<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Why is it necessary to have a creator?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.yash.info/blog/index.php/atheism/why-is-it-necessary-to-have-a-creator/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.yash.info/blog/index.php/atheism/why-is-it-necessary-to-have-a-creator</link>
	<description>Yash's adventures with life, business and technology</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 01 Feb 2012 13:58:57 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Trance Gemini</title>
		<link>http://www.yash.info/blog/index.php/atheism/why-is-it-necessary-to-have-a-creator/comment-page-1#comment-582</link>
		<dc:creator>Trance Gemini</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 03 Apr 2008 13:38:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.yash.info/blog/index.php/atheism/why-is-it-necessary-to-have-a-creator/#comment-582</guid>
		<description>Great article. I&#039;d like to take it one step further. 

Everything changes and evolves. Our existing universe is in a constant state of flux. 

Why does their have to be a beginning?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Great article. I&#8217;d like to take it one step further. </p>
<p>Everything changes and evolves. Our existing universe is in a constant state of flux. </p>
<p>Why does their have to be a beginning?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Yash</title>
		<link>http://www.yash.info/blog/index.php/atheism/why-is-it-necessary-to-have-a-creator/comment-page-1#comment-580</link>
		<dc:creator>Yash</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 27 Mar 2008 06:10:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.yash.info/blog/index.php/atheism/why-is-it-necessary-to-have-a-creator/#comment-580</guid>
		<description>&quot;In your search for simplicity, you oversimplified.&quot; well that summarises the story.

Anyway my point was that complex things can come into existence ON THEIR OWN. Now whether they come up by chance or by selection is not that important at least in the context of this article. The important factor is that a creator is not involved in the emergence of complex things.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;In your search for simplicity, you oversimplified.&#8221; well that summarises the story.</p>
<p>Anyway my point was that complex things can come into existence ON THEIR OWN. Now whether they come up by chance or by selection is not that important at least in the context of this article. The important factor is that a creator is not involved in the emergence of complex things.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Warren Lockhart</title>
		<link>http://www.yash.info/blog/index.php/atheism/why-is-it-necessary-to-have-a-creator/comment-page-1#comment-579</link>
		<dc:creator>Warren Lockhart</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 26 Mar 2008 23:21:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.yash.info/blog/index.php/atheism/why-is-it-necessary-to-have-a-creator/#comment-579</guid>
		<description>Well of course, you are absolutely right, mutation is a random process (with some exceptions, as biologists will tell you). My claim was simply as you say: the selection is not random. In fact, the word selection is defined so that something or someone influences the preference of one item (gene in this case) over another. 

I must say, it doesn&#039;t really matter how the mutations arise. Generally speaking they are randomly generated and usually very harmful - but only the genes which are beneficial survive, and this makes the whole process, evolution by natural selection, emphatically not random. My bone to pick with you was simply how you are presenting this to the public - to declare the randomness of it all is to give bullets to fire to those who do not understand evolution.

Your final statement (&quot;But since evolution is a product of mutation, for the sake of simplicity we can say that evolution is a random process&quot;) I&#039;m sorry to say is absurd. Evolution is absolutely NOT a product of a random set of mutations. Evolution is the product of only a very tiny number of mutations which make it - the rest were disgarded and do not contribute to evolution in any way. In your search for simplicity, you oversimplified.

If I shuffled a pack of cards, taking a selection each time of black cards which are less visible to card-eating predators, and then reshuffling, my end product in not a product of the initial randomness - it is a product of the selection. The source of the inital variation is irrelevant, except in the sense that it provides us with our options for selection, nothing more. Chance never results in increasing complexity (note that complexity is not the same as &#039;order&#039; - entropy can decrease locally).

If I seem to be coming on strong it is because this is of paramount importance. I take issue with your final sentence in particular, and I hope you can see where I am coming from.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well of course, you are absolutely right, mutation is a random process (with some exceptions, as biologists will tell you). My claim was simply as you say: the selection is not random. In fact, the word selection is defined so that something or someone influences the preference of one item (gene in this case) over another. </p>
<p>I must say, it doesn&#8217;t really matter how the mutations arise. Generally speaking they are randomly generated and usually very harmful &#8211; but only the genes which are beneficial survive, and this makes the whole process, evolution by natural selection, emphatically not random. My bone to pick with you was simply how you are presenting this to the public &#8211; to declare the randomness of it all is to give bullets to fire to those who do not understand evolution.</p>
<p>Your final statement (&#8220;But since evolution is a product of mutation, for the sake of simplicity we can say that evolution is a random process&#8221;) I&#8217;m sorry to say is absurd. Evolution is absolutely NOT a product of a random set of mutations. Evolution is the product of only a very tiny number of mutations which make it &#8211; the rest were disgarded and do not contribute to evolution in any way. In your search for simplicity, you oversimplified.</p>
<p>If I shuffled a pack of cards, taking a selection each time of black cards which are less visible to card-eating predators, and then reshuffling, my end product in not a product of the initial randomness &#8211; it is a product of the selection. The source of the inital variation is irrelevant, except in the sense that it provides us with our options for selection, nothing more. Chance never results in increasing complexity (note that complexity is not the same as &#8216;order&#8217; &#8211; entropy can decrease locally).</p>
<p>If I seem to be coming on strong it is because this is of paramount importance. I take issue with your final sentence in particular, and I hope you can see where I am coming from.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Yash</title>
		<link>http://www.yash.info/blog/index.php/atheism/why-is-it-necessary-to-have-a-creator/comment-page-1#comment-578</link>
		<dc:creator>Yash</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 26 Mar 2008 07:22:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.yash.info/blog/index.php/atheism/why-is-it-necessary-to-have-a-creator/#comment-578</guid>
		<description>Warren Lockhart:

Though I am not a biologist, I would argue that to a certain extent evolution IS a random process. Mutation is what makes evolution possible and mutation I believe is a random process. Some genes behave in a different way, some chromosomes get placed at a certain place in the DNA, or some chemical process alters something in a gene, and you have a new feature in a species or a completely new species. That&#039;s mutation and that is completely random. And when one of the mutant gene happens to be better suited for survival than the original one, slowly the carrier of the original gene become extinct and the mutant gene survives. That&#039;s evolution.

Evolution is made possible because of mutation which is a random process. Mutations take place all the time, in all the species, all around us. Don&#039;t we see a &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/story/0,22049,23119591-5001028,00.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;five legged cat&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;http://news.softpedia.com/news/A-Four-Legged-Baby-Born-in-South-Africa-59252.shtml&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;four legged baby&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.google.com/search?q=humans+with+tails&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;humans with tails&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;http://news.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,91059-1280981,00.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;a two headed cow&lt;/a&gt; and similar live examples of mutation around us? It happens all the time, randomly. Tomorrow if circumstances change due to some external factor and two legged humans become unfit for survival then who knows may be a new age of three or four legged humans will come and two legged humans will sink into extinction! Just how dinosaurs disappeared because they couldn&#039;t withstand the changes in the earth&#039;s environment due to an asteroid&#039;s collision and dropping of the temperature. Mammals were able to survive during that period because they were warm blooded and were smaller in size so they had lesser food requirements - better suited for survival. Emergence of mammals, must have been a result of mutation in early life forms. Later on it proved to be more fit for survival than the dinosaurs.

So I disagree with you on randomness because mutation is random. BUT whether the mutant gene survives or not is not by chance, it is by natural selection or by human or other selection. So I agree that evolution is not a chance process in its entirety. Mutation is random, evolution is not. But since evolution is a product of mutation, for the sake of simplicity we can say that evolution is a random process.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Warren Lockhart:</p>
<p>Though I am not a biologist, I would argue that to a certain extent evolution IS a random process. Mutation is what makes evolution possible and mutation I believe is a random process. Some genes behave in a different way, some chromosomes get placed at a certain place in the DNA, or some chemical process alters something in a gene, and you have a new feature in a species or a completely new species. That&#8217;s mutation and that is completely random. And when one of the mutant gene happens to be better suited for survival than the original one, slowly the carrier of the original gene become extinct and the mutant gene survives. That&#8217;s evolution.</p>
<p>Evolution is made possible because of mutation which is a random process. Mutations take place all the time, in all the species, all around us. Don&#8217;t we see a <a href="http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/story/0,22049,23119591-5001028,00.html" rel="nofollow">five legged cat</a>, <a href="http://news.softpedia.com/news/A-Four-Legged-Baby-Born-in-South-Africa-59252.shtml" rel="nofollow">four legged baby</a>, <a href="http://www.google.com/search?q=humans+with+tails" rel="nofollow">humans with tails</a>, <a href="http://news.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,91059-1280981,00.html" rel="nofollow">a two headed cow</a> and similar live examples of mutation around us? It happens all the time, randomly. Tomorrow if circumstances change due to some external factor and two legged humans become unfit for survival then who knows may be a new age of three or four legged humans will come and two legged humans will sink into extinction! Just how dinosaurs disappeared because they couldn&#8217;t withstand the changes in the earth&#8217;s environment due to an asteroid&#8217;s collision and dropping of the temperature. Mammals were able to survive during that period because they were warm blooded and were smaller in size so they had lesser food requirements &#8211; better suited for survival. Emergence of mammals, must have been a result of mutation in early life forms. Later on it proved to be more fit for survival than the dinosaurs.</p>
<p>So I disagree with you on randomness because mutation is random. BUT whether the mutant gene survives or not is not by chance, it is by natural selection or by human or other selection. So I agree that evolution is not a chance process in its entirety. Mutation is random, evolution is not. But since evolution is a product of mutation, for the sake of simplicity we can say that evolution is a random process.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Paul J. Klein</title>
		<link>http://www.yash.info/blog/index.php/atheism/why-is-it-necessary-to-have-a-creator/comment-page-1#comment-577</link>
		<dc:creator>Paul J. Klein</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 26 Mar 2008 04:20:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.yash.info/blog/index.php/atheism/why-is-it-necessary-to-have-a-creator/#comment-577</guid>
		<description>Hey Aint Punk - (lern 2 spel dilhole or aint u herd that aint aint a werd?) I doubt you&#039;ll ever read this, as my comment is a month late - but it still needs to be said...  See if you can wrap your fat ego around this:  

Since any number divided by zero equals infinity then (reversing the equation) infinity times zero equals any number - so - in the end - the probability that zero times infinity would equal zero is next to near impossible (a virtual inevitability within an infinite number of possibilities - even negative numbers would apply here)...  So yes - nothing exists - LITERALLY.  You could even substitute apple pies for &quot;any number&quot; as zero is not a number and neither is infinity for that matter........ and that&#039;s the werd.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hey Aint Punk &#8211; (lern 2 spel dilhole or aint u herd that aint aint a werd?) I doubt you&#8217;ll ever read this, as my comment is a month late &#8211; but it still needs to be said&#8230;  See if you can wrap your fat ego around this:  </p>
<p>Since any number divided by zero equals infinity then (reversing the equation) infinity times zero equals any number &#8211; so &#8211; in the end &#8211; the probability that zero times infinity would equal zero is next to near impossible (a virtual inevitability within an infinite number of possibilities &#8211; even negative numbers would apply here)&#8230;  So yes &#8211; nothing exists &#8211; LITERALLY.  You could even substitute apple pies for &#8220;any number&#8221; as zero is not a number and neither is infinity for that matter&#8230;&#8230;.. and that&#8217;s the werd.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: colleenmike</title>
		<link>http://www.yash.info/blog/index.php/atheism/why-is-it-necessary-to-have-a-creator/comment-page-1#comment-576</link>
		<dc:creator>colleenmike</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 25 Mar 2008 15:55:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.yash.info/blog/index.php/atheism/why-is-it-necessary-to-have-a-creator/#comment-576</guid>
		<description>aint punk, what is right?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>aint punk, what is right?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Will</title>
		<link>http://www.yash.info/blog/index.php/atheism/why-is-it-necessary-to-have-a-creator/comment-page-1#comment-575</link>
		<dc:creator>Will</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 24 Mar 2008 23:49:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.yash.info/blog/index.php/atheism/why-is-it-necessary-to-have-a-creator/#comment-575</guid>
		<description>&quot;aint punk&quot;, perhaps you should learn English before criticizing others. 

I see here a well thought out article, and a comment from someone who cannot master basic punctuation. Guess who wins? :)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;aint punk&#8221;, perhaps you should learn English before criticizing others. </p>
<p>I see here a well thought out article, and a comment from someone who cannot master basic punctuation. Guess who wins? <img src='http://www.yash.info/blog/smilies/yahoo_smiley.gif' alt='&#58;&#41;' class='wp-smiley' width='18' height='18' title='&#58;&#41;' /></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: God is an idea</title>
		<link>http://www.yash.info/blog/index.php/atheism/why-is-it-necessary-to-have-a-creator/comment-page-1#comment-574</link>
		<dc:creator>God is an idea</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 24 Mar 2008 23:48:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.yash.info/blog/index.php/atheism/why-is-it-necessary-to-have-a-creator/#comment-574</guid>
		<description>God is not part of reality. Reality exists independent of human thought. God does not exist outside of menâ€™s minds therefore god is not real. Furthermore, absence is evidence of absence.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>God is not part of reality. Reality exists independent of human thought. God does not exist outside of menâ€™s minds therefore god is not real. Furthermore, absence is evidence of absence.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Astonished</title>
		<link>http://www.yash.info/blog/index.php/atheism/why-is-it-necessary-to-have-a-creator/comment-page-1#comment-572</link>
		<dc:creator>Astonished</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 24 Mar 2008 20:24:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.yash.info/blog/index.php/atheism/why-is-it-necessary-to-have-a-creator/#comment-572</guid>
		<description>While the original poster poorly attempts to phrase the old question of first cause, it&#039;s obvious they have an open, questioning mind. The lone comment I found is what amazes me. Aint Punk spews fourth an unreadable mess of words that I had to attempt to translate. Since it took so much effort, I thought I would give the translation for future readers.

&quot;Dude you are wrong as wrong as it could get you see all your argument is based on the ego that your fat brain has what I would recommend is to cut your baseless crap and admit your argument is wrong and the argument about something coming to existence by chance is stupid go to your school again and start learning from the scratch because you know nothing about science&quot;

means:

Dude, you are as wrong as wrong can get. You see, all your arguments are based on the ego of your fat brain. I would recommend you cut your baseless crap, admit your argument is wrong and start again from scratch. The idea of existence by chance is stupid. Go back to school and learn science, since it is obvious you know nothing about it now.

I would suggest that Aint Punk consider going back to school and learn English, grammar and punctuation. Afterwards he might want to take some science courses himself. Until that happens, anything he says will only make him look the fool.

First cause is not something that we are going to settle any time soon. What we do know is that the universe is immensely large and old, so much so that most people cannot grasp this. We know that complex things often arise from simple things all by themselves. A snowflake is unique and complex, yet it is the result of some very basic laws of physics. Man created the idea of god because he wants the answers to &quot;why&quot; and we lacked the tools to learn the answers to those questions. As time goes by mankind, through science, slowly answers these questions, filling in the blanks as we can. It&#039;s easy, lazy and comforting to give the answer &quot;God did it&quot;, but not to fulfilling unless this God decides to show up and say hi. So far this has not happened. Until it does, I shall remain agnostic and try to help my fellow human rise above the muck we are all born in.

Oh, and I will try not to call anyone &quot;Dude&quot;.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>While the original poster poorly attempts to phrase the old question of first cause, it&#8217;s obvious they have an open, questioning mind. The lone comment I found is what amazes me. Aint Punk spews fourth an unreadable mess of words that I had to attempt to translate. Since it took so much effort, I thought I would give the translation for future readers.</p>
<p>&#8220;Dude you are wrong as wrong as it could get you see all your argument is based on the ego that your fat brain has what I would recommend is to cut your baseless crap and admit your argument is wrong and the argument about something coming to existence by chance is stupid go to your school again and start learning from the scratch because you know nothing about science&#8221;</p>
<p>means:</p>
<p>Dude, you are as wrong as wrong can get. You see, all your arguments are based on the ego of your fat brain. I would recommend you cut your baseless crap, admit your argument is wrong and start again from scratch. The idea of existence by chance is stupid. Go back to school and learn science, since it is obvious you know nothing about it now.</p>
<p>I would suggest that Aint Punk consider going back to school and learn English, grammar and punctuation. Afterwards he might want to take some science courses himself. Until that happens, anything he says will only make him look the fool.</p>
<p>First cause is not something that we are going to settle any time soon. What we do know is that the universe is immensely large and old, so much so that most people cannot grasp this. We know that complex things often arise from simple things all by themselves. A snowflake is unique and complex, yet it is the result of some very basic laws of physics. Man created the idea of god because he wants the answers to &#8220;why&#8221; and we lacked the tools to learn the answers to those questions. As time goes by mankind, through science, slowly answers these questions, filling in the blanks as we can. It&#8217;s easy, lazy and comforting to give the answer &#8220;God did it&#8221;, but not to fulfilling unless this God decides to show up and say hi. So far this has not happened. Until it does, I shall remain agnostic and try to help my fellow human rise above the muck we are all born in.</p>
<p>Oh, and I will try not to call anyone &#8220;Dude&#8221;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jon</title>
		<link>http://www.yash.info/blog/index.php/atheism/why-is-it-necessary-to-have-a-creator/comment-page-1#comment-571</link>
		<dc:creator>Jon</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 24 Mar 2008 18:51:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.yash.info/blog/index.php/atheism/why-is-it-necessary-to-have-a-creator/#comment-571</guid>
		<description>Wow aint punk, by name calling and crying your argument seems reasonable. Yah, thanks for opening my eyes to the miracles of this world through your God inspired testament of reason.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Wow aint punk, by name calling and crying your argument seems reasonable. Yah, thanks for opening my eyes to the miracles of this world through your God inspired testament of reason.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Served from: www.yash.info @ 2012-02-07 21:31:23 by W3 Total Cache -->
