Evolving the Musculoskeletal System

Who designed the antenna?

void for nowEdited by ICdesign, : No reason given.

Ah, but it is the central, key, most impotant part of "the equation" that blows apart your entire belief system in design Irrespective of the computer involved, the materials used to construct the system, the engineers who constructed the systems, the intelligence involved in determining what the designs were useful for, the fact that the antennas did not construct themselves...... nowhere in all of this is found the information that carries the design of the antenna.Where is the source of this information???It is exactly the same source as the entirety of evolution. It is the environment.If you wish to preserve your belief in the necessaity of a designer, you would do well to run away at this point and try to forget the above, as it is the death blow to Intelligent Design.Enjoy

The source is a computer program designed by an intelligent mind.
Would the antenna design exist if you took intelligent man out of the equation? Yes or no?Is information alone enough to create a material system? yes or no?

Then you should know without me having to point out such a simple truth.
Would a computer or a computer program exist without an intelligent mind such as yours? yes or no? Does your heart have an intentional purpose?

Nope.

---

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

Who designed these stalactites and stalagmites?

---

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.

Wrong - the design of the antenna does not exist in the computer programme. Irrelevant - I have already addressed this in my previous post - from where does the antenna design originate? Irrelevant - I have already addressed this in my previous post - from where does the antenna design originate?

Percy posted a detailed, considerate post.
I am wondering why you decided to ignore most of it, and simply cherry pick a couple of random points.Did you not understand it?
Are you debating dishonestly?
Or were you unable to defend your position?I am thinking that it is a combination of all three.

Are you still obtusely missing the point, yes or no?

---

Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. -- Thomas Jefferson

​

We see monsters where science shows us windmills. -- Phat

​

It has always struck me as odd that fundies devote so much time and effort into trying to find a naturalistic explanation for their mythical flood, while looking for magical explanations for things that actually happened. -- Dr. Adequate

​

...creationists have a great way to detect fraud and it doesn't take 8 or 40 years or even a scientific degree to spot the fraud--'if it disagrees with the bible then it is wrong'.... -- archaeologist

Because I am not interested in debating a chapter of information. That's why.

The antenna was generated by a computer program. Maybe its irrelevant to you but not to the truth. Would the antenna exist if intelligence was taken out of the equation? Yes or no? That is the relevant question.

No. I seem to be the only one around here able to grasp the relevant questions.

All design comes from the same source. God

Hi ICDesign,You ignored much of a long post. We don't want to lose track of the progress we made. The points you're ignoring are:

• Evolution has a mechanism, descent with modification filtered by natural selection. Creationism has no mechanism.
  ​
• There are examples of any system at all stages of complexity and development.
  ​
• Improvements occur in tiny mutational steps that confer some tiny advantage.
  ​
• Improvements build upon previous improvements resulting in increasing complexity.

About computers: Of course hardware and software are the products of intelligence, but I never said otherwise and that wasn't your point. Your point was that a simulation of a natural process means that that process is itself intelligent. I explained that this was false because otherwise it would mean that anything simulated is intelligent, like the weather and aerodynamics and soil erosion. Evolution is a natural process just like the weather and aerodynamics and soil erosion. We observe the evolutionary processes of descent with modification (mutations and allele mixing) filtered by natural selection in all life, and this becomes especially clear in breeding programs where people decide which pairs produce offspring instead of the environment.So do you now understand that simulating a natural process doesn't mean the process is intelligent?--Percy