How do you tell if something is designed by an intellect or not?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 3 Votes - 2.33 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
03-10-2014, 01:31 PM (This post was last modified: 03-10-2014 01:37 PM by Heywood Jahblome.)
RE: How do you tell if something is designed by an intellect or not?
(03-10-2014 12:52 PM)cjlr Wrote:  
(03-10-2014 12:39 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  And I explained already that while it is not a novelty...that is while it is not a new kind of life or even a new design of life....it still represents the creation of a new lineage of life.

Mycoplasma Laboratorium and you do not share a common ancestor. The first Mycoplasma Laboratorium had no ancestors. It wasn't anythings offspring. It was a creation in a laboratory.

Yours and others criticism here simply fails.

M. laboratorium explicitly derives from the genome of M. mycoides. Or as we might say, an ancestor. Had you read so much as the Wikipedia article, you'd know that.

You likewise remain unable to define "lineage" of life in any meaningful way.

Are you even trying?

We might say? Do you realize when you use phrases like "we might say"...you are stretching? To be a descendant in a biological sense.....you must be an offspring. The first Mycoplasma Laboratorium was a lab creation....this is a fact and it is not in dispute(except by Chas who thinks its a modifcation of a living thing....and he is wrong about that).

I read the wiki article prior to making this thread. I read quite a bit about mycoplasma laboratorium. I knew these objections would come but realized they are not fatal because A)In the strictest sense Mycoplasma Laboratorium represents a new lineage. B)Mycoplasma Laboratorium demonstrates that in principle we can design and create life. C)While nobody knows the future....its a very good bet that people will be unambiguously designing and creating new life.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-10-2014, 01:31 PM
RE: How do you tell if something is designed by an intellect or not?
Heywood,
Why is it so damn important to you, and I assume for us, to acknowledge a first creator/intellect? I mean you have your opinion, but why do you need others to buy into a, at best, sparsely supported assertion? Does it validate your belief in god? Does it make you seem less delusional?

Humans, scientists, using their intellect have done so many unique things in the fields of biology and chemistry. This does not directly lead to the conclusion that an intellect must have cooked up this planet, and the unique amount of life that exists and has ever existed. You just cannot state that with the evidence you have presented.

Again, why is this so damn important to be true for you? So much speculation in the claim of a "designing intellect". Why do you feel that science working out theories based on known chemistry and biology is also speculation and "faith"? That is all we have to produce evidence and explanations as to how our world and universe works. No need to make up wild stories of supernatural intellects if you are, which I presume, an intelligent adult.

“Truth does not demand belief. Scientists do not join hands every Sunday, singing, yes, gravity is real! I will have faith! I will be strong! I believe in my heart that what goes up, up, up, must come down, down, down. Amen! If they did, we would think they were pretty insecure about it.”
— Dan Barker —
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-10-2014, 01:38 PM (This post was last modified: 03-10-2014 01:46 PM by pablo.)
RE: How do you tell if something is designed by an intellect or not?
Quote:The monster Frankenstein had no mother or father and thus had no ancestors.

The pieces of other people who made up Frankenstein had ancestors, thus giving him biological ties to all the parts ancestors.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes pablo's post
03-10-2014, 01:38 PM
RE: How do you tell if something is designed by an intellect or not?
Is he using a fictional character like Frankenstein to drive home his points? WOW. Get off this one lab experiment already! We have, and we all know will be doing so much more in the areas of genetics and biology, that will be truely amazing and groundbreaking. We are smart enough to tinker with the nature of things (living or not). This does not mean that only some form of intellegence is responsible for life on an early earth!

Your belief perseverence is exhausting.

“Truth does not demand belief. Scientists do not join hands every Sunday, singing, yes, gravity is real! I will have faith! I will be strong! I believe in my heart that what goes up, up, up, must come down, down, down. Amen! If they did, we would think they were pretty insecure about it.”
— Dan Barker —
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-10-2014, 01:42 PM (This post was last modified: 03-10-2014 01:46 PM by Stevil.)
RE: How do you tell if something is designed by an intellect or not?
(02-10-2014 09:58 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  I think in the future we will be able to 3d print a human being...complete with memories....that such a being would be conscious with out the need of some super natural element.
Wouldn't that be cool?
No more dialysis, no more cancer, just print yourself out some new body parts, or even a whole body.
We are probably a 1,000 years or so away from that tech.

But my take out of your response is that for a living breathing conscious human we don't need any supernatural element such as a soul or a spark of life. Thumbsup

(02-10-2014 09:58 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  Evolution is a process. A process can't operate in a void. It must operate on something.
"process" is a very vague and broad word.
The process of thinking, of being able to recognise data, of being able to turn data into information, of being able to derive knowledge from information cannot occur in a void.

First off, there needs to be data. Data merely being observations of existence. We can't have data without existence, Can't have information or knowledge without data.

We also need some kind of machinery in order to observe data e.g. electromagnetic sensors such as eyes, or lenses. These need to feed information into a processing and storage mechanism such as a computer or a brain. There need to be mechanisms within the computer or brain in order to process the information adequately to gain value and derive knowledge. Then there needs to be a mechanism in order to react to that knowledge.

(02-10-2014 09:58 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  What is the inception of life in my opinion?
I haven't thought about the question deeply by my quick and dirty answer would be when something came into existence upon which the process of evolution could operate. That something is the inception of a lineage of life.
I don't think we are observing energy/matter coming into existence. There is the quantum fluctuations, but they are instantaneously here and then instantaneously not. So I don't think that really counts.
Going by law of "conservation of energy" the physicist's understanding is that energy cannot be created or destroyed. Einstein's E=m.c^2 shows that energy and matter are interchangeable.
So I guess you are postulating about an event whereby energy/matter came into existence including the physical laws (that which human's are modelling as the laws of physics)
Such a "coming into existence" event would violate our current understanding of the laws of physics.
The answer that most atheists will honestly give you is that we simply don't know if there ever was a "coming into existence" event and if there was, how that could happen.
The question as to whether that event required "intelligent design" is so far down the path of the unknown I don't personally think we are ready for this question yet.
But since you have brought it up, I hope you can recognise the significant issue of "How can we have intelligence without material existence, without data, without observational or processing mechanisms.

(02-10-2014 09:58 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  When I argue with theists, I often criticize them for separating God from reality. If God is intelligent, there must exist something which God can be intelligent about. I define intelligence as knowing, understanding, and the ability to navigate a reality. An intelligent God existing in some void is nonsense in my opinion.
Then your god cannot be creator of the universe. Your god cannot be unchanging, all knowledgeable and omnipresent.
I'm not saying that you claim these things of your god. I'm just pointing out that your god cannot be the same that is purported by most Christians.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-10-2014, 01:46 PM
RE: How do you tell if something is designed by an intellect or not?
(03-10-2014 01:38 PM)pablo Wrote:  
Quote:The monster Frankenstein had no mother or father and thus had no ancestors.

The pieces of other people who made up Frankenstein had ancestors, thus giving him biological ties to all the parts.

Biological ties is not lineal descent.

If you donate a kidney to bill Gates that does that make you his blood relative.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-10-2014, 01:50 PM
RE: How do you tell if something is designed by an intellect or not?
(03-10-2014 01:46 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  
(03-10-2014 01:38 PM)pablo Wrote:  The pieces of other people who made up Frankenstein had ancestors, thus giving him biological ties to all the parts.

Biological ties is not lineal descent.

If you donate a kidney to bill Gates that does that make you his blood relative.

Is that an option? I will sure call him daddy to be in his will!

“Truth does not demand belief. Scientists do not join hands every Sunday, singing, yes, gravity is real! I will have faith! I will be strong! I believe in my heart that what goes up, up, up, must come down, down, down. Amen! If they did, we would think they were pretty insecure about it.”
— Dan Barker —
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-10-2014, 01:51 PM
RE: How do you tell if something is designed by an intellect or not?
(03-10-2014 01:42 PM)Stevil Wrote:  
(02-10-2014 09:58 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  I think in the future we will be able to 3d print a human being...complete with memories....that such a being would be conscious with out the need of some super natural element.

Wouldn't that be cool?
No more dialysis, no more cancer, just print yourself out some new body parts, or even a whole body.
We are probably a 1,000 years or so away from that tech.

In about 20 years 3d printed kidneys(they exist today) will be common place me thinks.



Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-10-2014, 02:04 PM
RE: How do you tell if something is designed by an intellect or not?
(03-10-2014 01:46 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  
(03-10-2014 01:38 PM)pablo Wrote:  The pieces of other people who made up Frankenstein had ancestors, thus giving him biological ties to all the parts.

Biological ties is not lineal descent.

If you donate a kidney to bill Gates that does that make you his blood relative.

What the fuck does that have to do with anything? Your Frankenshteen analogy claims he's purely man made, when if fact he's made up of parts that have ancestral ties to someone somewhere.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-10-2014, 02:13 PM (This post was last modified: 03-10-2014 02:32 PM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: How do you tell if something is designed by an intellect or not?
(03-10-2014 12:39 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  
(03-10-2014 11:27 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  It has been clearly demonstrated, referenced and explained to you that what you are calling "creation of life by an intellect" is false. Any conclusion or corollary you may draw from your (false) "observation" is flawed, and in this case, an outright lie.

Have a sucky day, Blowme.

And I explained already that while it is not a novelty...that is while it is not a new kind of life or even a new design of life....it still represents the creation of a new lineage of life.

Mycoplasma Laboratorium and you do not share a common ancestor. The first Mycoplasma Laboratorium had no ancestors. It wasn't anythings offspring. It was a creation in a laboratory.

Yours and others criticism here simply fails.

Desperation obvious. It is not a new "lineage" as the scientists observed at the time. Your "special definition" is utterly lame. Without the template, and the cell it was inserted into, it could not have lived, AND YOU obviously do not even have the background to even BEGIN to discuss the topic. Without the template the computer synthesized the DNA from, the cell would not have been viable.

"The team started with the bacterium M. genitalium, an obligate intracellular parasite whose genome consists of 482 genes comprising 582,970 base pairs, arranged on one circular chromosome (the smallest genome of any known natural organism that can be grown in free culture). They then systematically removed genes to find a minimal set of 382 genes that can sustain life.[a 14] This effort was also known as the Minimal Genome Project.


Your assertion is refuted. It DID have an ancestor. In fact a direct ancestor.
(I see you ARE having a sucky day). Tongue

Feel free to continue to make a fool of yourself.

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
[+] 2 users Like Bucky Ball's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: