Evolutionry/religious nonsense

You first--you have consistently failed to provide any evidence for your magic sky daddy, for any design or for any intelligence behind the putative design. I have not made any statements based on the singularity nor upon the mechanics of astrophysics--I do not have to defend claims I have not made. You have made claims and you haven't provided any evidence. Your pseudo-scientific babbling constitutes a huge straw man fallacy.

Put up or shut up.

You have made no claims because there is no evidence to back up the claim that all this order came from nothing. The only thing we do know is that when we witness new order coming into existence it is either created by human intelligence or an existing ancient system designed to introduce complexity called nature. We have witnessed complex systems being created today, but never have seen one be initiated by chance. Can you give an example of one?

embeddeddimensions.com. That is the evidence I am working on. Now whatever inch do you have for nucleosynthesis which is necessary to create the matter that is going to be used in natural evolution. Where is your evidence that abiogenisis can occur without intelligence initiating it.

Thats your own collction of wikis. We went through that almost a year ago, remember??.
Jeez, youre getting difficult to take seriously.

I also gave you a pretty extensive running account of nucleosynthesis and the sepctral prints of specific radionuclide elements(Tc, recall?).

If you care NOT to accept, fine, one thing the Constitution gives you is a right to believe as you do and worship a being who gives you satisfaction as to the way you interpret the earth and its citizens to have appeared.I more or less agree with the National Academy of SCience which stated that the theory of evolution is
'the central unifying concept in biology". The overwhelming evidence supports an appearance and growth of life in deep time consistent with the laws of physical and organic chemistry, geology, as well as biology . Your only "evidence" seems to be a mantra of " the planet and its life is too complex to have arisen naturally". Thats all youve been able to cobble up and present after all this time. Everything else is denial of the sciences and Im really not here to defend the findings of science with you as arbiter. I find that you're rather dishonest in your approaches because I think Ive been rather generous with information about the work thats being done, nd all youve done is ignore and deny. Well Im still willing to debate but lets not start with your premises as fact and I want you to discuss the evidentiary stuff Ive brought up.

Till then.

Yeah, good luck with that.

I agree that natural evolution has happened and is happening.

Spectral analysis tells us that something exists. I agree that matter exists. I don't agree that supernova are producing heavy Atoms I do believe they are expelling heavy Atoms. Just because something is expelling something doesn't mean it's creating it. I expel carbon dioxide I do not create it .

I don't agree that there was gravity in the universe before matter. There is no evidence of it. Just because something exists doesny mean it always did. something had to create it. That is the pattern we see today.

First of all my evidence is not all wiki. Second of all I don't disagree with any of the observations of scientists only their interpretation of the evidence. I will rewrite my ideas using strictly mainstream data and it'll still work.

I believe there are two big assumptions science is making that is wrong. The first being matter was created by a gravitational event called the big bang and secondly matter was organized into a living organism by random events.

I explain in my compilation of scientific data that it could be interpreted a different way. I did not invent the data I just looked at it from a different point of view . Let's discuss where I am wrong in my interpretation.

start another thread if you wish to conflate these subjects Ill join in . This one is about evolution v ID .
Im through with you here (.)

I agree

Good call.

Another evolution happened here~! LOL

There is no order in this cosmos. You are projecting your immature needs for reassurance onto the universe. Look up entropy some time.

As FM says, this thread is about evolution, not your goofy pseudo-science.

Farmer keeps pointing out how natural selection is capable of producing complexity. He has spent years learning how natural selection through randomly introduced information has produced real genes for immediate use or, pseudogenes that will be used when future sudden climate changes require them to become real genes or they become real genes when biological needs like a new organ system like those for sexual reproduction require them to switch. The whole time the randomly generated material that would destroy the organism (which is generated at a much higher rate because there are more that can be randomly produced are eliminated.

That might not be order when viewed on a on a universal scale of entropy, but that is assuming there is enough disorder is some other part of the universe we cant observe. (Look up entropy).

The. Only reason to assume there would be to accept a view based on pseudoscience projecting your bigotted belief that, what looks like order to most people but is not really order, to promote yours and a fellow minorities view that there is no God let alone intelligence behind all the structures and systems farmer is understanding and explaining. (He is describing With great detail but incompleteness and with great resistance to the filling in of the details of how abiogenesis, quantum mechanics and gravity are produced, I might add)

Why should I believe your imperceptible disorder exists? Why is that not pseudoscience, when such gaping holes are left in your theory and you see no need to eliminate them in a logical way or at least refuse to accept all logical possibilities because of a preconcieved bias.

You guys want it both ways. First you say theres not enough time and
not enough random mutations occuring to account for the direction of evolution. When that dosnt hold water, you try to flip it about to say that lethal mutations are happening so much that they overwhelm evolution.
Which way you goin??

the living state has entropy in heck hil the organisms live and breed. Senescence occurs but overwhelmingly after reproduction occurs. Think salmon.


AS far as your God thing, try not to confuse your belief in the intelligent designer with reality. Reality has the property that, when you stop believing in it, still continues to happen.
Science needs evidence, apparently you have a disdain for that. Ive asked you guys for evidence over and over.Others have asked for evidence of your opinions, you just continue to ignore the requests and post these bible tract lead-ins. (Ya think people might notice your disrespect for others?)

Scientists are really much better critics of each others work than you can provide. You bring nothing to the table except myth and a single minded evidence-free assertion.

If youre gonna keep posting about me as if Im not in the room, I will remind folks by addressing the fact that youre not wearing any clothes .

I think the most recent ID/Creationism Textbook ,at least most recent to be used in many charter and Fundamentalist parochial schools, is the S. Meyer/ Minnich book EXPLORE EVOLUTION. It was published in 2008 nd I think its in its second ed. This is the book that filled in the embarrassing gaps of fact and truth that Of Pandas and People delivered to the judge at the Kitzmiller hearings.
Most of the ideas in "Explore..." strangely parallel what LF and BJ have been saying.

1 not enough mutations available
2 definitions of mutations counter what science understands
3 complexity undeniably a sign of ID (There are many more)
The book is about 150 pages and purports to be a definitive peer reviewed text with all the things needed for a good "Scientific" explanation of ID and creation science.


Normal biology books, like K Miller's text are in the 1000+ pages and still dont tell the whole story


(ncse does a nice critique of "Explore..."

Complexity is definitely evidence of design. Because every time we see it entering the universe today it enters through human intelligence or an ancient complex system with unknown origins that appears to be designed. That is the evidence of an intelligent designer that has been proposed.

The other evidence is that the designer stepped into the universe He created as Jesus and claimed to be the designer.

I keep asking for evidence that super novae is creating atoms and you provide spectral analysis. All that tells us is what is coming out of a super nova, not how what it is expelling is created. are a lot of systems expelling atoms, when we study them closelty none actually create new matter.

What happened in the big bang that allowed the process to create first gravity, then matter, and eventually life.

I propose matter came before gravity because the evidence suggests it and the bible agrees.

I am commenting on your posts because setanta did. You are a great resource.

ID will never get a fair peer review by the scienctific community until the scientific community quits being bigots and accepts them as peers.

All arguments agianst my logical proposals start with,"Brian's arguments are invalid because of my emtional need for a God." We all have emotional needs. Your emotional need (and yes i know you have them) for a family, job, and purpose in life does not discount the truth that a civil society that provides security to raise a family is a good thing. The emotional need is evidence that the system was designed for that purpose.

I even provided a poorly written but lengthy argument with no comment from you or sentana other than general name calling. You provided no detailed argumnent backing up the labels you give me. Name calling, Without a detailed argument is a sign of bigotry.

and you say this is so because.
??

You are waay too easily impressed by "complexity".


If you keep trying to spend time sneaking back to astrophysics (as if you think you are being profound). Ill jut keep reminding you that youre being rather obtuse .

ID cannot be a "peer" because it starts with its own conclusion, it doesnt work toward a conclusion by massive mounds of material evidence.

Peddle your crap before some folks who believe you have something of value to preach.

ID had its chance in Pa and Kansas to make its best "scientific arguments" and failed miserably in both cases. (There probably will be more as the centers of ID brain trust try to pel away more of the challenging stuff (like repeat ability or passing the "Lemon test") and paring itself down to a single point like "teaching the controversy"

We witness complexity being introduced by intelligence daily. We have never witnessed intelligence being introduced randomly except through an intelligently designed system, or by a system that is to ancient to determine the designer.

You try to hide the pattern of complexity requiring a designer behind the age of the system, you claim has these wonderful complexity adding qualities (namely natural selection which is running on the system of quantum mechanics and relativity).
Yes, it is impressive how matter and the higgs field interact to give us the laws of physics (qm and relativity) so natural selection can perform its miracles of abiogenisis and complexity creation from random introductions of new information. Especially since matter and the higgs field (which both need a complex structure for gravity can exist at all "see higgs field, higgs boson, entropic gravity, string theory, wave function, shape of atomic orbitals, etc. . . All these systems must first be understood and explained how they depend on each other, for the entire system of natural selection operating in the biospheres of our universe, before the origins of all these systems can be explained from patterns we more fully understand. If a pattern exists where we can always trace the pattern to an intelligence or an intelligence that is to ancient to identify why assume the age of the system eliminates the need for identifying the intelligence?

You are to easily jumping to the conclusion that all these poorly understood systems can be explained away by age of system taking care of the need for a designer.

Why, is your ability to assume that the origins these poorly understood systems will be explained away in the future by the actions of time and random introduction of info to create complexity "so much better than" my ability to assume the pattern of complexity always being introduced by intelligence or preexisting ancient systems (that also have intelligent rather than random origins to follow that patterns we currently are observing) that we observe today.

It seems you are assuming that a different set of rules (that we can't replicate today) existed in the ancient past for you to assume that complexity can originate from random introduction of information into a systemless universe (that by definition cannot organize information because a sytem to organize does not exist) that existed before matter and the higgs field.


Astrophysics is a huge part of the explanation of the intertwined systems that must all exist for anyone system (including natural selection to exist.) Ignorance is bliss I guess.



I just gave a list that of things science cannot explain. The reason the cannot be explained is because more order is necessary to explain gravity, relativity and qm. More order means more complexity. More complexity lowers the chances of random introduction of info being able to solve the explanation for the creation of the systems.

I am not caught up on some emotional need for a God, I am caught up on allowing the discussion for a mathematical and scientific need for intelligence behind the complexity of the Higgs field and matter for entropic gravity to exist so natural selection has an operating system to operate in.

You seem to be emotionally involved in stopping the discussion by judicial fiat. ( A judge who obviously did not understand statistical analysis, math, qm, entropic, gravity, higgs field, etc. . . because he did not mention them in his decision) All he mentioned were his feelings on including the possibility of ID in the disillusion based on some weird interpretation of the first amendment that says your interpretation of the evidence is allowed in the discussion but mine isn't based on your non religious belief system you live at home.

I am not asking for baptism to be a requirement of science, I am asking for open discussion of the evidence.

Design by nature based on the available environment. That’s the reason why animals and other living things appeared billions of years after earths’s environment became suitable for life forms to appear through evolution.

Now that’s a logical statement i agree with. Nature manipulates information which looks to cicerone like design.

And nature provides the environment because it is made up of atoms that get there mass by interacting with the Higgs field which was designed by (fill in the blank with some other complex system that designs things like cicerone’s nature)

No it's not.

Actually, they are ancient complex systems with unknown origins that appear to have evolved naturally.

Here's what we've got: The Big Bang Moment (Origin Unknown, precursor Unknown), followed by about 10 Billion years of atomic and molecular evolution leading up to a moment of Abiogenesis (transition specifics unknown), followed by about 4 Billion years of biological evolution. A total of almost 14 Billion years of natural processes with two tiny moments of "unknown", and you want to jam your intelligent designer into those tiny cracks.

That claim has been made before. Many, many, many times before, and every time, every single time, we learn more, and the unknown gets filled with natural processes. Why should this latest "God of the gaps" claim be any different? Why on earth would any reasonable person give it any credence after watching it fail so many times before?

You cannot deduce the presence of a Intelligent Designer by cornering it with your lack of knowledge, or even humanity's lack of knowledge. That's like trying to plug a leak with a strainer.