When robots have babies….

Jul 6, 2012

—

When will robots be able to find their own food, eat and digest it so they don’t need energy supplied by some outside source (usually electricity)? When will robots be advanced enough to have babies? When will a scratch to the robots skin be programmed to heal like a cut to a human hand?

It is interesting that thousands of the best scientists and engineers work to build better robots, but we are not even close to achieving what happened by chance through evolution. Yea, right. Happened by chance.

Why is it most engineers/scientists believe in God? I work with lots of those kinds of people and almost all of them believe in God. Maybe it is because as we design high tech airplanes and helicopters we find that complex designs just don’t happen by chance. It takes teams of highly trained professionals to design and build high tech. But none of the high tech today comes close to the complexity of even one human cell.

One hundred years ago scientists thought a human cell was pretty simple. So when they said a cell came about by chance, people believed it. But now we know that a cell is so complex that we have not even come close to fully understanding it, much less designing and building one.

Leave a message, feel free to tell me I’m wrong.

There is an old saying “Wrestling with a pig in the mud is a lot like arguing with an engineer, after awhile you realize the pig loves it.”

Comments

49 responses to “When robots have babies….”

Tommy

July 8, 2012

Thanks for stopping by my blog the other day — and nice post!

Reply
1. Kalea
  
  October 16, 2012
  
  Just what the doctor oderred, thankity you!
  
  Reply
2. Jasemin
  
  October 19, 2012
  
  Oh yeah, faublous stuff there you!
  
  Reply
Kip Light

July 7, 2012

There is an old saying “Wrestling with a pig in the mud is a lot like arguing with an engineer, after awhile you realize the pig loves it.” 🙂 That saying applies to truck-drivers and lawyers, too. Nice piece. I’ve often wondered why my so called “educated” friends who are very knowledgeable in the science fields are often non-believers and will vehemently argue against the proposition that there is a God just because there is no physical evidence. I suppose they believe that man knows more than we really do. I, for one, am in agreement that there is absolutely no way we (or the universe) “just happened”.

Reply
1. Brad Stanton
  
  July 16, 2012
  
  Thanks for the comment, glad I’m not alone.
  
  Reply
poetryofamadman

July 7, 2012

If there is a creator it merely means that this creator is more advanced than us, so of course cells and organisms in general are so complex. All we have learned in science is based on what has already been presented to us. But there has been no evidence proving a creator and there is no way to disprove it, so it is ultimately irrelevant.

Reply
1. mike and brandy
  
  July 11, 2012
  
  “But there has been no evidence proving a creator and there is no way to disprove it, so it is ultimately irrelevant.”
  if one has truly looked for and at the evidences, one would be hard pressed or intellectually dishonest (sorry) to say either of these statements. we ‘prove’ the existence of a Creator by His creation just as we ‘prove’ or show our existence by our parents. even if we’ve never met or never known them, it would be foolish to deny their existence or their relevence to our lives.
  Atheists ‘know’ but refuse to admit they know- at least they are honest
  Agnostics say they don’t know/can’t know there is a God- they are not honest enough to keep looking or acknowledge the possibility.
  I’d rather be an honest atheist that a dishonest agnostic… better, an ‘honest seeker’, willing to be found by the God who is there and who wants to be found.
  
  Reply
  1. poetryofamadman
    
    July 11, 2012
    
    A person can know they have parents even if they have never seen theirs because they have seen that other people have parents and that’s where babies come from. Agnostics do acknowledge the possibility of a supreme being, we just don’t claim to know. Claiming to know something that you do not is ignorance. Even if there is a God, that still doesn’t prove that there is a human soul. When we die, the cells in our bodies break down and become part of the earth and other organisms. So God or no God, THAT is a fact. And your last line is absolute horse shit. If God wanted to be found, then there wouldn’t be any atheists or agnostics at all.
    
    Reply
    1. mike and brandy
      
      July 11, 2012
      
      “And your last line is absolute horse shit.”
      nice to see we all have equal ability to be civil and respectful of other’s opinions in an intellectually honest way. there is more than enough evidence out there for the ‘mind’ to accept the existence of and the benevolence of a creator, sustainer ‘God’. most people have ‘heart’ issues with truth rather than intellectual issues. your emotional and obsene reaction and might i say ‘intollerance’ seems to characterise the irrational nature of both denial of God’s existence (though you say you acknowledge it) and the Hope you have that He is irrelevant in the final analysis.
      I submit that you are either a dishonest atheist, unwilling to even stand for your lack of belief or a dishonest agnostic, unwilling to accept the implications and rational conclusions of the ‘possibility’ of God by denying His equally ‘possible’ relevance to your life.
      either way, i’m going to disengage from this line of discussion with you until you can respond with a respectful and non-abusive tone.
      -mike
      
      Reply
      1. poetryofamadman
        
        July 11, 2012
        
        You don’t even understand what being an agnostic means. I DO accept the possibility. And just because I said the word shit doesn’t mean I was being abusive.
        
        Reply
        
        mike and brandy
        
        July 11, 2012
        
        agnostic means to ‘not know’ or ‘not be knowable’, but for you to say ‘not relevant’ also would assume a knowledge based on something you say you don’t know. given your reaction i would say ‘not rational’ and ‘not intellectually honest’. sorry for asking for more consistency and logic than you allow yourself to have. either way, yes, after 23yrs as a christian theist and most of those as a bible teacher, apologist, street evangelist and missionary… i do know what an agnostic is and what an atheist is. but like i said, your ‘tone’ says to me that your reaction and argument is more heart ’emotional’ than ‘open minded, seeker’ intellectual. i won’t be engaging in further discussions without civility, respectful tone, and refraining from the abusive language.
        -mike
        
        Reply
        
        poetryofamadman
        
        July 11, 2012
        
        Good. Because you’re an idiot anyway who throws out a bunch of words without actually saying anything. Intellectually honest? What does that even mean? Nothing. Go fuck yourself.
        
        Reply
        
        Brad Stanton
        
        July 12, 2012
        
        don’t u think the second law of thermodynamics shows evolution to be impossible?
        
        Reply
        
        poetryofamadman
        
        July 13, 2012
        
        I’m not familiar with it, and I’m not a scientist. But the evidence for evolution is much stronger than the no evidence at all of an Adam and Eve type situation.
        
        Reply
        
        Brad Stanton
        
        July 16, 2012
        
        There isn’t any evidence for evolution that I know of. There are no fossils of any missing links and no one has ever found a missing link. Occasionally someone thinks they have found a missing link, but always half a year later or a year later the scientists say, “oops we made another mistake.” Tell me one thing that is evidence for evolution. Before you post it go to http://www.answersingenesis.org/ and see what they say about it.
        
        Jason Alan
        
        July 17, 2012
        
        You have no idea how ignorant you are. I’m done with this conversation.
        
        Irene
        
        October 15, 2012
        
        Thanks , I have recently been srnhceiag for info about this subject for ages and yours is the best I have discovered so far. But, what about the conclusion? Are you sure about the source?
        
        Reply
        
        Betsey
        
        October 19, 2012
        
        I guess finding useful, reliable information on the internet isn’t hopelses after all.
        
        Reply
      2. Brad Stanton
        
        July 12, 2012
        
        well, don’t u think the second law of thermodynamics shows that evolution could not have happened? How familiar are you with that?
        
        Reply
  2. Brad Stanton
    
    July 12, 2012
    
    How can u be sure sure there is no hell? It is not irrelevant at all if it is real. U sure don’t want to go there is there is any chance at all that it is real. If you can prove there is no hell, then all this is irrelevant, but otherwise, it is extremely relevant. But thanks for your comment.
    
    Reply
    1. mike and brandy
      
      July 12, 2012
      
      brother brad,
      thanks for the discussion and allowing participation. I absolutely believe there is a hell and the second law of TD is my favorite when discussing evolution and origins of the universe. as they say with entropy “nothing comes from nothing” and “rust don’t make sky scrapers”
      Evolutionists and naturalists say 1) “all came from nothing” 2) all is static, uncreated and always existant or 3) they postulate the ‘bounce’. cycles of big bang, expansion, implosion and big bang again. but they fail and will wiggle like a greased pig to answer how ‘all’ is here in the first place. (infinite regress in time is an absurdity… eternity only happens one direction..forward in time) naturalists and evolutionists cannot answer the question of origins without religious ‘faith’ in self generation, eventhough natural law and ‘science’ forbids it.
      
      Reply
      1. Brad Stanton
        
        July 16, 2012
        
        Thanks for your comment. very interesting, and thanks for responding to Poetryofamadman
        
        Reply
shermangerherd

July 7, 2012

From a (former) engineer to another—YOU ARE RIGHT! It is the ‘un-experienced’ college professors that believe in crap.
BTW. I guess you know how to spot an engineer in a crowd?

Reply
keerthikasingaravel

July 7, 2012

Here’s my take on God and science.I’m a lowly civil engineer and not really on the cutting edge of science.But I was force fed enough quantum physics as a student to figure out that my prof. at least didn’t have all the answers.
My reasoning is that we don’t know enough to disprove the existence of God.So its safest to believe, if only to avoid hell or a nasty rebirth.And even if we ultimately disprove the existence of God,a belief in God or Gods, spirituality,destiny,karma etc will help us in times of crisis by giving us hope,So a belief in God is a pretty useful thing to have.

Reply
1. Brad Stanton
  
  July 16, 2012
  
  yes i know what you mean, very good point
  
  Reply
2. Brad Stanton
  
  July 17, 2012
  
  some say “civil” and “engineer” are a contradiction in terms. Just joking.
  
  Reply
  1. keerthikasingaravel
    
    July 17, 2012
    
    We had another joke
    Civil-Corruption Is Very Important In Life
    
    Reply
    1. Sarmishtha
      
      October 15, 2012
      
      – I love the color and clarity of this image and what a cool Mom you are! Looks like you may have quite the fihsaon forward thinker on your hands. This is just lovely Amanda.
      
      Reply
    2. zoszaja
      
      October 16, 2012
      
      XjCesT eafspfxsxtkm
      
      Reply
jcgator1

July 7, 2012

So very true. Great perspective! I like to take strolls through the park or even “nature lined” streets. All i have to do is look at a simple leaf and think about the complexity of how that leaf is working to realize that, its function is very purposeful. For “evolution” to spontaneously create one type of intelligent accident, well that maybe could happen, but to look at the whole gamut of complex living organisms and say all of it was an accident…well, that’s just statistically impossible.

Reply
Jane

July 7, 2012

nothing to argue about…you are absolutely right, and doubt any man of science these days would argue with you….it becomes clearer with each passing advance in science that some sort of Higher Divine Power is at work here, and always has been. Just nice that it gets said once in awhile and you said it succinctly and concisely.
with love light and JOY

Reply
Av

July 7, 2012

you are forgetting doctors who think about GOD everytime they stand in the operation theatre. But yes, it’s an interesting analogy that scientists and Engineers too are GOD fearing. They all need the HAND OF GOD to make their inventions work. !!

Reply
1. Brad Stanton
  
  July 16, 2012
  
  thanks for the comment
  
  Reply
mike and brandy

July 7, 2012

thankfully, the difference between us and robots is the ‘principle of Life’. we live and move and have our being by the daily, moment by moment supply of Life given by the hand of the Father. Life includes the ability to ‘seed’ it to the next generation and the freedom to participate freely in relationship not only ‘to’ but also ‘with’ the creator sustainer God.
Jesus restores this relationship of love, trust, Life Provision in the Spirit as a ‘fruit’ of the Atoning Work on the Cross…paying the penalty for and cancelling ‘Sin’ and lawlessness as the ‘death principle’ mankind lives by without that relationship.
Praise God that He could have, but would not live without that vital relationship with His creation. Now we are truly free to draw our every breath and heartbeat as from the very Life of Jesus.

thx for dropping by our blog to make a comment as well…
-mike

Reply
lenwilliamscarver

July 6, 2012

my uncle Don may he rest in peace was an aeronautical engineer, he believed in God and had a deep faith in God and NASA. But he always told us helicopters were not designed to fly. The aeronautical museum in Louisana has the plane he designed and flew as it is very unique.

Reply