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
06-03-2013, 03:20 AM
RE: What do Richard Dawkins and the Intelligent Design movement have in common?
(06-03-2013 02:43 AM)Aspchizo Wrote:  [Stop being dishonest, you joined an atheist forum to troll. Chances of you not believing in a god are slim.

You said that there are recurring patterns, like eyes that crop up due to evolution. In your original post you make multiple claims.

So how does believing in God imply that I believe patterns are evidence of an external intelligence? It doesn't. Calling me a troll doesn't help your case either. To be honest...it makes you look weak.


Quote:First off, you lack an understanding of what constitutes as good evidence. Implying convergent evolution is evidence that evolution is not blind when divergence/convergence rates appear to follow chance. There is a much higher chance of a mutation causing a divergence than convergence between two species; we see have a lot more examples of divergence than convergence.

Do you have any evidence convergence and divergence rate appear to follow chance? No...I didn't think so. Look, if you design an evolution simulator to select organisms which best chase a red dot...guess what happens...the evolved organisms become very good at chasing a red dot. This isn't unexpected....infact its quite predictable. Why is it predictable? Because evolution isn't some blind process whose outcomes are the result of happenstance. If you can predict behaviour, you can predict form.

Quote:When you flip a coun 100 times and end up with 45 heads and 55 tails do you assume there was guidance for that coin from somewhere to land on one more than the other? Hopefully not, it follows expected chance.

1: The fitness paradigm determines which random mutations get passed on.
2: By designing the fitness paradigm in a specific way you can design/determine the products of evolution.

These two pieces of information conflict with each other. How do you expect to determine the result of random changes? (if they are in fact random). Since there are multiple adaptations a organism could undergo to meet a specific challenge, there is no way to determine which path an organism will take. The best you could possibly do is determine the probability of one change happening over another. So in your opinion, did god set this all up so that humans would probably crop up?

Law of big numbers. I may not know how ten coin flips will turn out. But I know if the coin is flipped 50 billion times, it will be so close to 50% heads and 50% tails that any variance will be insignificant.

Vosur, Anjele, Hanoff.....have you learned nothing in my absence?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply

Messages In This Thread
RE: What do Richard Dawkins and the Intelligent Design movement have in common? - Heywood Jahblome - 06-03-2013 03:20 AM
Forum Jump: