Intelligent Design
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
22-02-2016, 07:30 AM
RE: Intelligent Design
(22-02-2016 06:13 AM)TheInquisition Wrote:  
(22-02-2016 04:28 AM)BlackEyedGhost Wrote:  Oh, right. Sorry, forgot you mentioned things besides viruses.

Sedimentary rocks aren't very complicated. They're fairly uniform throughout, making a single part of it not very dissimilar from the rest. A cell, however, has numerous different components which all work together. Nuclei, mitochondria, golgi apparatus, etc.. Cells are EASILY more complicated than rocks. Stellar phenomena are more or less similar in that they're just really really big implementations of a single thing. Fusion is what drives stars and it only requires large amounts of (atomically light) matter in the same spot (which in turn creates heat, gravity, etc..). There's not a bunch of diversity in either case. Cells, however, have diversity in their design (please forgive the term) where many components serve different purposes. Cells are complicated in a way that isn't observed elsewhere in nature and cells are life.


You're simply saying complex=designed. It is not, cells do not have anything in them that requires an intelligent designer.

What does a cell with no intelligent design look like?

This is no different than someone pointing at a tree and saying goddidit.

Watch this:




What a bizarre mixture that video is of using advanced technical jargon combined with the assumption that the audience does not know the first thing about bacterial flagellum.

Way to go, Youtube Video Maker, for dazzling them with big words to bolster your credibility.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Aliza's post
22-02-2016, 07:42 AM
RE: Intelligent Design
(21-02-2016 09:06 PM)BlackEyedGhost Wrote:  For this forum, I'm defining "Intelligent Design" as the idea that life was originally either created or seeded on this planet by some intelligent source.

It is my stance that this is a valid possibility and shouldn't be discredited without proof.

The evidence I claim supports this stance is the complexity of life forms as we know. The human brain is the most complex bit of "machinery" in the known universe, with man-made (intelligently designed) things only recently having any sort of comparable complexity.

I realize this is far from a popular view in this forum, but I none-the-less hold it. I created this forum so people would have a place to tell me how stupid I am without junking up other forums.

You believe that complexity only arises from complexity then?

If complex organisms prove, to you, that a designer (or seeder or whatever) must exist, do simple organisms and systems disprove it? What would disprove your proof if not simplicity?

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
22-02-2016, 07:43 AM
RE: Intelligent Design
If they start banging on about the complexity of the eye I swear I will facepalm myself to death Tongue
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-02-2016, 08:07 AM
RE: Intelligent Design
(22-02-2016 07:30 AM)Aliza Wrote:  Way to go, Youtube Video Maker, for dazzling them with big words to bolster your credibility.

Cue Albert Einstein quote. Something something "God does not play dice." Rolleyes

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-02-2016, 08:31 AM
RE: Intelligent Design
(21-02-2016 10:00 PM)BlackEyedGhost Wrote:  Again, I didn't say that complex things had to have an intelligent source, but that it's a possible source of life.

This is technically true, in the same way that it's possible leprechauns exist.

Note how there is a big difference between noting a technical (yet unsupported) possibility and assuming that it's something worth considering. There are an infinite number of things that "might be true". There is no reason to consider any of them if there is no reasonable evidence. Doing so would paralyze you under an infinite number of contradictory assumptions. Narrowing it down arbitrarily to one or a few that you happen to like is special pleading.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like RobbyPants's post
22-02-2016, 08:37 AM
RE: Intelligent Design
OK you stated:

For this forum, I'm defining "Intelligent Design" as the idea that life was originally either created or seeded on this planet by some intelligent source.

It is my stance that this is a valid possibility and shouldn't be discredited without proof.

The evidence I claim supports this stance is the complexity of life forms as we know. The human brain is the most complex bit of "machinery" in the known universe, with man-made (intelligently designed) things only recently having any sort of comparable complexity.

I realize this is far from a popular view in this forum, but I none-the-less hold it. I created this forum so people would have a place to tell me how stupid I am without junking up other forums.

P1. OK you can believe what you like!

P2. You need to bring proof to the table of debate! I could just say find the fault in all the evidence we have for evolution!

P3.By stating with complexity of the brain is no place to start with your hypothesis!
You are not showing how things have not changed over time. That may be proof of design. However we have seen how thing's on this plaint have changed over time and each time become more complex!

P4. I am not going to tell you, "You are Stupid". All I want you to do is present the evidence to your hypothesis so we can look at it, evaluate it and I may change how I see evolution. However you need to present the facts for us to see!

Thanks, I hope to hear from you soon!

Arguing with a zealot is only slightly easier than tunneling through a mountain with your forehead!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-02-2016, 08:45 AM
RE: Intelligent Design
(22-02-2016 02:23 AM)BlackEyedGhost Wrote:  
(21-02-2016 10:22 PM)Unbeliever Wrote:  No, you didn't. You provided a non sequitur comment that offered no support to your original assertion, then claimed it was evidence.

The complexity of life is in no way evidence of intelligent design, or even of the possibility of it.

Not even a little.
Are you unable to understand how complexity could imply an intelligent source?

I understand it perfectly well.

That is to say, I recognize that complexity completely and utterly fails, in every respect, to even begin to imply an intelligent source.

Your only "argument" is your personal incredulity about a non-intelligent source being responsible - but then, incredulity isn't actually an argument.

Quote:If you look at words on a page, you think they're there because someone put them there rather than because someone spilled ink. Genetic code IS words in its own way.

Only in the most figurative and worthless sense.

DNA is chemicals. It is chemicals doing what chemicals do. There is nothing else to it. It needs no intelligent agency to make it happen, and no amount of incredulity on your part will even begin to demonstrate otherwise.

Quote:So, how is it that when we look at binary code we think it has an intelligent source, but when we look at the base-4 code in our genome we HAVE TO think it sprouted naturally?

Because computers are built from materials that do not naturally come together in that way.

DNA is chemical. Chemicals can react together however they like.

"Owl," said Rabbit shortly, "you and I have brains. The others have fluff. If there is any thinking to be done in this Forest - and when I say thinking I mean thinking - you and I must do it."
- A. A. Milne, The House at Pooh Corner
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 6 users Like Unbeliever's post
22-02-2016, 01:37 PM
RE: Intelligent Design
(22-02-2016 08:37 AM)JONES Wrote:  P3.By stating with complexity of the brain is no place to start with your hypothesis!
You are not showing how things have not changed over time. That may be proof of design. However we have seen how thing's on this plaint have changed over time and each time become more complex!
Indeed. Great argument. A better piece of evidence is the simplest organisms we know of. Single-celled organisms still have an impressive amount of complexity to them. As I've stated in other posts, DNA is a type of code which even the simplest cells have. When we look at computer code we know it has an intelligent source because it means something. In the same way, DNA means something and is decoded by other components of the cell, which then gives it instructions on how to create proteins and such. So if computer code is intelligently designed, it seems reasonable to think that DNA could have some intelligent influence, even if it was just someone setting evolution on its course.
Quote:P4. I am not going to tell you, "You are Stupid". All I want you to do is present the evidence to your hypothesis so we can look at it, evaluate it and I may change how I see evolution. However you need to present the facts for us to see!

Thanks, I hope to hear from you soon!
Thank you for your intelligent and respectful tone. I'd like to note that I don't claim to be Christian and I don't claim to be an atheist either. I don't claim to believe in God nor do I claim he doesn't exist (depending on the starting definition). The purpose of this thread isn't by any means to evangelize, but simply came about when I mentioned my stance on the topic and others proceeded to pounce on it.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes BlackEyedGhost's post
22-02-2016, 01:44 PM
RE: Intelligent Design
(22-02-2016 04:50 AM)houseofcantor Wrote:  Didn't you specifically state in the other thread that you were not going to do this? Dodgy
I don't think I did. I said it wasn't why I had come to that thread. Which is why I created this thread so that the discussion wouldn't take that thread over.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-02-2016, 01:55 PM
RE: Intelligent Design
(22-02-2016 01:37 PM)BlackEyedGhost Wrote:  A better piece of evidence is the simplest organisms we know of. Single-celled organisms still have an impressive amount of complexity to them.

Complexity does not require intelligence. Complexity does not even imply intelligence.

(22-02-2016 01:37 PM)BlackEyedGhost Wrote:  As I've stated in other posts, DNA is a type of code which even the simplest cells have. When we look at computer code we know it has an intelligent source because it means something.

No. We know that computer code has an intelligent source because the system in play is crafted from components that do not reach that state naturally. "Meaning" is inherently subjective, and exists only as an interpretation.

Organic chemicals react in different ways than those in computers. There is no chemical reaction that produces a functioning motherboard. There is demonstrably a chemical reaction that produces functional DNA.

The two are not comparable.

(22-02-2016 01:37 PM)BlackEyedGhost Wrote:  In the same way, DNA means something and is decoded by other components of the cell, which then gives it instructions on how to create proteins and such.

Again, this is figurative language, not literal fact, and insistence upon using it serves only to make you look rather silly. DNA is just chemicals, reacting as chemicals do. It is even in the name - deoxyribonucleic acid. Yes, it is an extraordinarily complex reaction, but it is still just a reaction.

A chemical reaction, no matter how complex, is not evidence for an instigating intelligent agency. It is not even evidence for the possibility of an instigating intelligent agency. The conclusion does not follow from the premise.

You are simply wrong.

"Owl," said Rabbit shortly, "you and I have brains. The others have fluff. If there is any thinking to be done in this Forest - and when I say thinking I mean thinking - you and I must do it."
- A. A. Milne, The House at Pooh Corner
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like Unbeliever's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: