Chromosome condensation, amazing evidence of design
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
20-07-2015, 11:27 AM
RE: Chromosome condensation, amazing evidence of design
(20-07-2015 06:46 AM)RocketSurgeon76 Wrote:  Another avoidance. He demanded to know about how DNA was made, since it appears to be IC to him, and someone kindly put up a video that gets into the details, which he ignores even after I specifically directed him to watch and show us he's honest.

Again he links to El Shermer website, trying to drive up traffic for himself (selfish!), avoids the original question, and asks a new one (along with lots of personal attacks on the ego: Aha! bet you can't do it!, like the science-literate are a bunch of children waiting around to show We Can Do It, We're Big Kids Now!), showing that all he is doing is engaging in the Machine Gun Tactic.

So, what then, GE?

Let's say I took the time to learn about the biosynthetic pathway for Chlorophyll, which I currently know nothing about. (Why would I? I'm not a botanist or even particularly interested in plants, so it's totally new to me.) I spend a day, perhaps more, learning the exact chemistry of the process, tracing down which amino acids are folded and how/when, what external genes direct the process, and so on... I learn all about it, taking hours, perhaps days out of my life.

Then I show you how the "unique enzymes" were close to other enzymes, or near other systems that could be co-opted for this process. I demonstrate, somehow, step-by-step each element of the MASSIVE process you're asking me for... a literal doctoral-thesis level of writing. Somehow, I manage to make it simple enough to fit in an online post to be read here.

Let's say I do every bit of that. Right here in this post.

What would it get me?

If you were not wearing blinkers, after reading my argument about chlorophyll, you would admit chlorophyll cannot emerge naturally and gradually. Even a 7 year old can understand why my evidence makes sense. But of course, that is what you want to avoid at any cost, since otherwise you would have to admit a creator, which for some reason only known to you, you do not want to admit.

But i make it bulletproof for you.

Could it be, as a analogy, that a unguided natural process would produce a car piston without any blueprint, and the process would be able produce the pistion with the precise size and dimensions to fit in the right motor block in a functional way ? Its not a reasonable scenario, that the motor could emerge in a stepwise gradual manner without a planner, being the intermediate parts non functional, to then, in the end, like a magic hand, everything being fitted together , precisely interlocked into a working whole. Truly, my imagination does not reach that far. But if i imagine fairy tales, everything becomes possible. Its just, that it will be possible in alice in wonderlands. Not in real life. You reveal more about your world view in regard of what you do NOT respond and refute of my posts, rather than what you take position to. Its evident your world view is a unrealistic one, and exists only in your wishful thinking. But in the end, i wonder, what is your goal to fight for the the fairy tale belief of the non existence of God ( or the imagination that the natural world is all there is ?? )

[Image: meme_g12.png]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-07-2015, 11:30 AM
RE: Chromosome condensation, amazing evidence of design
(20-07-2015 08:01 AM)Chas Wrote:  You are making the claim - you must prove that DNA is irreducibly complex. You have the burden of proof.

LOL... i have.

http://elshamah.heavenforum.org/t2028-or...uble-helix

refute my argument if you can.... Rolleyes
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-07-2015, 11:33 AM
RE: Chromosome condensation, amazing evidence of design
(20-07-2015 07:27 AM)docskeptic Wrote:  Let me get this straight. Your proof for Intelligent Design hinges on microscopic constructs like the bacterial flagellar motor which we can't even see without the aid of electron microscopes (designed by real intelligent designers) but the things that are evident to the eye like the fact that all insects have 6 legs, not 4, as claimed by your God, don't seem to matter to you?

There's this bridge in Brooklyn...

http://www.icr.org/article/does-bible-re...-have-fou/

next time....

[Image: my_mem10.png]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-07-2015, 12:13 PM
RE: Chromosome condensation, amazing evidence of design
(20-07-2015 11:27 AM)Godexists Wrote:  After reading my argument about chlorophyll, you would admit chlorophyll cannot emerge naturally and gradually. Even a 7 year old can understand why my evidence makes sense. But of course, that is what you want to avoid at any cost, since otherwise you would have to admit a creator, which for some reason only known to you, you do not want to admit.

Nope. No way. Since virtually every plant biologist and plant physioloist and plant genetecist in the entire world agrees that Evolution is the best explanation we have, you MUST provide a peer-reviewed Plant biologist who supports your garbage, (as you are in no way qualified to even discuss the subject). Good luck with that.

But thanks for continuing to make a complete fool of yourself with you false car analogy. Thumbsup

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-07-2015, 12:16 PM
RE: Chromosome condensation, amazing evidence of design
(20-07-2015 07:20 AM)RocketSurgeon76 Wrote:  It really is simple, GE.

When you presented scientific (I thought) evidence that something I believed (replication mutations) could not in fact contribute to the genetic diversity of a species in the long run, I changed my mind. That's what honest people do, and what science teaches us to do. It's fundamental decency.

Turned out it was a deliberate lie, designed to take advantage of someone who didn't know that was a fake journal.

It happens that is has NEVER been shown that natural processes can increase information. And the quest of the origin of the information required to make the first living being is far greater.

[Image: sdfsds11.png]

http://elshamah.heavenforum.org/t1312-co...rom-a-mind

"The inadequacy of proposed materialistic causes forms only a part of the basis of the argument for intelligent design. We also know from broad and repeated experience that intelligent agents can and do produce information rich systems: we have positive experience based knowledge of a cause that is sufficient to generate new specified information, namely, intelligence. We are not ignorant of how information arises. According to information theorist Henry Quastler...'the creation of new information is habitually associated with conscious activity' "....I described indirect evidence which is a recognized form of proof for a causal agent...if you have no theory which explains the formation of complex specified information or functional operational activity without an intelligent origin then you cannot dismiss a known cause for such phenomena. Seen or unseen such phenomena require a sufficient cause.

Quote:But it made me realize that this is the difference between us. No matter what I say, I will never reach you with facts or teach you new ideas, because your mind is made up and you are willing to stoop to any level of dishonesty to promote your agenda...

aham...

[Image: meme_g13.png]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-07-2015, 12:17 PM
RE: Chromosome condensation, amazing evidence of design
Is this guy here just peddling his own blog or something? I don't see any answers, only links to another website and I am not tracking down some ignorant ass theist bullshit because they don't have the time or inclination to actually respond on this forum. It is lazy and disrespectful.

Being nice is something stupid people do to hedge their bets
-Rick
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes TheBeardedDude's post
20-07-2015, 12:39 PM (This post was last modified: 20-07-2015 12:43 PM by Simon Moon.)
RE: Chromosome condensation, amazing evidence of design
(20-07-2015 12:16 PM)Godexists Wrote:  It happens that is has NEVER been shown that natural processes can increase information. And the quest of the origin of the information required to make the first living being is far greater.

Sorry, but DNA is not a code. It is chemistry.

DNA is a chemical. What it does is just a function of the laws of chemistry and physics working through specific chemical interactions. If it’s a code, then so is every other chemical formula.

If DNA is a code, then H2O is a code. Are you making that argument also?

But the bottom line is, that scientists talk about DNA being a code in order to make is easier for laypeople to understand.

Codes, by definition, have to communicate information, DNA causes chemical reactions.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Simon Moon's post
20-07-2015, 01:04 PM (This post was last modified: 20-07-2015 01:14 PM by RocketSurgeon76.)
RE: Chromosome condensation, amazing evidence of design
Well said, Simon Moon!

GE - Give it up, dude. We're not going to go to your website to drive up your traffic, especially since it looks like little more than a repeater-database of Creation Institute claptrap. That stuff has been debunked so many times I could wear out my fingertips pointing you to people who've already done the work you're asking me to do.

And in the end, it doesn't matter, because you won't listen. You don't care about fact. You just make claims that NOBODY in the working scientific community (that is, those who produce actual, testable research on the subject and publish their results in peer-reviewed journals to be torn apart if possible, which is how science works) would agree with, that numerous people have already shredded, and then ask us to disprove it yet again. Most importantly, even if we did, you would never acknowledge it, so why should we do it?

By the way, the peer-review process is how we make sure science is unbiased... yes I know you think scientists just conspire to edge out Creationists, in one big global atheist conspiracy... but if you actually knew anything about science you'd know that not only are individual scientists in competition with one another to tear down any bad ideas, but nations compete with one another for preeminence. There is no way British researchers would back up a publication by an Italian scientist, or the Chinese would agree with an American scientist, unless the facts were solid. The idea of scientists working together in a global conspiracy is beyond ridiculous, it's insane. It means you've never met a scientist in your life.

I have already posted why the "yuh-huh!"/"nuh-uh!" exchange is meaningless on these kinds of complex questions. Do you seriously even understand the size of the questions you're asking? To fully explain these questions you're tossing out like a spray of machinegun bullets would require the amount of work equivalent to a doctoral thesis... quite unfair and a little bit much to ask of us, especially if you're going to ignore them anyway, as seems apparent.

You're actually employing a weak metaphor, not only because there's not a metaphorically similarity between a metal machine and a biological system that works by the physics of chemical bonds, as Simon pointed out, above, but because the biological systems are significantly more complex than the machine to which you were referring... and yet we observe the parts forming by themselves, once we set up the right physical conditions for them to do so. (It's not like we can physically push the chemical elements together!) When you see a car part that bonds to another car part in the way that elements bond to one another every day in every way, then we'll talk about the metaphor you think demonstrates (let alone proves) anything.

Why do you keep with the machinegun tactic? We've already called you out on it.

What about this!? (explanation given and ignored)
What about that!? (explanation given and ignored)
Well you can't explain THESE!!! (okay I give up)

Seriously, dude, pay attention. Stop a moment, breathe, and look at what you keep doing. I am hoping you're not really so intellectually bankrupt and dishonest as you seem when you keep doing this stuff.

"Theology made no provision for evolution. The biblical authors had missed the most important revelation of all! Could it be that they were not really privy to the thoughts of God?" - E. O. Wilson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like RocketSurgeon76's post
20-07-2015, 01:12 PM
RE: Chromosome condensation, amazing evidence of design
I know this has already been pointed out, but I think it bears repeating. Even if this wanker could back up his assertions, that would do absolutely nothing to establish his "Goddidit" thesis, because there is zero evidence for that. All it would mean is that science hasn't found the answer yet. Science freely admits that. But it doesn't mean you get to fill in any answer that you want. "Goddidit" isn't even a contender.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Grasshopper's post
20-07-2015, 01:35 PM
RE: Chromosome condensation, amazing evidence of design
(20-07-2015 11:33 AM)Godexists Wrote:  
(20-07-2015 07:27 AM)docskeptic Wrote:  Let me get this straight. Your proof for Intelligent Design hinges on microscopic constructs like the bacterial flagellar motor which we can't even see without the aid of electron microscopes (designed by real intelligent designers) but the things that are evident to the eye like the fact that all insects have 6 legs, not 4, as claimed by your God, don't seem to matter to you?

There's this bridge in Brooklyn...

http://www.icr.org/article/does-bible-re...-have-fou/

next time....

[Image: my_mem10.png]

Your bible says the cosmos was created in a day, after the Earth was created.

Gods derive their power from post-hoc rationalizations. -The Inquisition

Using the supernatural to explain events in your life is a failure of the intellect to comprehend the world around you. -The Inquisition
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: