Don't tell me there's no proof for evolution

@cicerone imposter,

Quote:

ID has already been falsified. The bible claims this earth is 7,000 years old. Science shows us that this planet is 4.5 billion years old.

Your creator doesn't exist (no evidence), so how can your creator create anything? A creator who can't be proven to have created this planet is absurd. It goes nowhere.

CI, You sound like a little boy hiding under the blankets in the dark reciting his mantra - There is no monster in the closet, there is no monster in the closet, ...

0 Replies

Ah, such a trenchant riposte.

0 Replies

@fresco,

Quote:

Natural abiogenesis IS likely to be 'understood' given advances in systems chemistry and quantum theory etc, and synthetic abiogenesis IS a subsequent possibility.

Call me when it happens.
Here's another prediction of ID. - You won't call.

Quote:

But even in that event, theists will argue that the 'creativity' involved was 'in the gift of the deity for his own purposes'.

Damn, can't you guys ever stop talking about religion? And give up on pretending to be able to see the future, you have no idea what anyone will say then.

Quote:

After all, we already have some theists acknowleging evolution as part of ' His purpose' !

Different subject. We were discussing abiogenesis. What difference does it make what 'some theists' say, this is you and me talking.

Quote:

You underestimate both the nature of epistemological progress and the reaction of vested interest theists in countering it.

Not at all, and it's a two way street fresco.

0 Replies

No one would be talking about religion if it weren't for the IDiots, who are dishonest god-botherers, creationists who are lying about their beliefs.

0 Replies

Quote:

Ah, such a trenchant riposte.

1 Reply

@farmerman,

Quote:

Nei is certainly entitled to his opinions but its fairly obvious that (even by the neutral "theorists") selection occurs at all levels,

I agree that natural selection works at all levels. We have already agreed on that. Why do you keep bring it up? Natural selection must be a key component to any theory of evolution that suggest ID is the driver of new info rather than random actions. We wouldn't have extinct species or adaption if that wasn't true, and we have both.

Quote:

is accomplished as a physiological "tropism" by mostly external agents.

Wiki

Quote:

A tropism (from Greek τρόπος, tropos, "a turning") is a biological phenomenon, indicating growth or turning movement of a biological organism, usually a plant, in response to an environmental stimulus. In tropisms, this response is dependent on the direction of the stimulus (as opposed to nastic movements which are non-directional responses). Viruses and other pathogens also affect what is called "host tropism", "tissue tropism", or "cell tropism", or in which case tropism refers to the way in which different viruses/pathogens have evolved to preferentially target specific host species, specific tissue, or specific cell types within those species. Tropisms are usually named for the stimulus involved (for example, a phototropism is a reaction to sunlight) and may be either positive (towards the stimulus) or negative (away from the stimulus).

A tropism is a programmed response to a stimuli. Programmed means there is a program written in the DNA(maybe written by someone because of the complexity of some of these PAX 6 protiens) which guides an organisms response in a way that leads to survival. A plant changing direction of growth, or a virus mutating to become another similar virus, in order to survive in a changing environment, is a far cry from macroevoultion of new organ systems, or species.

Quote:

I know they are merely trying to insert a deity in the mix but they seem to deny that Oxidation/Reduction is intelligence-free to make it happen, further dont ALL surface reactions happen blindly in nature whether its just mere adsorption, hydrolysis, linkages or a whole bag of reactions. Why do they need some overseer??

You used the word Tropism which is a programmed response. A combination of hundreds of PAX 6 proteins operating in what appears to be a choreographed unity to cause macroevolution to extreme complexity leads one to assume that the biological program running in the living computer of the combined PAX 6 protiens requires intelligence to initiate the process.

Quote:

(I really think the MAGIC occurred over 10 billion years ago when , after the Big Bang, which only created Hydrogen and helium, how the heavy elements got produced)

I agree. And as they develop the precise structure of empty space to fulfill the data they obtaining in there testing of the Higgs boson, and Entropic gravity, the complexity at the start of the universe only becomes more insurmountable for random acts to provide the new information. They will find out Gold atoms aren't popping out of nowhere by chance from a Big Bang or from some Super Nova explosion.

I have been reading Sean Carroll for years. Would you discuss his main idea that supports random actions can provide the information written in these PAX 6 proteins, and the programming to choreograph groups of them working together.

Quote:

Evolution , on the whole, is an interaction of mutation (not redesign from scratch), natural selection, and Time. ID "hypothesists" scramble about by trying to dispute and deny one of these components. The overall evidence, like Dr Behes writings and testimony on "Irreducible Complexity" stand in evidence totally against His writings. (Still, he is a featured scholar and a board member of the Discovery Institute the USA center of science denial on evolution by nat selection).

You like to step back and look at the overall evidence but, all the evidence has to work always. Otherwise it takes magic along the way to fix the one thing in the theory that doesn't work. Intelligence is not magic, our thoughts are not magic but, they might not be natural either.

Give me specific examples of evidence standing agianst Behe's writings.

2 Replies

@brianjakub,

Quote:

Natural selection must be a key component to any theory of evolution that suggest ID is the driver of new info rather than random actions. We wouldn't have extinct species or adaption(sic) if that wasn't true, and we have both.

That's kinda why I kep trying to get it twixt your ears,that's why. You seem to parse these components of evolution into
A . Divinely controlled(mutation)
B . Adaptive (selection)
Science doesnt work that way, thats all. Ya want to play like you understand, please try to comprehend that point.

Quote:

tropism is a programmed response to a stimuli.

you are merely word playing as if it meaningful to your point. Tropism is a response , physical or, more likely, chemical.Just as I explained thatOxidation/Reduction can be started or stopped by you or by nature. "Tropic reactions" can be used used to describe the modus of adaptation . To use the word "programmed" as if to imply ID, its up to th user to provide some meaningful evidence.

1 Reply

@brianjakub,

Quote:

Intelligence is not magic, our thoughts are not magic but, they might not be natural either.

So they are Supernatural?? words are all our games you see.
If you wish to try to make your argument for ID driving genetic variability, you will probably have to deny Dr Behes "hypotheses" about this very topic(Carroll highlights this in "Making of the Fittest" As far as your mixing of concepts from Phyics into phys chem, remember the rules of reaction nd forget "entropic gravity" or for whatever the hell you are reaching. Some of our actual honest to goodnes real physicists on the board call string theory "Mathturbation"

IN ALL EARTHBOUND ACTIVITIES BELOW LIGHT SPEED, NEWTONIAN PHYICS CTUALLY WORKS. ALL our geophysical models use basic Newtonian field equations and we make Billions of dollars in exploration using em. (But I have to beg a bit of ignornce since I grew out of physical organic and rare earth P-chemistry

1 Reply

http://cdn77.sadanduseless.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/god-spider.png

2 Replies

@edgarblythe,

Don't forget fangs. Shocked

1 Reply

@BillW,

Fangs for the memory.

0 Replies

@Leadfoot,

It beats the hell out of your snide remark to C.I. in which you basically called him a frightened child. You really are a wonderful example of a Christian--sneering, haughty, contemptuous and at the same time inept and lacking in imagination.

1 Reply

@BillW,

Belief in a 2000 year old book that includes so many errors and contradictions, a sane person would end up insane if you truly believed everything in the Bible. A sane person would need to ignore all the contradictions. Science should supercede fiction 100% of the time, but one must practice logic in order to understand facts. Is the planet earth 7000 years old and created by God according to the Bible, or 4.5 billion years old according to science?

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

ci, that is a good reworking of what I am saying, Thanks!

There are other qualifications to this book and reality; such as, the editorializing by allowed stories and contact by the Catholic Church in the beginning, most stories were written 100 years after the death of Jesus and many rewrites that changes significantly the stories in the eye of the editor.

1 Reply

@Setanta,

I don't understand why anybody would call me a frightened child. I've worked over 80% of my working career in management and consulting. I'm 82 years old, have traveled to 83 countries, and have friends in Russia, Cuba, Singapore, Mexico, Germany, France, England, Australia, Bhutan, and all across the US of A. We are financially secure in retirement living in Silicon Valley, have no loans, and can travel to any place on this planet except some places in the Middle East. I'm doing fairly well after suffering kidney failure, and no longer require treatment for it. I see my life as having been rewarding.

0 Replies

@farmerman,

Quote:

you seem to parse these components of the evolution into
A. Divinely controlled (mutation)
B. Adaptive (selection)
Science doesn't work that way

Random or intelligently guided do you Tatian's provide the new information for the packs six proteins to use to decide what cells are going to grow, and what changes in morphology will occur. Natural selection decides if the newly mutated animal should live or die. They are two completely different processes that do two completely different things. together they make evolution work. But each has to stand alone as a viable explanation of the separate processes teacher fulfilling.
Nei pointed that out, because he understands how changes in DNA occur. He didn't pointed out because he likes pushing his opinion. He pointed that out in his article.

So random mutations has to be the driver of new information. Is something it's working along with random mutations providing information whether it's intelligence or something programmed into the organism itself, it's origins needs to be accounted for and explained

0 Replies

@farmerman,

Quote:

you will probably half to deny Dr. Behe's hypotheses about this very topic

. Could you be a little more specific on this Comment? give me a couple quotes or something.

Global positioning systems are something we use every day they cannot work under Newtonian physics. String theory is what mathematicians get when they try describing a complex system without being able to draw a picture in their mind of what the system looks like.

2 Replies

@BillW,

I believe the Bible is mostly a book of stories recording things of historical significance. Your statement that it is been edited and rewritten enough times that you can't depend on the meaningbehind the stories I do believe is a false statement if you check the Histórical documentation of how the Bible was compiled

0 Replies

@brianjakub,

If you go back and reread what I said about Newtonian Physics and the "fringe" area in which relativity prevails. STring theory is where "entropic gravity" arises.

We dont hve anything which supports, defines, or exemplifies string theory . A I said , its mathturbation.

0 Replies

@brianjakub,

Quote:

you will probably have to deny Dr. Behe's hypotheses about this very topic

The examples come out of Behe's own written testimony before he credited "Supernatural events" as science(he did that on the stand).

His biggest fault is, considering his hypothesis of Irreducible Complexity, he, and the entire "faculty" at the Discovery Institure MUST fall back on Goldschmidts concept of the "hopeful monster" wherein all possible genetic formulations are there in the code and are merely "clipped off" by naturl selection. Hence sustaining a universal intelligence behind it all. Its not the case an I hope youre not hanging on to hi thinking as valid.

2 Replies

Don't tell me there's no proof for evolution

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know