Announcement
Collapse
Natural Science 301 Guidelines
This is an open forum area for all members for discussions on all issues of science and origins. This area will and does get volatile at times, but we ask that it be kept to a dull roar, and moderators will intervene to keep the peace if necessary. This means obvious trolling and flaming that becomes a problem will be dealt with, and you might find yourself in the doghouse.
As usual, Tweb rules apply. If you haven't read them now would be a good time.
Forum Rules: Here
As usual, Tweb rules apply. If you haven't read them now would be a good time.
Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less
Specified complexity
Collapse
X
-
I'm always still in trouble again
"You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
"Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
"Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman
-
Originally posted by Roy View PostOh dear.
First, DNA etc hasn't been arranged into a specific pattern, so claiming that life is full of specified complexity is suspect.
But there is an even bigger hole in your argument.
If living systems do contain specified complexity then there are two known causes of high levels of specified complexity: (human) intelligence and evolution.
Or, if you insist on rejecting evolution, there is a known cause of specified complexity and an unknown cause - and you can't simply claim that the unknown cause is the same as the known one.
Your argument, in a nutshell: Complex things we built were built (by us), so complex things we didn't build were built (by us)..
Expressed formally: X&Y -> Z => X -> Z.
I did say there were much worse arguments than the one by Seeker's friend that you objected to, but I didn't expect you to provide one, let alone so quickly.
For example, light taken from the sun is coded(translated) or instructed into food for a plant and that plant eats the light through photosynthesis, so far so good? Now what would happen if those instructions or codes take placed? Well guess what, we wouldn't be having this conversation right now, lol. Do you know level of subatomic and molecular involvement for this process to take place? I can see some clearly lack the knowledge in basic programming or biology or done even basic research for that matter. That beagle weagle can't even different between too and to. So it takes only human intelligence to create such complex "patterns" or evolution? Hmm the coder needs the blueprint...
Last edited by JohnHermes; 02-19-2019, 02:23 PM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by TheLurch View PostI find the whole argument truly bizarre, because none of these protein complexes look designed to me. Don't know why, and i know that there are other people who do think they look designed. But it really does drive home that this is just a matter of personal opinion, rather than anything objective.
Blessings,
Lee"What I pray of you is, to keep your eye upon Him, for that is everything. Do you say, 'How am I to keep my eye on Him?' I reply, keep your eye off everything else, and you will soon see Him. All depends on the eye of faith being kept on Him. How simple it is!" (J.B. Stoney)
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by DayOneish View PostActually, it doesn't. There are secular Jews and agnostics at the Discovery Institute.
In fact, their religious/ideological makeup is very similar to America's as a whole, which is exactly what you would expect from an organization with no ingrained bias.
The only bias here is the fact that you have a problem with an organization for not having an anti-religion bias.
As for what I.D. is, it's simple: the detection of design in biology, using methods which are uncritically accepted everywhere outside of biology.
If an I.D. proponent happens to believe the designer of living systems is God, that is their personal belief, and not an extension of the theory of I.D.
More to follow . . .
If you had better arguments, shunyadragon, you wouldn't have to lie all the time. Something worth considering.Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:
go with the flow the river knows . . .
Frank
I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.
Comment
-
Originally posted by DayOneish View PostWhich is exactly what I.D. does, yet you're so blinded by your ideology that you're unable to admit it.
If you want to lie to me, that's fine; I have no problem seeing through lies and calling people out for them. You really shouldn't lie to yourself, though. It's very unhealthy.
The genetic code, the foundation of life, is a literal programming language.
So, yes, what we see in life is entirely comparable to the work of human intelligence.
Maybe you should contact MIT, Harvard, U.C. Berkley, etc., and inform them that there's no relation whatsoever between human design and biological design, and they should shut down their bio-engineering and bio-informatics courses.
There is one thing you're right about, yet ironically, it's actually further evidence for I.D.: human intelligence has never been able to engineer life from non-life.
If you gentleman don't start arguing in good faith and with reason and logic, I'm not even going to waste my time here.
Comment
-
More documentation that the Discovery Institute Intelligent Design is a Fundamentalist Creationist argument. The last paragraph in BOLD of this reference documents the dishonest Discovery Institute' methods to promote their agenda at all possible costs to their credibility.
By the way, I am not an atheist.Last edited by shunyadragon; 02-19-2019, 05:34 PM.Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:
go with the flow the river knows . . .
Frank
I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.
Comment
-
Originally posted by DayOneish View PostYour friend's argument is so idiotic that I've had to reread 12 times to make sure I'm getting it correct.
You friend's argument, in a nutshell: "if crystals were something entirely different from crystals, and exactly like lifeforms, we would recognize them as lifeforms, therefor, there's no difference between crystals and lifeforms."
I have to say, in my many years of reading the Darwin vs. design debate, this might be the worst "argument" I've ever read.
Crystals are just basic fractals -- simple repeating patterns -- and are easily explained by physics. That design-deniers are forced to cling to them is strong evidence of how weak and desperate their position is.
If life were anywhere near as simple as a repeating pattern, don't you think the origin of life would've been solved centuries ago?
The foundation of life is a genetic code and cellular machinery capable of reading and processing that code -- this is light years beyond basic fractals.
To conclude, try to do two things: define what ''specified'' means in the context of this discussion, and by extension, try to to define ''specified complexity'' in a way that is not circular. He's saying the argument is circular because the word specified is circular. Try to define it NOT SO.
And don't be too angry, please. I started this thread with the best of intentions.
Comment
-
Originally posted by lee_merrill View PostWhich protein complexes do you mean? Do you include the flagellum? It certainly looks designed, and passes Dembski's explanatory filter.
Blessings,
Lee
There is no evidence you are 'willing to learn.'Last edited by shunyadragon; 02-19-2019, 09:06 PM.Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:
go with the flow the river knows . . .
Frank
I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.
Comment
-
Originally posted by JohnHermes View PostHow is that suspect of DNA exactly? You given no reasons behind your claims...
Doesn't sound like logical fallacy. Systems do contain specific complexity which perform certain duties. Um they're called patterns which create more complex patterns which includes instructions called "code" creating your design. Now you can't deny the existence that the universe is based on code.Patterns which gives rise to designs through specific instructions called codes which perform a function. So far so good? Nature never lies just your opinions do.
For example, light taken from the sun is coded(translated) or instructed into food for a plant and that plant eats the light through photosynthesis, so far so good? Now what would happen if those instructions or codes take placed? Well guess what, we wouldn't be having this conversation right now, lol. Do you know level of subatomic and molecular involvement for this process to take place? I can see some clearly lack the knowledge in basic programming or biology or done even basic research for that matter.That beagle weagle can't even different between too and to.Jorge: Functional Complex Information is INFORMATION that is complex and functional.
MM: First of all, the Bible is a fixed document.
MM on covid-19: We're talking about an illness with a better than 99.9% rate of survival.
seer: I believe that so called 'compassion' [for starving Palestinian kids] maybe a cover for anti Semitism, ...
Comment
-
September is early this yearJorge: Functional Complex Information is INFORMATION that is complex and functional.
MM: First of all, the Bible is a fixed document.
MM on covid-19: We're talking about an illness with a better than 99.9% rate of survival.
seer: I believe that so called 'compassion' [for starving Palestinian kids] maybe a cover for anti Semitism, ...
Comment
-
Originally posted by Roy View PostBut they never say where the specification is. They never show that there is a specific pattern that the DNA has been arranged to match.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Seeker View PostThat's because they think the function of DNA is preprogrammed by God. The specific pattern in DNA has been arranged to match whatever God intented when ''Creation'' happened. So once again we're stuck in circularity. How does one determine if any given specific of DNA is the product of intelligence?Jorge: Functional Complex Information is INFORMATION that is complex and functional.
MM: First of all, the Bible is a fixed document.
MM on covid-19: We're talking about an illness with a better than 99.9% rate of survival.
seer: I believe that so called 'compassion' [for starving Palestinian kids] maybe a cover for anti Semitism, ...
Comment
-
Originally posted by Seeker View PostThat's because they think the function of DNA is preprogrammed by God. The specific pattern in DNA has been arranged to match whatever God intended when ''Creation'' happened. So once again we're stuck in circularity. How does one determine if any given specific of DNA is the product of intelligence?
Comment
Related Threads
Collapse
Topics | Statistics | Last Post | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-18-2024, 12:15 PM
|
48 responses
135 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by Sparko
03-20-2024, 09:13 AM
|
||
Started by Sparko, 03-07-2024, 08:52 AM
|
16 responses
74 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by shunyadragon
03-08-2024, 03:12 PM
|
||
Started by rogue06, 02-28-2024, 11:06 AM
|
6 responses
48 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by shunyadragon
03-08-2024, 03:25 PM
|
Comment