What do Richard Dawkins and the Intelligent Design movement have in common?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 1 Votes - 5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
28-02-2013, 11:44 PM
RE: What do Richard Dawkins and the Intelligent Design movement have in common?
Well when he presents his entire argument then he can be showed where all the flaws are.

2.5 billion seconds total
1.67 billion seconds conscious

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-02-2013, 11:47 PM
RE: What do Richard Dawkins and the Intelligent Design movement have in common?
(28-02-2013 11:44 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  I have not made an argument that God used evolution to produce human beings. I am making an argument that evolution is not blind, that it is guided by a fitness paradigm(my own term but you can substitute selection pressures if you like). I am arguing that it is possible to design an evolutionary system to produce a desired end result simply by manipulating the fitness paradigm.

Watch this video of a computer program which evolves a face.




Why is a human face evolved and not a cows face or a pigs face? Because the writer of the program constructed the fitness paradigm so narrowly that only a human face would emerge. Evolution is a powerful creative process that can produce just about anything.

The argument that evolution is likely the result of an intellect is another argument(and another thread) entirely.

No, evolution can not produce 'just about anything'.

Are you getting to a point?

2.5 billion seconds total
1.67 billion seconds conscious

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-02-2013, 11:49 PM
RE: What do Richard Dawkins and the Intelligent Design movement have in common?
(28-02-2013 11:37 PM)Aspchizo Wrote:  
(28-02-2013 11:32 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  So we are in agreement then that products of evolution are shaped by selective pressure, that it is not a blind process as suggested by Dawkins.

Yes or No.

!= means: does not equal.

If this conversation is to continue I expect you to cut the dishonesty.

The products of evolution are shaped by selection pressures. Sure. Now what?
I wouldn't miss you if you left the conversation. Feel free to go.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-02-2013, 11:50 PM
RE: What do Richard Dawkins and the Intelligent Design movement have in common?
(28-02-2013 11:49 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  I wouldn't miss you if you left the conversation. Feel free to go.

Can't handle a skeptic?

Still waiting for your argument.

2.5 billion seconds total
1.67 billion seconds conscious

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-02-2013, 11:55 PM
What do Richard Dawkins and the Intelligent Design movement have in common?
Heywood, you seem to wield the phrase "it's a red herring" like Wonder Woman wields her bracers.

You used it on me in another thread. I just thought you might like to know it feels cheap and sleazy when you use it. It also left me the distinct impression I'd been used for your own purposes. Just FYI.

He's not the Messiah. He's a very naughty boy! -Brian's mum
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-02-2013, 11:58 PM
RE: What do Richard Dawkins and the Intelligent Design movement have in common?
(28-02-2013 11:50 PM)Aspchizo Wrote:  
(28-02-2013 11:49 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  I wouldn't miss you if you left the conversation. Feel free to go.

Can't handle a skeptic?

Still waiting for your argument.
If you were an actual skeptic, you would be open minded. You already made up your mind from the get go I must be wrong hence the neg rep right off the bat.
I want to have a conversation with thinkers and rational people and actual skeptics. Not someone who autothinks I am wrong because I am a theist.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-03-2013, 12:02 AM
RE: What do Richard Dawkins and the Intelligent Design movement have in common?
(28-02-2013 11:58 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  
(28-02-2013 11:50 PM)Aspchizo Wrote:  Can't handle a skeptic?

Still waiting for your argument.
If you were an actual skeptic, you would be open minded. You already made up your mind from the get go I must be wrong hence the neg rep right off the bat.
I want to have a conversation with thinkers and rational people and actual skeptics. Not someone who autothinks I am wrong because I am a theist.

Your starting post in this thread showed that you don't have a very comprehensive understanding of evolution, and yet you claim you want to change our world views. You got the neg rep for that and the attitude you created this thread with. Are you done crying about a rep? If you hate it that much rep me back and stop the bitching.

Now present your argument, stop deflecting and wondering about.

2.5 billion seconds total
1.67 billion seconds conscious

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-03-2013, 12:02 AM
RE: What do Richard Dawkins and the Intelligent Design movement have in common?
(28-02-2013 11:55 PM)Cardinal Smurf Wrote:  Heywood, you seem to wield the phrase "it's a red herring" like Wonder Woman wields her bracers.

You used it on me in another thread. I just thought you might like to know it feels cheap and sleazy when you use it. It also left me the distinct impression I'd been used for your own purposes. Just FYI.
It is a very common argumentive error. I find myself making it all the time so I don't think less of you because you made it. This thread isn't about my education so whats the point in bringing it up other than to derail it? If I told these guys I was a PHD they would still think I was wrong.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-03-2013, 12:06 AM
RE: What do Richard Dawkins and the Intelligent Design movement have in common?
(28-02-2013 11:44 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  
(28-02-2013 11:29 PM)Full Circle Wrote:  Let me see if I understand Heywood's Hypothesis: He's abandoning the typical ID argument that a creator directly designed us and instead suggesting that what this creator has done is guide 3.6 billion years of plate tectonics, meteors, gravitational fluctuations, climate changes etc to have as an end product in evolution Homo sapiens?

I have not made an argument that God used evolution to produce human beings. I am making an argument that evolution is not blind, that it is guided by a fitness paradigm(my own term but you can substitute selection pressures if you like). I am arguing that it is possible to design an evolutionary system to produce a desired end result simply by manipulating the fitness paradigm.

Again, is your point that God guided/created the "selection pressures" (ie everything I mentioned in my post above)?
That's what is sounds like to me.

“I am quite sure now that often, very often, in matters concerning religion and politics a man’s reasoning powers are not above the monkey’s.”~Mark Twain
“Ocean: A body of water occupying about two-thirds of a world made for man - who has no gills.”~ Ambrose Bierce
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Full Circle's post
01-03-2013, 12:07 AM
RE: What do Richard Dawkins and the Intelligent Design movement have in common?
(01-03-2013 12:02 AM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  
(28-02-2013 11:55 PM)Cardinal Smurf Wrote:  Heywood, you seem to wield the phrase "it's a red herring" like Wonder Woman wields her bracers.

You used it on me in another thread. I just thought you might like to know it feels cheap and sleazy when you use it. It also left me the distinct impression I'd been used for your own purposes. Just FYI.
It is a very common argumentive error. I find myself making it all the time so I don't think less of you because you made it. This thread isn't about my education so whats the point in bringing it up other than to derail it? If I told these guys I was a PHD they would still think I was wrong.


A degree or certificate doesn't make one any less of a dumbass. I've seen 'Dr' Kent Hovind, and the drivel spewed forth from AnswersInGenesis and the Discovery Institute. They are shining examples of 'accredited' stupidity writ large.

[Image: GrumpyCat_01.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes EvolutionKills's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: