Atheism the unscientific belief (part one, two, and three)

[Angrboda]

Sorry son but the evidence point to the fact that anything alive must have some degree of consciousness.
Cells have far too many similarities to our human bodies therefore they are bodies and bodies need consciousness to be alive.


Though a human is comprised of over fifty trillion cells, there are no physiologic functions in our bodies that were not already pre-existing in the biology of the single, nucleated (eukaryotic) cell. Single-celled organisms, such as the amoeba or paramecium, possess the cytological equivalents of a digestive system, an excretory system, a respiratory system, a musculoskeletal system, an immune system, a reproductive system and a cardiovascular system, among others. In the humans, these physiologic functions are associated with the activity of specific organs. These same physiologic processes are carried out in cells by diminutive organ systems called organelles.


https://www.brucelipton.com/resource/art...sciousness

Arguing by bad analogy again.  No wonder you didn't respond when I pointed out the problem with arguing by analogy.  In this case, the analogy fails because single celled organisms do not have anything which is like the brain or mind.  There are parts that very vaguely perform similar functions, but only vaguely.  There is nothing that in any meaningful sense corresponds to the brain.  Analogy failure.  And since there's good reason to believe that consciousness resides in the brain, that disanalogy would mean that consciousness doesn't reside in the cell.  You failed again.

Conventional opinion considers the nucleus to be the “command center” of the cell. As such, the nucleus would represent the cellular equivalent of the “brain.”

https://www.brucelipton.com/resource/art...sciousness

The nucleus doesn't perform a function even remotely like a brain.  And the same goes for the cell membrane.  Your author has overreached.  "As Hume states the relevant rule of analogy, "wherever you depart in the least, from the similarity of the cases, you diminish proportionably the evidence; and may at last bring it to a very weak analogy, which is confessedly liable to error and uncertainty" (Hume, Dialogues, Part II)."(http://www.iep.utm.edu/design/) Your author has departed greatly from the similarity of the cases. Really? The cell membrane is like a brain? No it is not.

As a liquid crystal semiconductor with gates and channels, the membrane is an information processing transistor, an organic computer chip.

https://www.brucelipton.com/resource/art...sciousness

An information processing transistor isn't anything like a computer chip.  This article is nothing but garbage and word salad.  The author again overreaches.

Your article is nothing but a bunch of new agey bullshit.

About the author:

Bruce Harold Lipton (born October 21, 1944 at Mount Kisco, New York), is an American developmental biologist best known for promoting the idea that genes and DNA can be manipulated by a person's beliefs.