it down as being needlessly complicated for no reason.

>>16533380
>he still thinks numbers exist
>he still thinks computers run on ancient pedo magic
the best time to kys was before you made the thread
the second best time is now

>>16533319
you can make no judgment about consciousness of anything else in the universe except yourself. yes, including humans.

>>16533319
>he thinks consciousness is mental processes like decision making or speech
Dumb retard. You make most of your decisions unconsciously. You can talk in your sleep.

>>16532006
Why was it arranged in that way? what are the chances?

>>16533319
>This argument sure aged poorly.
To be fair ChatGP isn't concious.
It's just an AI mindlessly copying and retelling human speech that it scraped from the internet lol.
Not even the most inhuman autistics amongst mankind do this.

>>16533380
>the specific arrangement is a turing complete system in bulk.
Turing completeness is irrelevant in real world computers and brains though,
It's only possible with infinite memory and no computation system has infinite memory.
>A turing complete system in bulk is like a little platos realm
Turing completeness has absolutely nothing to do with Plato's conception of the soul which by the way is totally different from the Christian concept of the soul.
You're a schizophrenic imbecile.
>reproduce some mythical narrative? what kind of retarded request is that?
Christians like you think Genesis is a literal description of how this universe was formed.
You don't consider it a mythical narrative.
You consider it objective fact.
That's why you must now experimentally prove it by recreating it in the lab.
I'm holding you up to your own standards Christ-tard anon.
>>16533684
>you can make no judgment about consciousness of anything else in the universe except yourself. yes, including humans.
So you're mentally incapable of determining whether or not somebody else is conscious and awake?
Lol. That's hilarious.
>>16533697
>Dumb retard. You make most of your decisions unconsciously. You can talk in your sleep.
Well no. Some are ONLY made in a conscious state. I may snore and fart in my sleep but I only read books when I'm awake and conscious.

>>16533751
>I only read books when I'm awake and conscious.
Are you sure? Maybe you read them while unconscious as well but you have no recollection afterwards.

>>16533746
>Why was it arranged in that way? what are the chances?
You can say the exact same thing about crystals.
In fact this is why many New-Age religions think that crystals are alive. The wrongfully deduce that anything with spontaneous regular order must be god created and alive.

>>16530847
You're silly!

>>16533751
>Turing completeness is irrelevant in real world computers and brains though,
>Turing completeness is only possible with infinite memory and no computation system has infinite memory.
lmaoing at your life right now

>>16533759
>Are you sure?
I've never been caught sleep-reading or sleep-walking. I've also never ever heard of somebody sleep-reading and then wondering how they suddenly acquired new knowledge in the morning.
That would definitely be a wonderful skill to have though.
It's outside of human capability right now.

>>16533765
>lmaoing at your life right now
That's not a valid argument anon.

"To show that something is Turing-complete, it is enough to demonstrate that it can be used to simulate some Turing-complete system. No physical system can have infinite memory, but if the limitation of finite memory is ignored, most programming languages are otherwise Turing-complete."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turing_completeness

>>16533760
Why is there a regular order again?

>>16533777
>Why is there a regular order again?
Because atoms of different elements exist and react with each other.
When I drop a handful of marbles on the ground their movements may seem random but they aren't. It doesn't require god.
When I store marbles in a box they form grid like structure on their own after I shake the box for a few seconds. Complex but perfectly logical behavior from non-living physical objects. Once again doesn't require god.
See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sphere_packing

>>16530847
>snakes cant talk
Correct.
>nothing can explode and create everything
Correct, only fool would believe in Unmoved mover
>life can come from nothing
Correct that's why it came from dead matter
>consciousness can spring from dead matter if you make it complicated enough
Correct that why magic kike puffing at dirt isn't the origin of humanity
>the universe can be made of 98% invisible spooky ghost shit that can't be tested and only exists in simulations made by physicists coping
Correct, that's why literally no one belives that.

I'm glad we agree on everything OP!

>>16533773
>To show that something is Turing-complete, it is enough to demonstrate that it can be used to simulate some Turing-complete system
Yeah, this is just the statement that if a system like conway's game of life or microsoft excel can be shown to simulate another turing complete system, then microsoft excel and conway's game of life are turing complete, (which they are, by the way). It's just an obvious statement about what it takes to consider something a computer.

Turing completeness LITERALLY DEFINES what a computer is, you dingus. Your quote boils down to saying that something is considered to be turing complete when it can simulate any other turing-complete system with enough memory and time, it doesn't mean something has to have INFINITE MEMORY to be turing complete. The notion of infinite memory is just talking about computers running arbitrarily long programs, you halfwit.

>>16533817
>Yeah, this is just the statement that if a system like conway's game of life or microsoft excel can be shown to simulate another turing complete system, then microsoft excel and conway's game of life are turing complete

ONLY IF you ignore the finite memory.
In reality IT ISN'T Turing complete.
Nothing is actually Turing complete. It's an irrelevant concept.

>>16533817
>Turing completeness LITERALLY DEFINES what a computer is
Nope. Non-turing complete computers are still computers. It has absolutely nothing to do with what a computer is.
It's more of a theoretical test of computing power and ability.
>>16533817
>it doesn't mean something has to have INFINITE MEMORY to be turing complete
>>16533773
>No physical system can have infinite memory, but if the limitation of finite memory is ignored, most programming languages are otherwise Turing-complete
>>16533773
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turing_completeness

...

>>16533751
>So you're mentally incapable of determining whether or not somebody else is conscious and awake?
>Lol. That's hilarious.
You're more hilarious because you think you can, but you can't. At least I'm able to admit that I don't know.

>>16533925
>You're more hilarious because you think you can, but you can't.
Lol. So you're an autistic grey alien from another galaxy that's never seen a sleeping, dead or comatose human?
>At least I'm able to admit that I don't know.
Or maybe you are a legit reptile that learned how to access the internet lol.

>>16533942
Tell me, how do you know that the other person is conscious while you talk to them?

>>16533905
>ONLY IF you ignore the finite memory.
>In reality IT ISN'T Turing complete.
>Nothing is actually Turing complete. It's an irrelevant concept.
Microsoft excel can, with enough memory and time, simulate any computational system, including your laptop and your brain. The property of being able to do this is called "faggot completeness" by some. Any system which can do this is considered "faggot-complete", and to prove that a system is faggot-complete you need only show that it can simulate another faggot-complete system. This is the property I cam considering here. There are many others (literally everyone) who call this property "turing completeness", and they talk about it because it's very useful in the REAL WORLD because you can't run arbitrary computer programs on non-turing complete systems, but you seem to think this term means something else, because YOU have brain-aids.

>Non-turing complete computers are still computers. It has absolutely nothing to do with what a computer is.
Faggot-completeness (others say turing-completeness) is FUNDAMENTAL to the notion of what makes a computer a computer. All computers are faggot-complete (others say turing-complete) with enough memory and time, or they are not computers, just incredibly shitty calculators.

>>16533262
so the delicious hamburger i ate could've been an illusion...

>>16533993
>most people don't know what they're talking about
impossible

>>16533964
>Tell me, how do you know that the other person is conscious while you talk to them?
They are talking to me and demonstrating thought that only a conscious person can demonstrate...

>>16533993
>Microsoft excel can, with enough memory and time, simulate any computational system
Yep, but it doesn't have infinite memory so it isn't Turing complete.
Also we don't have infinite time either.
So not Turing complete.
Nothing is actually Turing complete.
it's nothing more than a theoretical mind game.
It's completely irrelevant to real world computing.
>is FUNDAMENTAL to the notion of what makes a computer a computer
If Alan Turing died as a child absolutely nothing would have changed.
Computers already existed.
All the practical knowledge regarding computing.
(binary, tertiary, quaternary logic)
( clock cycles )
(Logic gate theory, cellular automaton, computer paper plotting, typing etc )
Basically all the fundamental practical concepts of modern computing were worked out by people that weren't Turing.
Konrad Zuse and Charles Babbage being examples.
Turing completeness is a completely irrelevant nothingburger.
Sad...

>>16534054
>>most people don't know what they're talking about
>impossible
Samefagging is a sign of mental illness OP.

>>16530847
Facts don’t care about your feelings. The universe does not make intuitive sense or be satisfying as a human driven narrative. If you can’t handle where the facts lead then don’t worry about it and get ready for your gas station shift tomorrow

>>16534130
you're just stupidly missing the whole point of what is meant by "infinite" and it's the type of confusion only an idiot who knows nothing about computers would have. Infinite in this sense just means arbitrary lengths of programs to be run, it's formal language.

Besides, we're not even talking about turing-completeness anymore, you moron, we're talking about faggot-completeness. I defined it in >>16533993 and as you can see it does not mention "infinite memory" or "infinite time". The notion of faggot-completeness in computational systems is extremely important and is in fact is what differentiates computational systems from dumb calculating instruments, because you can't run arbitrary computer programs on non-faggot-complete systems.

All computers in the world are truly faggot-complete. It is this property that defines them as such.

File: 54ljh.gif (2.09 MB, 720x404)

2.09 MB GIF

>>16534500
>>16534481
>>16534137

>>16534500
No computer is actually Turing complete anon.
We don't have infinite memory or processing time.
Too bad.
Go and cry on someone else's shoulder.

File: screencapture-boards-4cha(...).png (902 KB, 1920x5461)

902 KB PNG

>>16534681
>No computer is actually Turing complete anon.
Huh? What's that supposed to mean? Read it again, tard, I'm talking about "faggot-completeness", which as I'm sure you'll agree, is a totally different thing. See >>16533993

ALL computers are faggot-complete, you faggot.

>We don't have infinite memory or processing time.
No, no we certainly don't anon, you wretched popsci faggot, and luckily for us faggot-completeness demands no such thing. Again, imbecilic reading comprehension on your part.

I notice that you seem to think I'm someone else in the thread. Here's a screenshot to help you know who you're talking to. I know, I know, 4chan is hard. You'll get the hang of it.

>>16534719
>"faggot-completeness"
Kind of fitting since Turing was a faggot.
>luckily for us faggot-completeness demands no such thing
It does actually.
Too bad.
Life sucks for you I guess.
Nobody wants to use a theoretically "turing complete" computer that takes thousands of years to execute but can run any program.
A theoretically non-Turing complete computer that can run any practical program in a practical amount of time is always preferable in reality.
In reality no computer is Turing complete.
>I notice that you seem to think I'm someone else in the thread.
Your screen cap proves nothing autistic psychopath anon.

>>16534719
>>16534735
Both of you are gay-complete for eachother

>>16534735
>It does actually.
lawlz no it doesn't! where?

>Nobody wants to use a theoretically "turing complete" computer that takes thousands of years to execute but can run any program.
First of all, you myopic little pseud, we're talking about faggot-completeness. Know the difference.

Secondly, I JUST USED my faggot-complete computer to execute the program which sent this message to your withering eyeballs, and it took like a couple seconds, not thousands of years.

>In reality no computer is Turing complete.
Whatever the case, ALL computers in reality are faggot-complete, and that's all that really matters in the end.

>Your screen cap proves nothing autistic psychopath anon.
rofl

>>16534743
>Both of you are gay-complete for eachother
Lol.

>>16534749
>lawlz no it doesn't! where?
"No physical system can have infinite memory, but if the limitation of finite memory is ignored, most programming languages are otherwise Turing-complete"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turing_completeness

>>16534749
>First of all, you myopic little pseud, we're talking about faggot-completeness. Know the difference.

>Secondly, I JUST USED my faggot-complete computer to

>Whatever the case, ALL computers in reality are faggot-complete

Sounds like you're a faggot that's never going to contribute anything to computing. Much like Alan Turing. You sure do love talking about faggots.

>>16534137
I haven't posted in this thread since making it, except >>16532028
and >>16532061
and >>16532080
I always and without exception abandon my own threads.

>>16534811
>I always and without exception abandon my own threads.
By "returning" to say you've abandoned your threads?
Dude, you've been posting non-stop in your own stupid thread.
You're proof that autists are the worst liars ever.

>>16534818
Don't be so mean...maybe..he took a nap and forgot about it, hm, yes. Can the two anons continue their debate on the gay-completeness now?

>>16534804
>>"No physical system can have infinite memory, but if the limitation of finite memory is ignored, most programming languages are otherwise Turing-complete"
This statement applies to turing-complete systems, not faggot-complete systems. Try again, tweedle-dum!

>>16534818
Meds.

>>16534832
>This statement applies to turing-complete systems, not faggot-complete systems. Try again, tweedle-dum!
Lol, Now it's silly time because you couldn't defend your stupid opinions!!!
>>16534835
>Meds.
There are no meds that will cure your autism and generalized psychopathy anon.
I guess aim to treat others as you would like to be treated unless you're a masochist.

>>16535036
>Lol, Now it's silly time because you couldn't defend your stupid opinions!!!
That's funny because the only opinion I'm arguing here is that all computational systems in the real world are faggot-complete. You keep bringing up some shit about turing-completeness like a dementia patient, and I keep politely correcting you because I realize I am speaking to a victim of blunt-force trauma. It's eerie how you keep avoiding the subject of faggot-completeness, like you're too stupid or too scared to think about new concepts when faced with them. One more time for clarity--- faggot-completeness is the only thing I'm arguing about here.

>>16532006
Life is ambiguous in relation to matter, any retard that doesn't understand that upfront should politely quit the discussion and educate himself like a white civilized man of high standards.

>>16530847
Yeah pretty much

Incredulity isn't an argument homeboy

>>16530847
when the last remaining magnetar is complete ; big bang again?

>>16530847
>if I simplify a concept I barely understand down to absurdity, it sounds absurd
wow, good job OP
>>16533746
Why was it arranged in that way?
selection
>>16532028
You are aware that plenty of abiogenesis is backed up by experiments, right?

>>16530847
I want her to impale me with her gigantic futanari cock and then cum gallons in my ass and make me look her pregnant bitch (male). Hope that doesn't give her the ick tho haha.

>>16532087
denounce the talmud

>>16536334
>You are aware that plenty of abiogenesis is backed up by experiments, right?
Mindbroken by scientism. Synthesizing amino acids doesn't prove shit. There are amino acids in half the dead rocks floating around in space.
You can't even generate a basic short strand of non working RNA through those processes.

>>16536416
How old is the Earth, anon?

>>16532006
>>16532028
And don't forget that the lab will be inteligently created.

>>16530847
The only explanation for the existence of the world an us is a supernatural creation.

Another great argument is that the human genome is degenerating over time. We accumulate mutations (genetic copying mistakes) at a rapid paste.

And before you say "just select against it" - it's impossible - it happens all the time, IN EVERYONE. And to make it worse, we pass on a part of those mutations to our children.

As a consequence, every generation has more copying mistakes in their genomes as the previous one.

TL;DR: Evolution is the dumbest theory ever created.

Now go educate yourself and read John Sanford's "Genetic entropy". Here's a short video form:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eY98io7JH-c

>>16530847
>snake
Imagine failing this hard at perceiving the truth in genesis in spite of having the internet at one's disposal for investigating the associated symbolic language.

>>16536467
Symbolic language is just a post-modern reframing of the word of gosh almighty

>>16536416
>scientism
and you expect to be taken seriously?

>>16536416
>scientism
So when you get sick do you just not take medicine because it's a product of science?

File: oh no no no.gif (115 KB, 300x294)

115 KB GIF

>christcucks totally aren't astroturfing science
but
>Georges Lemaître, (1894-1966), Belgian cosmologist, Catholic priest, and father of the Big Bang theory.
If people they are so retarded that they cannot comprehend that atheism is objectively correct, I'm about to study satanism.

>>16536748
You will be taught nothing that you haven't already internalised and you are probably already practising most principles of it anyways.
>>16536694
>>16536698
You can tell that what you believe is nothing more than sentimentalism disguised, like some kind of pseudo religion, as is shown by the passion with which you uphold it, and by the hatred with which you go against whatever goes against your inclinations or passes your comprehension.

>>16537320
could you repeat that without niggerbabbling?

>>16536334
>>16533746
>>16533760
>selection
wrong. it only starts darwinian evolving after the system becomes faggot-complete. A faggot-complete system in bulk (with a little randomness thrown in) is the precise configuration needed, you're just saying random shit.

>They* wrongfully deduce that anything with spontaneous regular order must be god created and alive.
It might help them if you pointed out that the essential distinction between living and non-living systems is faggot-completeness--- the existence of information carrying molecules which are capable of transforming one another in a way that can be programmed to run any algorithm in principle.

>>16530847
>>nothing can explode and create everything
Assumption that the universe didn't already exist in a different state. Or that time and space operated the same way pre-big bang.

>>16537405
one that you have to be religious to make