Evolutionry/religious nonsense

I have no doubt that there are fundamentalist creationists who want to use the ID arguments to support their beliefs even though ID does not have anything to do with their 6000 year old earth, humans coexisting with dinosaurs, etc.

I simply reject your tarring of ID for that unwanted and unwarranted association.

As long as people play the silly game of not stipulating the alleged intelligence and its agency, those people will be justifiably lumped in with the creationists. They dodge the question because they are being willfully deceitful.

Im really not "tarring" the moern ID movement as sponsored by Discovery. THEY have shown their moose tracks from here they originated, and they derive from the Creationists.
I said, one paper about "Molecular memory" is actually worth a consideration. Its falsifiable, testable nd the various internal angles that ions contain among their atomic substructures, plus the mathematical measurements make organics as structurally predictable as water ,where the" solventmagic" revolves around its 105 degree structure

theres all flavors from young earth to those who essentially buy science but add a component of theistic evolution (without any compelling bases except their say so).As st said, its a game to not specify whats"under the hood"

What flavor is under your hood? How does the new information that natural selection is using to decide who lives and who dies coming from? Is the new information coming from a purely random source? Or is there something written into the DNA codes that helps The right mutations come up so that biospheres can interact and species can interact to survive? ( like the biosphere inside a cows gut and the biosphere in the honeybees gut thats pollinating the Cows food and the biosphere in the fly larvate gut that are decomposing the food that plants are living on that feed the honeybee )

Are you out of the flavor we all won the lottery 50 million times in a row, or somebody is lining things up so that we have such a wonderful place to live? And please don't answer this question with the system is so complex you can't understand how it appears to look intelligent when it's not, it's just too complex for you to understand it's really simple how all this happened by chance if you were just smart enough to understand it . It is just is reasonable to believe this didn't happen by chance as it is to believe that it did happen by chance. Actually it's more reasonable to believe something complex is designed. The problem is the longer ago it was designed and the bigger it is the harder it is to figure out who designed it especially if your man living inside the universe somebody designed. Or an ant living inside the skyscraper somebody designed. That just makes you a stubborn ant.

It just occurred to me that English is not your native tongue, is it? your emphases on some objects that may have no meaning to an ESL person. I apologize if you and I aren't on the same frequency

This guy is competing with Trump on trashing the English language. I'm just wondering which school he attended when he had to study English?

My voice recognition changes the dang words 30 seconds after they appear sometimes and I didn't notice it

Are you of the flavor we all won the lottery 50 million times in a row? That's what had to happen for so much integration between species and ecosystems to happen that are necessary for all of life to flurry shot hurt like it is today. And this is happening in spite of huge climate changes Caused by catalclysmic Events. It was amazing and how quickly life adapted to those major changes in climate without intelligent guidance, or did it? If intelligence did help and adapt to climate changes in the past that kind of throws the young Earth species were created complete theory in the garbage.

I believe the Bible says evolution did happen and intelligence did help life adapt to changes in the environment over millions of years.

Think a bit deeper. All concepts you rely on like 'cause', 'beginning' 'intelligence' , 'design', and 'chance' are human constructs. ID-ism is stuck in an anthropocentric mental cul-de-sac resulting from the limits of language and thought. The counter intuitive but highly successful developments in quantum physics should themselves be sufficient to torpedo simplistic thinking about 'causality'. 'Systems Chemistry' developments in abiogenetic theory is another.

Think a bit deeper. All concepts you rely on like 'cause', 'beginning' 'intelligence' , 'design', and 'chance' are human constructs. ID-ism is stuck in an anthropocentric mental cul-de-sac, marvelling at its own tenuous evolutionary niche, its questionable 'luck' merely a product of the limits of its language and thought. The counter intuitive but highly successful developments in quantum physics should be sufficient to torpedo simplistic thinking. about 'causality'.

APOLOGIES FOR DUPLICATION

If you think I haven't made a personal choice about who is the intelligence behind the obvious design that we still haven't completely reverse engineered, you are either being selective about what you (and your sidekick Setanta) read, or you are lying.

I have made it abundantly clear that I am a theist and have never tried to hide that fact. I've also made it clear that I've purposely separated my theistic beliefs from the arguments for ID because they are able to stand on their own without reference to Bible or other theological references (unless I'm asked for them).

Your lame attempt at discrediting ID arguments by attacking the person or organization making them rather than the argument itself exposes one of the many fallacies in your argument.


https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Shill_gambit

I am not FM's "sidekick." I am capable of judging for myself, and I see no evidence of any intelligence, nor any design, nor any plan. I also understand natural selection and how it functions as the mechanism, the random mechanism of evolutionary change. That horse poop there about separating your theism from the "intelligence" and the "design" (for neither of which have you ever provided a shred of evidence) might fool a nursery school kid. No reasonably intelligent adult, especially an educated adult who is not religiously brain-washed is capable of seeing the entirely speculative and self-serving nature of your claims. Really . . . don't piss down my leg and tell me it's raining. You have never provided the least evidence for your dog and pony show.

Ive attacked your arguments with facts all the time. You like to stand in a corner and claim that im all ad hominem.
You and your beuds consistently cry that you are convinced by specific "evidence" yet you never really seem to xpand beyond that assertion.
What you do profess is that you are a theistic evolution fan. Fine, I have really nothing I wish to attack you on other than to expand on the history of that modern movement. I find the history with Phillip Johnston, Richard Demski, J Shapiro, M Behe, S Austen and several others to be somewhat disingenuous. Their "Science assertions" can all be esily dismantled and Ive repeated the data that was used to accomplish that debunking.
I think Ive done more to present dta and evidence from rsearch in my arguments than all of your side put together.
Its hard to argue small findings that , together make compelling stories of chaotic, opportunistic evolution rather than some systematized "Implied design from intelligence"

The last month "Systematic paleontology" journal had such and interesting findng from crinoid and sessile organisms in the Paleozoic embayments along the proto S Asian coats. It appears , through the fossil record (looking deeper in adjacent strata).
It appears that predation, as a regional seaway opened up to a spreading sea floor had resulted in major speciation changes and rapid evolution in upward layered species of sessile organisms. In other words, as time went on , later sediment layers began to evince these chnges and newer more robust species of daughter versions as the predation evidence increased in time. Sort of a stand still, "Red Queen mode" of adaptation.
When we get down to these multi million year old examples of adaptive radiation or speciation, we seem to see that there are many examples of these "little steps" of evolution that are seemingly absent any evidence of "intelligence".

I welcome any discussions in these actual examples rather than the broader "linkages " .
Do you agree that its easier for the human mind to build compelling evidence in a forensic manner than it is to assert a phenomenon and then try to hunt for supportive evidence(and discount anything that doesnt support it).

Other evidence regarding mass extinctions and bursts of volution are hard examples to deny in the fossil record. As worldwide studies have become deeply interdisciplanary in scope, they bring little bits of overlapping evidence that MUST be incorporate into any systematic approach. We cannot take one piece of field or lab data and ignore other , modifying, examples that do NOT support the systematics. It all mut fall into place. Thats one of the big areas that I find ID falling down. They buy and sell data from real science and ignore glaring things that dont fit their beliefs.

See your selectivity in action?? Because we HAVENT "reversed engineered something" you fail to mention the word YET.

Usually some grad student in paleo genetics is out there working on a PhD in just that problem. (Species by species).

Also, You claim "obvious design" and I ask WHERE? Youve gotta look at the life and development o species before you try to coopt the "obvious design" phrase.

Im still not fully clear about what youre asking but think about what speciation (nd higher tqxa), once appearing in the fossil record, hqve limited directions that they can continue evolving. (once lobe finned fish began evolving modified features like moveable necks, yes on top f their heds, usable naries, etc). These modifications limit where the NEXT feture can evolve.
Its not a "win the lottery" issue, its a path on which life is set

Tells us again, in glorious detail, how god revealed himself to you on several occasions.