|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
|
Author | Topic: Evidence for Intelligent Design-is there any? | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Bio-molecularTony Member (Idle past 5409 days) Posts: 90 Joined: |
Huntard: "when they claim to have evidence that we are designed, and then don't show any, they are lying, and lying's not ok with their god and all that."
______________________________________ Tony: Life is not some kind of on going supernatural miracle or some magical unknown phenomena. Evolutionist might think it is more closer to being so then I do. Life simply is (Occam's razor) TECHNOLOGY. Life is a machine with programming - Fully automated systems. Such Technology can be copies by mankind intelligently. Can not be copied without intelligence. Not even one protein needed for life can be created without intelligent designing engineers. You can't even shuffle a box full of supplies to "intelligently create" what only artistic hands can create. 1. The cell is a machine.2. DNA is Genetic Instructions (software). 3. Life is an illusion of all that complexity (machinery) 4. Machines (big or small) are never naturally occurring. News flash: There is no Living Matter.There is no reproducing Matter.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Bio-molecularTony Member (Idle past 5409 days) Posts: 90 Joined: |
bluegenes: "Life copies itself without intelligence every day."
___________________________________________ TONY: So-called "life" can't even function without the super smart DNA programming instructions (Software - intelligence encoded). Remove the DNA and find out how wrong you are.....
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Bio-molecularTony Member (Idle past 5409 days) Posts: 90 Joined: |
bluegenes: Natural selection doesn't shuffle randomly. There is an automatic bias towards what functions, and then towards improvements in function.
_______________________________________ TONY: There already is this thing can INTELLIGENT GENETIC INSTUCTIONS (basically smart programming. What changes you see are the result of this programming abilities to just name a few. Your lack out knowledge of programming and engineering is showing. Trying to copy the smarts of the DNA without the Programming has never been seen. It is impossible, Testable to be impossible, and is the most basic common sense logic that even a child can see that.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Bio-molecularTony Member (Idle past 5409 days) Posts: 90 Joined: |
You're assuming an intelligence behind the "code" without presenting evidence for it. DNA has no brain, and it modifies itself randomly. There is so much wisdom and knowledge built right into the programming it can create, yes, even intelligently design a human. The DNA systems function like a computer. We know this because we have copied its basic design and came up with a DNA computer. So if you’re DNA systems are a molecular computer running on logic pre-programmed commands - that is all the evidence I need. Logic is not naturally occurring. Intelligent thought is not a blind random evolutionary selection. There is no evidence that anything I can do intelligently can also be copied by some non-intelligent Evolutionary process. Logic programming is only a creation of an intelligent mind.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Bio-molecularTony Member (Idle past 5409 days) Posts: 90 Joined: |
Even by the rather lax standards of ID, this statement makes no sense. The programming can intelligently design? Don't you mean the programmer?
No, the programmer has left the building... There is nothing supernatural here, just bio-mechanical simplicity. All the smarts are now part of the programming instructions in the software DNA.Why is it that one cell can single headedly create one whole human? Designer software of course!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Bio-molecularTony Member (Idle past 5409 days) Posts: 90 Joined: |
The programming can intelligently design?
TONY: We are talking here of a superior programmer coding automated intelligent software! Not human technology - superior technology fit for a God /great universal creator.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Bio-molecularTony Member (Idle past 5409 days) Posts: 90 Joined: |
No, they don't. They really don't. The only similarity I can think of is that they both using digital systems; although, even there, DNA does a lot of stuff which isn't digital too.
TONY: Do you want to bet on that one.....
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Bio-molecularTony Member (Idle past 5409 days) Posts: 90 Joined: |
Wow, lot's of posts to answer too and it's 10:00 pm FRI. Oh man...
I am going to use my library forum to refer you to cut and past information that best answers your questions when my words are just not enough.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Bio-molecularTony Member (Idle past 5409 days) Posts: 90 Joined: |
"Proof: 1. conclusive evidence: evidence or an argument that serves to establish a fact or the truth of something." Evidence - Wikipedia Evidence in science In scientific research evidence is accumulated through observations of phenomena that occur in the natural world, or which are created as experiments in a laboratory. Scientific evidence usually goes towards supporting or rejecting a hypothesis. When evidence is contradictory to predicted expectations, the evidence and the ways of making it are often closely scrutinized (see experimenter's regress) and only at the end of this process the hypothesis is rejected: this can be referred to as 'refutation of the hypothesis'. The rules for evidence used by science are collected systematically in an attempt to avoid the bias inherent to anecdotal evidence: nonetheless even anecdotal evidence is enough to reject a theory incompatible with that evidence, if there are sufficient repeated examples. TONY: No one has ever shown that software of any kind can be produced naturally (non-intelligent source) that is basically superior to human knowledge. No one has ever shown bio-machinery can occur naturally to a superior design level then mankind can design intelligently. I have two points here. 1# You underestimate the vast complexity of the DNA software, and the bio-machinery that stores the information, reads it, and creates the finished "product". 2# Your dogmatic belief system is blinding your eyes from seeing the evidence is all around us - so clearly exposed.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Bio-molecularTony Member (Idle past 5409 days) Posts: 90 Joined: |
Are you proposing an intelligent engineer who is simpler than the simplest of proteins? TONY: No. God has a complex mind, with complex thought.To create a computer that is self functioning and complex you need to design it from the ground up. Yes you need to start simple but the complexity increase on each level to create a fully functional, totally automatic MACHINE / computer. Note that all parts of the computer are intelligently designed - there are no natural designs (such things do not exist). So it is with life. Life is contrary to nature - all technology is forced designs against the "natural tendencies" of random/blind chemical happenings. The possibilities basically are the same for making a car verse making life without intelligence. What is the difference? Not much. If I create a door key, I create it large enough to fit in may hand. At the quantum level this is EXTREMELY large. The size should be the simplest problem because it is all the same metal, and that would be the easiest part. To make the custom key with a custom design to have a restrictive function is what intelligent design really is all about. Living systems have all kinds of molecular "keys" with highly restrictive functions. They're "created" out of dumb atoms, an "intelligent" automated functioning logic system for order and for design. Dumb atoms in themselves can do nothing, but can be used to create "Machines" that can act "intelligently" with stored information commands. Have you ever created a computer program like tic-tack-toe. You use dumb commands and create a logic structure of intelligent thought down in writing. The computer reads and does what is said. So my tic-tack-toe game might whip your butt, even though the computer is not intelligent in it's self or the programming as well. But my programmed logic in that game is more intelligent them many children, maybe even you for the first 15 minutes. Logic programming is contrary to nature. This is a undeniable principle understanding in true science. Intelligence in any form, alive and functioning person, a book, a software program are all - not naturally occurring (contrary to nature).
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Bio-molecularTony Member (Idle past 5409 days) Posts: 90 Joined: |
Old - TONY: "The DNA systems function like a computer."
No, they don't. They really don't. The only similarity I can think of is that they both using digital systems; although, even there, DNA does a lot of stuff which isn't digital too. Mr Jack New - TONY: You must understand the complexity of the problem here. We have this little cell that can do things you could never do. It can create complex structures again and again on command that will for ever be beyond you intellectual abilities, both in size and structure. Information storage is of no value if never used, read, and acted on.You already know life can not function without those DNA "instructions". So getting to know the a-z logic functions of the cellular machinery (factory) would help you not to put you own foot into your own month. Don't make me force you to eat your own words of stupidity. Watch those Youtub videos on DNA functions and learn a little more about God's universal bio-technologies. Lest I bleed you to "death" on the forum floor. (Joke) Oh Mr Jack.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Bio-molecularTony Member (Idle past 5409 days) Posts: 90 Joined: |
From b00tleg: Does ID have any methods at all on how one might observe an act of Intelligent Design? I ask because its taken science a long hard road to work out the details as to what constitutes evidence, how it should be observed, and how to make sure that experiments with a specific result can be repeated by other scientists. Can we expect ID to offer up any new or unique evidence of its own to support it's claims. Will ID ever make any predictions on where or how design can be observed and verified? To: bluegenes and b00tleg (if not all). TONY: Don't you just hate those religions that walk around so righteous, head so high and yet live by double standards. They have two sets of rules, those for them and those for all others. Well, The theory of Evolution is just that - just another bad smelling religion - two faced, self righteous garbage. With two sets of rules for nature. 1# All the normal rules of science and nature we take for granted.2# Special supernatural mystery phenomenon - where normal rules of every day life do not always apply. Where Abiogenesis can and does occur. Where molecular machinery can be spontaneous happen and where complex Information that is superior intelligent software logic commands just pop out of nowhere without any designer needed. When you bring in your religious dogma into a science forum there is going to be confusion in your head. Fact and fiction are two different worlds man. You need to separate the two. Abiogenesis is dead. Most wise "evolutionists" won't even touch Abiogenesis even with a ten foot pole now a days. If you think abiogenesis is still alive theory then lets clear that one up now. It's time you parted with your trash.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Bio-molecularTony Member (Idle past 5409 days) Posts: 90 Joined: |
Spontaneous generation - Wikipedia
Law of biogenesis"La génération spontanée est une chimre" ("Spontaneous generation is a dream") (Louis Pasteur) Pasteur's (and others) empirical results were summarized in the phrase, Omne vivum ex vivo (or Omne vivum ex ovo), Latin for "all life [is] from [an] egg". This is sometimes called "law of biogenesis" and shows that modern organisms do not spontaneously arise in nature from non-life. The law of biogenesis is not to be confused with Ernst Haeckel's Biogenetic Law. [1] [2] No cellular life has ever been observed to arise from non-living matter. The construction of viable viruses capable of infection and evolution from abiotic material has been reported[1]; however, considerable debate still exists regarding if viruses are actually alive. Various other experiments into the possibility and potential mechanisms of abiogenesis have also been reported but remain unproven.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Bio-molecularTony Member (Idle past 5409 days) Posts: 90 Joined: |
Hi onifre, I guess we all have our brand of logic fallacies. From your perspective I have mine. But you’re not the only one with prospective visual comprehension. Your own brand of logic just loves those circular reasoning that never end. The world has enough information about reality to take a stand on what is true and what will never be true. It’s time to drop the gonja (pot) and stand up and be counted. Time to pick a reality that is real and happening.
onifre: Again, here you show some double talk. If it's comparable to human technology then it is not Godly in any way. Evolved apes came up with computer programs, if DNA was the result of some superior God-like programming then it, by definition, could not be comparable to anything humans designed.
And if it has no resemblace to human technology, then how do you know what you're looking at and judging to be superior? It would be beyond your scope of comprehension. Something equivalent to magic perhaps. Post of nonsense that is not contributing to the discussion has been hidden. Edited by AdminNosy, : use peek to see post. It does not contribute to the discussion.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Bio-molecularTony Member (Idle past 5409 days) Posts: 90 Joined: |
Percy: It's one thing to have ideas, it's another thing to actually develop them into hypotheses and eventually theories. If the ideas of ID had any correspondence to the real world then they would lead to insights and discoveries beyond the reach of modern science, or at least to ideas as good as modern science, or at least lead to some positive result, but they don't. That's why the vast majority of ID effort is lobbying rather than research. Hi Percy, sorry I took so long to get to your post. Busy, and there are so many replies to my posts. Ouch. I disagree with your comments quoted above. I personally have my own thoughts (theory - reality). It goes like this: All reality is intelligently designed - so much so that it was necessary to build the complexity to such a high level so as to create the `look and `Feel` of something natural and real. Albert said: The physical reality is an illusion albeit a very persistent one. I have found this to be real and true. Physical life is not real, does not exist because you’re not really alive. You can not have living machines, but you can have machines the `think they are living`. So your living on what is really a lifeless planet - with just biotechnological machinery swarming everywhere. Made to look like the real thing, that never really existed anyway, but your not going to ever know that anyway, anyhow. Matter is not really physical though it looks to be so because it is designed to look that way. Energy fields are what atoms are made of not solid mass. So your living in an illusionary physical realm designed to give you a reality to exist. All is intelligently designed to look as real as possible, yet it is not what it seems. All things even mass must have a particle or something to create the illusion of mass. Science is now looking for that particle - Higges. This can get very deep...
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024