Confident people...How or Why?

[GodsDaughter1]

Confident people...How or Why?

Is it in one's DNA structure that determines one's confidence level, is it inherited, is it natural, how does one's confidence come about?

I'm a confident person, but, how am I confident under situational circumstances, or why am I confident and not doubtful? Is my confidence something inherited? Why should I be confident in myself? What are the reasons other than obvious reasons?

[Tomas]

-God's #1 Daughter-
Is it in one's DNA structure that determines one's confidence level, is it inherited, is it natural, how does one's confidence come about?

-tomas-
When I popped outta my momma's oven I waaw'd and wailed, "Self, what's happening?? - it all seems so real."


-God's #1 Daughter-
I'm a confident person, but, how am I confident under situational circumstances, or why am I confident and not doubtful?

-tomas-
Well then, somebody started puttin' a diaper on this yungin', whoa there momma, do you know who you messin' with?


-God's #1 Daughter-
Is my confidence something inherited?

-tomas-
Pretty soon enough I started crappin' and pissin' all over me'self and them diapers started smellin' mighty ripe...


-God's #1 Daughter-
Why should I be confident in myself?

-tomas-
Momma done took off those nasty diapers and then I peed straight up like Old Faithful and like clockwork it done happened the next hour, too!


-God's #1 Daughter-
What are the reasons other than obvious reasons?

-tomas-
Figger'd out right quick that my stay in the Garden of Eden was wearin' mighty thin with my momma. My pops would have nothin' to do with me till I started wearin' those training pants.

Moral of the story? - Find a low-wage babysitter. The neighbor a couple farm's away, who had a 20-something daughter who would be going to Africa to mission to those people who'd never heard the name of Jesus. She sat with me for a couple months many stories one of which was something of the "reed and boat story" of how Moses was found in the Nile.

Confidence? Now I'm cured and I don't pee my pants ;-)

[Ryan Rudolph]

I suppose it all depends on what one is confident about. For instance: Hitler was incredibly confident, but the source of his confidence was delusion, false belief, and an egotistical assumption that he was chosen, protected and destined for great things. Belief in oneself is usually rooted in emotion, not fact. and emotion can be a dangerous delusion. However, if you do have some extraordinarily ability, you can have confidence in that ability, but usually people make unrealistic goals about what they can achieve in the material world with that ability.

A person without doubt and skepticism usually has a confidence that is rooted more in fantasy than reality.

[GodsDaughter1]

I suppose it all depends on what one is confident about. For instance: Hitler was incredibly confident, but the source of his confidence was delusion, false belief, and an egotistical assumption that he was chosen, protected and destined for great things. Belief in oneself is usually rooted in emotion, not fact. and emotion can be a dangerous delusion. However, if you do have some extraordinarily ability, you can have confidence in that ability, but usually people make unrealistic goals about what they can achieve in the material world with that ability.

A person without doubt and skepticism usually has a confidence that is rooted more in fantasy than reality.

GodsDaughter says: I don't believe that statement at all, I am a person without doubt, and my thinking is clear, concise, reality. A person without doubt is a person like myself accurate in thinking, which then naturally contributes to confidence!

GodsDaughter says: Just look where Hitlers confidence took him, he was a highly influential person. However, his ego was being fed by his followers. I think that people who are confident in themselves are gifted, as you say extraordinary ability.

GodsDaughter says: Just today I went up to a woman sitting in Tim Hortons, I commented on her child telling her that my friend thought she might be four while I thought she was two, the woman said the child was two and a half. I then said, she's brilliant, the child is brilliant. The child looked straight up in my eyes and answered in front of everyone, "I know that" I wasn't a bit surprised by this child's response, I could see how bright she was from observing her from across the room.

I think confidence is something you're born with, this two and a half year old exuberated confidence, she appeared to be highly perceptive, highly social, she looked like a miniture adult.

[Ryan Rudolph]

But what are you confident about though? your ability to charm people, and adapt and rise to the top of an insane world. My point is that many confident people are the ones usually doing the most damage to the world because they are not doubtful and skeptical of their very nature, which is evil and animal by nature.

Just look at the insane world we live in, it is the product of many confident people not questioning their own behavior.

Wisdom is born of of its intense understanding of how flawed and imperfect our species is. Anything else is mere egotism disguised as something more noble.

[GodsDaughter1]

But what are you confident about though? your ability to charm people, and adapt and rise to the top of an insane world. My point is that many confident people are the ones usually doing the most damage to the world because they are not doubtful and skeptical of their very nature, which is evil and animal by nature.

Just look at the insane world we live in, it is the product of many confident people not questioning their own behavior.

Wisdom is born of of its intense understanding of how flawed and imperfect our species is. Anything else is mere egotism disguised as something more noble.

GodsDaughter says: I disagree with wisdom then, because, I don't believe one little iota that our species is imperfect or flawed in any way, prove to me our species is flawed or imperfect, and I'll tell you whether it's bullshit or not!

What flaw or imperfection determines an imperfect child? The medical field has knowledge of this, so my question is, is it the incompatibility of DNA that creates this imperfection between two people producing an imperfect child, and if so, couldn't the medical field stop imperfections from happening through education? For instance, couldn't people have blood tests before having a baby to determine the healthiness of the fetus? Can the medical field stop imperfections in birth? Did humanity cause our flaws or imperfections, and can humanity fix the problem? The Bible speaks that everything God created is good. Am I to think the Bible being God's word is bullshit?
The Bible is what I believe in, but, I also believe in what makes sense to me.

You always get me going Ryan, now I'm on a role, and I question question question!





GodsDaughter says: I'm confident about everything since you asked. I won't go into detail, however, that's an interesting observation that you think "many confident people are the ones usually doing the most damage to the world because they are not doubtful and skeptical of their very nature, which is evil and animal by nature"

So in other words if they realized they were evil they'd likely do a better job? Is this what I hear you saying? Very interesting yes indeed!

I'm totally confident in myself to the point that I could lead a group, but, not a country, yet, I feel I could influence the world with my common sense.

[cousinbasil]

For instance, couldn't people have blood tests before having a baby to determine the healthiness of the fetus? Can the medical field stop imperfections in birth? Did humanity cause our flaws or imperfections, and can humanity fix the problem? The Bible speaks that everything God created is good. Am I to think the Bible being God's word is bullshit?

The Bible is not God's word, that much I know.

[GodsDaughter1]

For instance, couldn't people have blood tests before having a baby to determine the healthiness of the fetus? Can the medical field stop imperfections in birth? Did humanity cause our flaws or imperfections, and can humanity fix the problem? The Bible speaks that everything God created is good. Am I to think the Bible being God's word is bullshit?

The Bible is not God's word, that much I know.

GodsDaughter says: How can it be proven that the Bible is not God's word? I seriously doubt it could be proven. I know it seems ridiculous to believe the Bible is God's word, but, when I doubted it's contents, the Lord would show me the light. The light is God's word, the Bible is the light.

What do you know that might, might not, or could, convince me that the Bible is not God's word cousinbasil? Remember, I have the right to know what man perceives as truth, I want to know what you know, so I can decide if it's truth or not. Lets see if you have what it takes to take my mind away from God? I doubt man could prove the Bible is not God's word! Because I believe God's word is truth, and no one is smarter than God!

[Ryan Rudolph]

I wouldn't use the bible as your only source of information. You need to read psychology, biology, and the sciences that offer explanations and observations of human behavior.

Man is imperfect. That is a irrefutable fact. He is greedy, self-serving, petty and will cut his brother's throat for even the promise of sexual security or financial security. He is animal at root, and the sprirt is at war with the animal.

It is man's destiny if he has the courage to overcome the animal within himself, and be more human like. And overcoming the animal starts with skepticism and doubt. the confidence comes afterwards, not before.

[GodsDaughter1]

I wouldn't use the bible as your only source of information. You need to read psychology, biology, and the sciences that offer explanations and observations of human behavior.

Man is imperfect. That is a irrefutable fact. He is greedy, self-serving, petty and will cut his brother's throat for even the promise of sexual security or financial security. He is animal at root, and the sprirt is at war with the animal.

It is man's destiny if he has the courage to overcome the animal within himself, and be more human like. And overcoming the animal starts with skepticism and doubt. the confidence comes afterwards, not before.

GodsDaughter says: I was the most doubting Tomas there ever was, I questioned the word of God, the answers made a believer out of me. I still question the Bible, but now I believe.

GodsDaughter says: I think man is good, the way God created him to be. God made man in his own image, he did not create imperfect, nor did he create perfect, he created good, therefore, if God created man in his own image, than that makes God only good and not perfect himself.

GodsDaughter says: I've read psychology books because that is where my interest is, I appreciate science too, but I wouldn't go out to buy a book, however, I do subscribe online to Scientific American. Biology I've read but not enough, I have a great appreciation for biology. Mathematics I love and understand it if I've learned it. I amazed myself when I taught myself Algebra and corrected it myself and found I was 100% accurate. I knew intuitively my answers were correct!

[Ryan Rudolph]

God`s daughter,

GodsDaughter says: I think man is good, the way God created him to be. God made man in his own image, he did not create imperfect, nor did he create perfect, he created good, therefore, if God created man in his own image, than that makes God only good and not perfect himself.

That is a big load of bullshit, made up by the same type of illogical people who thought the earth was flat and only 6000 years old. It is all superstitious belief not grounded in any sort of evidence or truth.

Man is in the image of a modified ape, and his appearance is continually changing according to his environment, that is why we have different races that have very different facial features. I would also imagine aliens on other planets that evolved from creatures other than mammals and so they would have a completely different appearance, yet we are all from the same universe. The truth is that there is probably an infinite number of possible facial forms that intelligent life can manifest in, not just one ideal imagined by irrational people, who need an imaginary sky daddy in the clouds to explain every naturally occurring event.

[cousinbasil]

Lets see if you have what it takes to take my mind away from God?

Whatever would make you think I am trying to do that? It is the Bible which distracts people from God's word. More people selectively quote it to justify their hatreds and prejudices than any other written or spoken thing. If one truly believes in God, then one must jettison faith in the Bible, which was written not just by men, but by one select group of people. If you even slightly understand the New Testament, you would see that Christ's mission was to "fulfill" the words of the prophets, in his own words. The word of the prophets is the Pentateuch, or all that is contained in the OT. Note that he didn't say to change the Law, but to fulfill it - as one fulfills a debt. It is paid and gone. It is to be rendered finished and complete. Adherence to it or its demands has been made unnecessary.

Christ's meaning was to CEASE being a slave of the letter of the law - ie, the OT, which is the bulk of the Bible - and find its spirit, which is written in one's heart, not in the musty outdated laws of one specific people. One cannot accept Jewish Law as being God's Law, which is in the hearts of ALL men, not just the Habiru - the Hebrews, or nomads - of 5 thousand years ago.

[cousinbasil]

Man is in the image of a modified ape

I'll ask you to speak for yourself, sir!

[cousinbasil]

GD1:
What would make the Bible more God's word than the Koran?

I'll bet you have never read the Koran, or what a Muslim would refer to as an "interpretation" of it, since its spoken form cannot be translated to English or any other language, accourding to tradition.

I'll bet you haven't even read much of the Bible, or even the NT - yet you are entranced with the notion it is somehow God's word.

[GodsDaughter1]

GD1:
What would make the Bible more God's word than the Koran?

GodsDaughter says: It says in the Bible that the Bible is the word of God. The sacred text of Islam is considered by the Muslims to contain the revelations of God to Muhammad. There is only one God. Do you think God would tell the Muslims they can kill their wives, or have as many as they want? Their laws are ridiculous, as for the Koran, back a few years ago I contemplated studying the subject and writing about it, but changed my mind.

I'll bet you have never read the Koran, or what a Muslim would refer to as an "interpretation" of it, since its spoken form cannot be translated to English or any other language, accourding to tradition.

GodsDaughter says: You're right I have never read the Koran nor would I ever want to! Why the heck would I even want to, the Koran is not my faith, and I'd not likely believe any of their so-called sacred revelations.

I'll bet you haven't even read much of the Bible, or even the NT - yet you are entranced with the notion it is somehow God's word.

GodsDaughter says: How much you wanna bet? I read the Bible daily, and for many years. I am dedicated to my Lord and Heavenly Father and always have been. I receive Bible scriptures from Arca Max for several years now. When I say something is in the Bible I mean it, sometimes I have to refer to my concordance though to find scriptures. The Bible is where I got the idea that it's contents are the word of God, don't you know that?

[GodsDaughter1]

For instance, couldn't people have blood tests before having a baby to determine the healthiness of the fetus? Can the medical field stop imperfections in birth? Did humanity cause our flaws or imperfections, and can humanity fix the problem? The Bible speaks that everything God created is good. Am I to think the Bible being God's word is bullshit?

The Bible is not God's word, that much I know.

GodsDaughter says: "The Bible is not God's word, that much I know" Then you don't know the Bible enough to say this statement!

GodsDaughter says: Although, I'm dedicated to the Bible being God's word, and I'd never deny the Lord, but, I still question the Bible as to whether it is or not. I am a doubting Tomas, although, I live a righteous life and obey the Ten Commandments. My only sin is that I'm tainting my holy temple by smoking pot. But, it's not a commandment not to.

[cousinbasil]

Then you don't know the Bible enough to say this statement!

You are making the same logical error so many people make. You feel that to see the Bible for what it really is, namely a many-times-translated copy of an oral tradition that was pieced together by rabbis and priests, none of whom was God nor an incarnation of one of God's messengers, is to say you do not believe in God's word. If Jesus was God and he desired that authoritative writing of "God's word" were to be left to the ages, he would have himself left something in writing.

While the Bible is certainly not the word of God, the word of God is alive within it. But the word of God is alive in many places. The Bible is the word of men about God - most of it is the words of Jewish men about God. Within the Bible you find an account of a specific people with their God. If you are like the Jehovah's Witnesses, then you believe the Bible is inerrant. Which is to say, for instance, that God created the rainbow to remind mankind about the Flood. This means that no one saw a rainbow before Noah - assuming there was an historical Noah. But one can see a rainbow in the spray of a garden hose when washing the car or watering the plants. It can easily be described in terms of water's ability to diffract light. Believing the Bible is factually inerrant therefore means the nature of either water or sunlight changed at some point in history.

Well, you see what I am saying. The important thing is not the Bible, Donna, it is you. You have been given the ability to think things through, as have most people although they choose all too often not to exercise it.

In fact, revering the Bible is precisely what Jesus did not want people to do. They were already doing that, clinging to dusty traditions of their forefathers. Jesus came to fulfill the words of the prophets - not to die on a cross or "atone" for mans sins. He came to teach a new way of relating to God, one that comes from the heart and not from Scripture. The Bible is Scripture, but so then is the Koran and the Vedas.

[GodsDaughter1]

Then you don't know the Bible enough to say this statement!

You are making the same logical error so many people make. You feel that to see the Bible for what it really is, namely a many-times-translated copy of an oral tradition that was pieced together by rabbis and priests, none of whom was God nor an incarnation of one of God's messengers, is to say you do not believe in God's word. If Jesus was God and he desired that authoritative writing of "God's word" were to be left to the ages, he would have himself left something in writing.

GodsDaughter says: And those rabbis and priests had to rewrite the whole book all over if one error was found!

GodsDaughter says: Those priests and rabbis believed the Bible as truth too, otherwise, why would they participate in spreading lies as truths?

GodsDaughter says: "If Jesus was God and he desired that authoritative writing of "Gods word" were to be left to the ages, he would have himself left something in writing"

GodsDaughter says: Which brings me to question when the Bible was written--the year? Was it before Jesus or after Jesus?

While the Bible is certainly not the word of God, the word of God is alive within it. But the word of God is alive in many places. The Bible is the word of men about God - most of it is the words of Jewish men about God. Within the Bible you find an account of a specific people with their God. If you are like the Jehovah's Witnesses, then you believe the Bible is inerrant. Which is to say, for instance, that God created the rainbow to remind mankind about the Flood. This means that no one saw a rainbow before Noah - assuming there was an historical Noah. But one can see a rainbow in the spray of a garden hose when washing the car or watering the plants. It can easily be described in terms of water's ability to diffract light. Believing the Bible is factually inerrant therefore means the nature of either water or sunlight changed at some point in history.

GodsDaughter says: "Believing the Bible is factually inerrant therefore means the nature of either water or sunlight changed at some point in history"

GodsDaughter says: Yes, that, or there is another meaning for the Bible other than what it says!

"While the Bible is certainly not the word of God..." GodsDaughter says: I will still hang on to the belief that the Bible is the word of God, because it contains truth, life, nature, wisdom to rely on, proverbs to live by, and just by the very idea that the Bible could be God's word is enough to keep my attention on it.

Well, you see what I am saying. The important thing is not the Bible, Donna, it is you. You have been given the ability to think things through, as have most people although they choose all too often not to exercise it.

GodsDaughter says: "Well, you see what I am saying" yes, I definately see what you are saying, most of what you say, I've heard it all before, but, you say it like it could be true.

In fact, revering the Bible is precisely what Jesus did not want people to do. They were already doing that, clinging to dusty traditions of their forefathers. Jesus came to fulfill the words of the prophets - not to die on a cross or "atone" for mans sins. He came to teach a new way of relating to God, one that comes from the heart and not from Scripture. The Bible is Scripture, but so then is the Koran and the Vedas.

GodsDaughter says: Jesus came to save the world, not judge it. And yes, I've read that Jesus came to fulfill the words of the prophets. He did that so they could spread the good news around about Jesus and God's word. Christians believe God sent his son Jesus to die for people's sin, like he was sacrificing his own son. This is the only part of the Bible that doesn't make sense to me.

GodsDaughter says: "The Bible is Scripture, but so then is the Koran and the vedas"
Yes, but, there is only one God, and that is scripture! God is everyone's God.

[Beingof1]

God`s daughter,

GodsDaughter says: I think man is good, the way God created him to be. God made man in his own image, he did not create imperfect, nor did he create perfect, he created good, therefore, if God created man in his own image, than that makes God only good and not perfect himself.

That is a big load of bullshit, made up by the same type of illogical people who thought the earth was flat and only 6000 years old. It is all superstitious belief not grounded in any sort of evidence or truth.

And so you will, in the very next statement, introduce your own illogical blind belief.

Man is in the image of a modified ape, and his appearance is continually changing according to his environment, that is why we have different races that have very different facial features.

This has not a single shred of scientific evidence at all - not one piece. It has no observation, experimentation, duplication, and you cannot possibly falsify this - cough - 'theory'. At best, it is a postulate, with zero - you heard me - zero evidence.

It is just repeated, like a mantra, till everyone just agrees. The evidence for evolution is absolutely zilch. The evidence clearly shows in paleontology that species do not evolve - they appear as if out of thin air.

Riddle me this batman. If when life first began it could mutate into literally anything, how then did life lose this magical property?

Evolution contradicts itself so blatantly and the gap in the logic is so wide, it becomes invisible to all who cannot actually see the evidence. How can the gap between animal and plant be explained while adhering to strict lateral gene transfer? It really is mindless babble yet - most people - have blind belief in it.

I would also imagine aliens on other planets that evolved from creatures other than mammals and so they would have a completely different appearance, yet we are all from the same universe. The truth is that there is probably an infinite number of possible facial forms that intelligent life can manifest in, not just one ideal imagined by irrational people, who need an imaginary sky daddy in the clouds to explain every naturally occurring event.

Are you just a brain?

[Diebert van Rhijn]

Ha Beingof1, I see you're still attacking anything which you think threatens your obsolete faith in the literal. Is it so hard to see beyond this and let scientists worry over the science?

If when life first began it could mutate into literally anything, how then did life lose this magical property?

Why would you think it could mutate into "literally anything"? The key concept here is environment and the need to fit and prosper in that environment.

I personally like to believe, based on only a little evidence so far, that life is still beginning or arriving each and every day although there would be no long term safe place for any tasty cloud of competing clumps of cells anymore. The niches are occupied and new material serves as food only.

[Beingof1]

Ha Beingof1, I see you're still attacking anything which you think threatens your obsolete faith in the literal. Is it so hard to see beyond this and let scientists worry over the science?

Look in the mirror Diebert. If you are not concerned as you admonish me not to be - why in the world would you respond?

The contradictions in the mind are countless.

If when life first began it could mutate into literally anything, how then did life lose this magical property?

Why would you think it could mutate into "literally anything"? The key concept here is environment and the need to fit and prosper in that environment.

Er uh - because it did - according to the prophecy of Darwinism. You are aware of the theory I hope. I do not want to educate another on the evolution postulate that is blindly adhered to without anyone on the planet understanding the concept because it is self contradictory.

Put your thinking cap on please. Did life mutate into trillions of species or not?

I personally like to believe, based on only a little evidence so far, that life is still beginning or arriving each and every day although there would be no long term safe place for any tasty cloud of competing clumps of cells anymore. The niches are occupied and new material serves as food only.

This is where the nonsense begins to show up. When cells are simple - they have magic, they can become highly evolved complex lifeforms. When you have an organized, highly evolved life form, it loses its magic and is subject to lateral gene transfer.

The theory (cough) of evolution is absolute nonsensical hocus pocus.

Resolve the above monumental contradiction Diebert - life can evolve into a plant or animal except when it does?
Insert roll eyes here:

[cousinbasil]

I personally think that the information for speciation was present from the beginning, and that what we see as species are the equivalent of branches of a tree.

If you plant a peach, complete with pit, you will not get an apple tree, but a peach tree, if in fact you get anything. The information that codes for the morphology of peach tree as opposed to evergreen is contained in the seed. However, the specific morphology which the peach tree eventually cycles through as it grows is not predetermined by what is in the seed. Things like available sunlight, proximity of other trees, soil nutrients; all these affect the shape and inclination (and rate of growth and ultimate size as well as life span.) The environment affects the way the tree sends out branches but it cannot make those branches produce any other kind of fruit. Nor can the environment determine if the tree sends out branches. That is, if the tree manages to survive, it will definitely send out branches.

I see evolution as precisely analogous to this - an unfolding of precoded information into an environment which can affect – yet not entirely determine - the final product. I can't logically conclude anything other than that the initial life matrix was planted here from somewhere else. That it uses native elements to form organic compounds cannot have been otherwise - evolution cannot make use of anything which isn't here; and yet it cannot have started by itself with just what was here. The building blocks were already present, but the information cannot have been, nor could the drive which propels it.

And it is that drive which is the convincing thing, IMO. Each life form seems determined (for want of a better word) to survive. Yet each can trace its history back to where it joins another branch which joins another, which go back to the trunk or the single-celled organisms and earlier. No tree shows up where there has been no seed; likewise, no life has evolved which is not traceable back to the original matrix.

If life began spontaneously, then its means of reproduction must have begun spontaneously as well at the very same time unless one believes that begetting living matter is just something that nonliving matter does. What would then not be explained is why matter self-organizes and continues to do so and become more and more complex over millennia until matter is capable of analyzing itself.

In my view, the environment does not dictate speciation, but may affect when it can occur. As I see it, just as a tree must have branches – that fact is “present” in the seed – speciation will occur eventually. At a certain point in its life, a tree primarily sends out smaller and smaller branches. Likewise, the tree of evolution might send out a tendril that is a differently-colored finch.

[Beingof1]

The problem with speciation is - there is no evidence.

The theory of evolution does not meet a single scientific requirement.
1) Observation (including the fossil records)
2) Experimentation (it has never been done - a hybrid jump that is)
3) Duplication (it cannot be duplicated if it has never been done)
4) Falsification ( any life form at all is possible including Donald Duck and the Man in the Moon)

How is this science?
At best it is a postulate not a theory.

[Ryan Rudolph]

Being of 1,

The problem people have with evolution is that it is very difficult for the human mind to imagine a series of millions of small changes that lead to higher complexity. What I like about the theory of evolution is that it explains how organisms NATURALLY diverge and change over time, without having to invoke the supernatural, or some sort of supernatural intervention, which has always been the enemy of science throughout the ages. Logical thoughts stops when you invoke the supernatural to explain how things arose. Cause-effect should never be violated in any explanation.

[Beingof1]

Being of 1,

The problem people have with evolution is that it is very difficult for the human mind to imagine a series of millions of small changes that lead to higher complexity.

Nope - its very easy to do, that is why there is the postulate. There is no evidence that demonstrates small changes leading to species jumps - none, nada, zilch.

There is an abundance of evidence that demonstrates universal impact in a flash however.

What I like about the theory of evolution is that it explains how organisms NATURALLY diverge and change over time,

And this is why evolution is touted as some kind of science - because you like it. Same goes for the universities. It is taught as fact, without a single confirming scientific underpinning, because they like it better.

without having to invoke the supernatural, or some sort of supernatural intervention, which has always been the enemy of science throughout the ages.

This is not logic nor are you seeking the truth based on what you have said here.

I have a theory that is logical, can be experimented, duplicated, and can be falsified. Consciousness is an electromagnetic wave that contains the energy and information to pulse the genetic code and would result in dramatic and instant species transformation that the evidence points to.

There ya go - light = consciousness and the genetic code was downloaded from it.

No magic involved - it is just sneered at because the implication is a meta consciousness yet there is a mountain of evidence for that as a theory.

Logical thoughts stops when you invoke the supernatural to explain how things arose. Cause-effect should never be violated in any explanation.

Blah - you just stuffed logic through your entire post.