Intelligent Design Theory: Science or Religion?

@camlok,

Go start your own thread about US war crimes if you want to talk about it. /Stop gumming up every other thread on a2k with completely irrelevant-to-the-topic ****.

1 Reply

@MontereyJack,

kk4mds, leadfoot and I were all having a discussion.

Are you a science denier too?

0 Replies

@Syamsu,

Syamsu wrote:

What do you think the freedom in the universe is doing? Is it just like tossing salad, randomly making planets and stars here and there?

First, to what, exactly, do you refer to when you speak of "the freedom" in the Universe?
When we find out that there is no such thing, and when we learn how 'creation' is impossible, the confusing vain notion of some puppeteer god constantly stirring some brew toward his 'will/satisfaction', ultimately vanishes, as the Pride and vanity of the insane 'belief' in 'freedom/free-will/choice'!

Quote:

Isn't your science crap because you don't acknowledge any decision whatsoever in the entire universe?

Like most 'belief infected', you make many ignorant and self-serving assumptions toward the bias of your egoic beliefs.
The Universe doesn't make 'decisions, and only in the fevered dreams of your fantasies can you support such nonsense.
WE don't even make decisions; we 'feel/think' that we do. Ego/vanity says that we do and we are so vainly ready to accept that 'belief' infection! We feel like a god, making 'decisions' that affect the Universe!!
Ugh, feels good, want more good feeling!

1 Reply

@nameless,

Quote:

Syamsu Quote:
Isn't your science crap because you don't acknowledge any decision whatsoever in the entire universe?

Like most 'belief infected', you make many ignorant and self-serving assumptions toward the bias of your egoic beliefs.
The Universe doesn't make 'decisions, and only in the fevered dreams of your fantasies can you support such nonsense.
WE don't even make decisions; we 'feel/think' that we do. Ego/vanity says that we do and we are so vainly ready to accept that 'belief' infection! We feel like a god, making 'decisions' that affect the Universe!!
Ugh, feels good, want more good feeling!

A simple 'yes' would have sufficed.

1 Reply

@Leadfoot,

now now

1 Reply

@farmerman,

Wha'da ya supposed to say when he insults the guy for agreeing with him?

1 Reply

@Leadfoot,

forgive them ,for they know not what the **** they are saying.
Im gonna be 67 in a coupla weeks so Ill be older than you for a few days correct?

1 Reply

@farmerman,

Good advice.

Nah, I'm a bit further ahead of you there. I'll be 70 on turkey day. Giving myself a new bimmer for the occasion.

1 Reply

@Leadfoot,

the new Jag SUV is a smart looking auto. Idont know crap about its performance.
I just ordered a new 18 Explorer cause I need an SUV that gets me in and out of mine lqnds and swamps. My last client paid for a 2016 and it was a dream to drive open road AND backwoods. I get what a Rover should be for 20 K less

Have an enjoyable and uneventful birthdqy. Mine is on Dec 2,(my partner
to whom I sold the company is 72 on Dec 1 my other two pqrtners have their Birthdy in lte Dec and Jan. It was really weird for drivers license renewals .

1 Reply

@farmerman,

Thanks for the reminder, had forgotten my license expires this year. Was able to renew on-line just now.

Planned on an M2 but it was just too damn harsh on some of the roads around here. The M240i with a few performance options gives 98% of M2 performance without the bone jarring. The Slingshot crash showed me I'm too old for more than 95% anyway so I saved the same 20K. Should help pay for the mandatory 93 octane gas it eats. Getting the limited slip differential but it still won't be able to follow your Explorer into the swamp.

B-day Cheers to you & yer buddies

0 Replies

Yet another level of coding in DNA in peer reviewed science.

Quote:

Abstract

β‐ and γ‐cytoplasmic actin are nearly indistinguishable in their amino acid sequence, but are encoded by different genes that play non‐redundant biological roles. The key determinants that drive their functional distinction are unknown. Here, we tested the hypothesis that β- and γ-actin functions are defined by their nucleotide, rather than their amino acid sequence, using targeted editing of the mouse genome. Although previous studies have shown that disruption of β-actin gene critically impacts cell migration and mouse embryogenesis, we demonstrate here that generation of a mouse lacking β-actin protein by editing β-actin gene to encode γ-actin protein, and vice versa, does not affect cell migration and/or organism survival. Our data suggest that the essential in vivo function of β-actin is provided by the gene sequence independent of the encoded protein isoform. We propose that this regulation constitutes a global ‘silent code’ mechanism that controls the functional diversity of protein isoforms.

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.31661.001

If it were just simple chemical interactions, life could be rationalized as the normally expected outcome of inevitable chemical interactions. But an accidental generation of multiple levels of coding directing those interactions is simply implausible.

I really loved the title of the suggested further reading at the end of the paper. (emphasis mine)

Quote:

Further reading

Computational and Systems Biology Biochemistry and Chemical Biology

1 Reply

@Leadfoot,

Ah-hahahahahahahahahahaha . . .

And your imaginary friend, your magic sky daddy is plausible?

Ah-hahahahahahahahahahahaha . . .

Ya just can't make up sh*t this funny.

2 Replies

@Setanta,

Interestingly, this paper suggests that genotypic(and phenotypic expression in muscle tissue) variability in the several actins (I believe theres less than 10 different ones) are controlled by natural selection not by "neutral theory" (a friend of ID)

1 Reply

@Setanta,

Quote:

Ah-hahahahahahahahahahaha . . .

And your imaginary friend, your magic sky daddy is plausible?

Ah-hahahahahahahahahahahaha . . .

Ya just can't make up sh*t this funny.

Folks who deny WTC molten/vaporized steel, just one of the myriad impossibilities that sink the USGOCT, really should not be pointing fingers at others as regards plausibility.

0 Replies

@farmerman,

It is the complete rejection of the rather simple, elegant and pervasive effect of natural selection which makes such idiots of the ID crowd. The oldest evidence of the archaea dates back more than four billion years. Even modern mammals become reproductively viable within a year or two. The number of iterations is off the scale of reasonable calculation. The failure to understand the process of natural selection and its relentless expression, or the refusal to acknowledge it makes the religious agenda of so-called intelligent design crowd so obvious that they ought to be embarrassed. They're effectively fighting in the last ditch.

2 Replies

@Setanta,

its interesting though that theyve been using actual science to help define their goals. Its kind of neat that the concepts of "common ancestry" and the limitations of variability, and that ole chestnut that Dawkins made up,'The Selfish gene" have lined up behind Darwin AND HE HAD NO FRIGGIN IDEA THAT WHAT HE(and fr Mendel) WERE SAYING WOULD BECOME A KEY in HOW LIFE is subtended and driven by simple chemical reactions perhaps staring with helical crystals of iron oxyhydroxides and hydroxycarbonates(where we see the hugest numbers of Archaea species existing today ).

1 Reply

@Setanta,

Holy ****! Something other than **** flinging behavior from Setanta! A welcome change.

Quote:

It is the complete rejection of the rather simple, elegant and pervasive effect of natural selection

First, I have never rejected the effects of natural selection.

But more to the point, the words 'Intelligent Design' in the thread title has more to do with abiogenesis. Natural selection is not a factor there.

0 Replies

@farmerman,

Well, at least you recognized that the subject was abiogenesis.

As for 'life from rust', I'm glad you said 'perhaps'. You can add that to the list, under sea vents, certain clay, etc.
Hell, the intelligence behind the origin of life could use whatever sort of 'dust' he/she/it wanted.

You sure can't get away from the fact that first life had to be RNA/DNA based and was coded. Unless you want to introduce yet another complexity of an unexplained transition from some other non DNA based life form. Is that what your 'life from rust' is getting at?

1 Reply

@Leadfoot,

Quote:

You sure can't get away from the fact that first life had to be RNA/DNA based and was coded

"GET AWAY"?? Recent research just says that it didnt happen that way. The first life appeared to be just a fatty acid polymer enclosing the iron oxyhydoxide s . somatic cell.
No evidence of RNA in sight. We see instead that fronds of oxyhydroxides ere GROWING because they bifurcated almost in union. We have evidences of this kind of structure in stuff we call "Bog Iron"(limonite lepidocrocite, and goethite). Other "life consistent" features include , environment of occurence, evidence of respiration adjacent to the bog iron. Other things like ingestion an nutrition are only being inferred and not solidly proven.

RNA was a late bloomer,(it was quite a time before the two chemical groups that define the5 nucleotides that are consistent with nucleic acids) and then another half a billion years before we can even speculate that DNA evolved.
This supposed "programming" sounds like it gets in gear only with lots of intervening time between important events. Sounds more like responses to environmental conditions or natural selection. If you can prove that the environments that induced sequential steps in natural selection that led to complex life were also "Programmed" I would listen intently, because thats the key step controlling what life looks like now.

2 Replies

@farmerman,

Quote:

The first life appeared to be just a fatty acid polymer enclosing the iron oxyhydoxide s . somatic cell.

Oh really.. That ought to be dead simple to demonstrate in the lab experimentally. Got any results?

I think it is more likely that they happened upon this shape in your iron oxyhydroxide and thought "Eureka! There is where DNA based life came from!" That's as likely as DNA based life coming from a rusty drill bit.

http://www.mdpi.com/crystals/crystals-05-00047/article_deploy/html/images/crystals-05-00047-g001-1024.png

0 Replies

Intelligent Design Theory: Science or Religion?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know