Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 69 (9102 total)
7 online now:
Newest Member: sensei
Upcoming Birthdays: Tusko
Post Volume: Total: 904,256 Year: 1,137/14,231 Month: 61/1,076 Week: 170/234 Day: 22/39 Hour: 3/3


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Is ID falsifiable by any kind of experiment?
Rahvin
Member
Posts: 3976
Joined: 07-01-2005
Member Rating: 10.0


(4)
Message 136 of 246 (904289)
12-25-2022 9:22 PM
Reply to: Message 135 by MrIntelligentDesign
12-25-2022 5:58 PM


Re: Merry Trollmas
What are you even actually asking for? All I see is word salad and a half-formed argument from semantics that doesnt appear to have an actual point.
Evolution is the cornerstone of virtually all of modern biology and is confirmed by literally every observational test we have ever tried. It's one of the best-supported and most successful (in terms of making accurate, useful predictions) theoretical frameworks across all scientific disciplines.
If you have a competing theoretical model that provides even more accurate predictions relating to the diversity of species and their relationships than evolution, please do so - your Nobel Prize awaits.
Bear in mind that such a competing model would need to still need to explain the directly-observed change in allele frequency in populations over time - directly-observed evolution.
Evolution is not a dictionary and does not seek to define "intelligence" or "intention." Those are descriptive words we simply use - like "allele" or "frequency." They're relevant to evolution, but evolution doesn't define them.
As is the case with many English words, the terms "intelligence" and "intention" are fraught with multiple definitions based on context. But in the context of Intelligent Design, cdesign proponentists are typically using those terms to mean something at least vaguely reminiscent of human intelligence - that is, a specific entity that has goals, an internalized comprehension of what those goals are and how to achieve them, and agency to take actions to achieve those goals. Something like how I (as a discrete entity separate from you) am trying to describe how your words dont appear to make much sense or approach the correct way to challenge a scientific theory, and how I posses the ability to understand that I can communicate that to you through this message forum and have the agency to decide to do so.
The evolutionary model includes zero variables for such an intelligence - it's simply observed to be not a required factor, any more an such an intelligence is required to create snowflake structures. The mechanisms of the universe simply make such temporary organization from chaos inevitable.
We have examples of things that do require the specific intent of an aware actor - many, and requiring varying degrees of awareness. We know that an Apple iWatch does not spontaneously self-assemble - we know in precise detail the amount of engineering design that goes into the product and even the tools to create the tools to create the product, as well as the specific steps in assembly. Yet every instance of life of which we are aware has spontaneously self-assembled...with heritable variation. And self-assembly with heritable variation makes evolution an inevitable process, without the requirement for any design, intelligence, intent, agency, etc.

“The human understanding when it has once adopted an opinion (either as being the received opinion or as being agreeable to itself) draws all things else to support and agree with it.” - Francis Bacon

"There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs." - John Rogers

“A world that can be explained even with bad reasons is a familiar world. But, on the other hand, in a universe suddenly divested of illusions and lights, man feels an alien, a stranger. His exile is without remedy since he is deprived of the memory of a lost home or the hope of a promised land. This divorce between man and his life, the actor and his setting, is properly the feeling of absurdity.” – Albert Camus

"...the pious hope that by combining numerous little turds of variously tainted data, one can obtain a valuable result; but in fact, the outcome is merely a larger than average pile of shit." - Barash, David 1995...

"Many that live deserve death. And some die that deserve life. Can you give it to them? Then be not too eager to deal out death in the name of justice, fearing for your own safety. Even the wise cannot see all ends." - Gandalf, J. R. R. Tolkien: The Lord Of the Rings

"The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death."
1 Corinthians 15:26King James Version (KJV)

Nihil supernum


This message is a reply to:
 Message 135 by MrIntelligentDesign, posted 12-25-2022 5:58 PM MrIntelligentDesign has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 137 by MrIntelligentDesign, posted 12-25-2022 10:30 PM Rahvin has replied

  
MrIntelligentDesign
Member
Posts: 238
Joined: 09-21-2015


Message 137 of 246 (904290)
12-25-2022 10:30 PM
Reply to: Message 136 by Rahvin
12-25-2022 9:22 PM


Re: Merry Trollmas
What are you even actually asking for? All I see is word salad and a half-formed argument from semantics that doesnt appear to have an actual point.
I am asking all of you is to kick Evolution out in science, society and in all schools, right now, and replace Evolution with Biological Interrelation, BiTs, since BiTs is the only correct theory for biology. If you will dis-agree, you must answer all questions and all challenges that the new model will throw at you. DO IT and win. Don't do it, and Evolution lose.
REMEMBER that one of the immediate impacts of bad theory like Evolution, is the distortions of definitions of every words, as published in dictionaries. Remember that Evolution was started on 1860 AD, and after that, many publishers published dictionaries, and they will surely rely on science, for some of them or all of them are educated in Evolution. And since Evolution is the supposed to be the cornerstone therefore, correct, then, publishers will surely use Evolution as the basis, for if not, people like you will call those publishers stupid, or probably make a law so that their publishing companies will be bankrupted for not following Evolution.
Evolution is the cornerstone of virtually all of modern biology and is confirmed by literally every observational test we have ever tried. It's one of the best-supported and most successful (in terms of making accurate, useful predictions) theoretical frameworks across all scientific disciplines.
Then, if Evolution is cornerstone, then, define "intentional", "intelligence" or "control", etc here, and let us apply that in the change of frequency alleles, in Biology. The definition must be universal and scientific. They must have experiments and numerical limits between the non-intentional, non-control, etc, respectively, you know what I mean. Fight for Evolution or kick Evolution out. If you can't provide, then, Evolution is dead.
REMEMBER, Evolution is the cornerstone, which means, Evolution did not leave all stones unturned, for if Evolution did leave, then, you knew very well that Evolution as theory is stupid.
If you have a competing theoretical model that provides even more accurate predictions relating to the diversity of species and their relationships than evolution, please do so - your Nobel Prize awaits.
If I were you, you must call Nature and the Nobel Committee for that Prize to me. The new theory is called Biological Interrelation, BiTs, and I had submitted four articles for the falsifications of Evolution but they were all rejected, for professional envy.
Bear in mind that such a competing model would need to still need to explain the directly-observed change in allele frequency in populations over time - directly-observed evolution.
It would be very easy since BiTs uses intelligence and will never leave science to stupid and moron scientists. Evolution never uses intelligence, thus, wrong.
Evolution is not a dictionary and does not seek to define "intelligence" or "intention." Those are descriptive words we simply use - like "allele" or "frequency." They're relevant to evolution, but evolution doesn't define them.
I agreed, but Evolution has impact on all inventers of definitions and publishers of dictionaries. WHY? If a theory is really correct, then, people will rely on it and will base on that theory, for anything. That is one of the greatest achievements of the correct theory. But if the theory is wrong like Evolution, then, the immediate impacts is the distortions of definitions. Thus, Evolution must be quickly kicked out, in science and all schools and society, NOW!
As is the case with many English words, the terms "intelligence" and "intention" are fraught with multiple definitions based on context. But in the context of Intelligent Design, cdesign proponentists are typically using those terms to mean something at least vaguely reminiscent of human intelligence - that is, a specific entity that has goals, an internalized comprehension of what those goals are and how to achieve them, and agency to take actions to achieve those goals. Something like how I (as a discrete entity separate from you) am trying to describe how your words dont appear to make much sense or approach the correct way to challenge a scientific theory, and how I posses the ability to understand that I can communicate that to you through this message forum and have the agency to decide to do so.
You knew very well that these words are existing in English languages, with their corresponding translated words for any languages, why Darwin and you did not give them too much attention? WHY CONCLUDE Evolution without testing those words???
The evolutionary model includes zero variables for such an intelligence - it's simply observed to be not a required factor, any more an such an intelligence is required to create snowflake structures. The mechanisms of the universe simply make such temporary organization from chaos inevitable.
One of the reasons why Evolution is so stupid and dumb theory is that you let Evolution concluded without knowing the topic! Concluding that "Evolutionary Model Includes Zero Intelligence" is one of the worst claims of Evolution!!! What is the definition, description and properties of "intelligence" on that sentence that you had posted? What is the non-intelligence? How do we know their numerical limits? YOU SEE, stupid theory is really stupid. Evolution cannot even answer that! Can you?
We have examples of things that do require the specific intent of an aware actor - many, and requiring varying degrees of awareness. We know that an Apple iWatch does not spontaneously self-assemble - we know in precise detail the amount of engineering design that goes into the product and even the tools to create the tools to create the product, as well as the specific steps in assembly. Yet every instance of life of which we are aware has spontaneously self-assembled...with heritable variation. And self-assembly with heritable variation makes evolution an inevitable process, without the requirement for any design, intelligence, intent, agency, etc.
And again, stupidity is Evolution cannot stop! They knew already that there are many examples in reality of intentional, intelligence, control, etc, why not check them all FIRST instead of claiming spontaneous?
Once again, tell us here the differences between
spontaneously self-assembled X
non-spontaneously self-assembled X
and their numerical limits, and let us apply that in Biology. I need experiment on where you derive your answer. Remember, Evolution is the cornerstone of science, or cornerstone of stupidity. Your answer will give us on which one is applied to Evolution.
I NEED THAT ANSWER badly. Do it, for if not, just surrender to the new theory.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 136 by Rahvin, posted 12-25-2022 9:22 PM Rahvin has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 138 by Rahvin, posted 12-25-2022 10:48 PM MrIntelligentDesign has replied
 Message 147 by Taq, posted 12-27-2022 10:40 AM MrIntelligentDesign has not replied
 Message 155 by Phat, posted 12-29-2022 8:49 AM MrIntelligentDesign has not replied

  
Rahvin
Member
Posts: 3976
Joined: 07-01-2005
Member Rating: 10.0


(4)
Message 138 of 246 (904291)
12-25-2022 10:48 PM
Reply to: Message 137 by MrIntelligentDesign
12-25-2022 10:30 PM


Re: Merry Trollmas
Oh boy.
quote:
I am asking all of you is to kick Evolution out in science, society and in all schools, right now, and replace Evolution with Biological Interrelation, BiTs, since BiTs is the only correct theory for biology. If you will dis-agree, you must answer all questions and all challenges that the new model will throw at you. DO IT and win. Don't do it, and Evolution lose.
Thats not how anything works. If this is how you think changes happen in science, then you need to head back to grade school.
Evolution is a well-established theory. it underpins all of biology. It's not getting thrown out - ever, just as we didnt throw out Newton just because Einstein was able to find a more accurate mode. Newtonian mechanics still work in the right reference frames, with high accuracy.
And Einstein didnt propose "throwing out" Newton, either. He published a model that specifically addressed some observational gaps where Newtonian predictions came up a little off. His model gave the same answer as Newton for the problems where newton was already correct, but also was able to accurately close those gaps. The Einsteinian model also made additional predictions that couldnt be tested at the time, but which have since been confirmed repeatedly and with high precision in ways Einstein could not have possibly imagined.
Note that the burden of proof was not on Newton or the physics establishment of the time. The burden of proof was on Einstein. And he had to do a lot more than write up a bunch of word salad and claim his way was better. He had to produce actual experimental predictions (in his case really just math added to existing observations).
You have the burden of proof here - not to prove evolution wrong (you cannot prove a negative without proving a mutually exclusive positive claim), but to show that you have a model that makes more accurate predictions than the current evolutionary model while also producing the same predictive results that we have confirmed with evolution.
You're making assertions of "the only correct theory." We already have theoretical models that are experimentally validated with high precision. We are not omniscient, and we already know that our existing models are not perfect - that's not the goal of science, since it is unattainable. Science seeks to be less wrong today than it was yesterday. We iteratively improve our models with ever-increasing accuracy, approaching ever more closely the real truth of the universe as best we can without omniscience.
quote:
I NEED THAT ANSWER badly. Do it, for if not, just surrender to the new theory.
I need not do your work for you. Evolution is a well-supported model with a proven track record of accurate predictions. Even if you were to prove evolution 100% wrong that would not mean your model is actually more accurate. Propose an actual model with predictive capability more accurate than any current model. Until you do so, you're shouting at the wind.

“The human understanding when it has once adopted an opinion (either as being the received opinion or as being agreeable to itself) draws all things else to support and agree with it.” - Francis Bacon

"There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs." - John Rogers

“A world that can be explained even with bad reasons is a familiar world. But, on the other hand, in a universe suddenly divested of illusions and lights, man feels an alien, a stranger. His exile is without remedy since he is deprived of the memory of a lost home or the hope of a promised land. This divorce between man and his life, the actor and his setting, is properly the feeling of absurdity.” – Albert Camus

"...the pious hope that by combining numerous little turds of variously tainted data, one can obtain a valuable result; but in fact, the outcome is merely a larger than average pile of shit." - Barash, David 1995...

"Many that live deserve death. And some die that deserve life. Can you give it to them? Then be not too eager to deal out death in the name of justice, fearing for your own safety. Even the wise cannot see all ends." - Gandalf, J. R. R. Tolkien: The Lord Of the Rings

"The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death."
1 Corinthians 15:26King James Version (KJV)

Nihil supernum


This message is a reply to:
 Message 137 by MrIntelligentDesign, posted 12-25-2022 10:30 PM MrIntelligentDesign has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 139 by MrIntelligentDesign, posted 12-26-2022 2:39 AM Rahvin has replied

  
MrIntelligentDesign
Member
Posts: 238
Joined: 09-21-2015


Message 139 of 246 (904293)
12-26-2022 2:39 AM
Reply to: Message 138 by Rahvin
12-25-2022 10:48 PM


Re: Merry Trollmas
You claimed many things for Evolution, now let us see if your claims could answer these:
Once again, tell us here the differences between

spontaneously self-assembled X
non-spontaneously self-assembled X

and their numerical limits, and let us apply that in Biology. I need experiment on where you derive your answer. Remember, Evolution is the cornerstone of science, or cornerstone of stupidity. Your answer will give us on which one is applied to Evolution.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 138 by Rahvin, posted 12-25-2022 10:48 PM Rahvin has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 140 by Rahvin, posted 12-26-2022 12:17 PM MrIntelligentDesign has replied

  
Rahvin
Member
Posts: 3976
Joined: 07-01-2005
Member Rating: 10.0


(2)
Message 140 of 246 (904298)
12-26-2022 12:17 PM
Reply to: Message 139 by MrIntelligentDesign
12-26-2022 2:39 AM


Re: Merry Trollmas
quote:
You claimed many things for Evolution
I made only a few claims - that evolution is extremely well supported and is the cornerstone of biology. I can defend that claim, but it feels rather like supporting that the sky is blue - we wouldnt be having this discussion, you wouldnt be trying to overturn the established theoretical model, if evolution were not...the established theoretical model.
I mentioned a few other basic elements. If you want to point to a specific claim I've made, I'll be happy to support it. But I'm not obligated to argue for claims I've not made just because you want me to. Do your own homework.
quote:
now let us see if your claims could answer these:

Once again, tell us here the differences between

spontaneously self-assembled X
non-spontaneously self-assembled X

Thats not how this works. Im not going to do your work for you. I can support specific positive claims I make. You need to support positive claims you make.
I have made no claims about these word-salad terms you appear to have made up yourself.
From what I can tell, you have no model. You make no predictions, you just want to try to gish gallop nonsense and claim that somehow you have disproved evolution.
So let's try something even more basic - ignore evolution. Pretend nobody has ever heard of it. What model do you propose, what elements of observed reality do you believe this model explains, and what observations can we make to increase or decrease the likelihood of your model accurately reflecting reality?

“The human understanding when it has once adopted an opinion (either as being the received opinion or as being agreeable to itself) draws all things else to support and agree with it.” - Francis Bacon

"There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs." - John Rogers

“A world that can be explained even with bad reasons is a familiar world. But, on the other hand, in a universe suddenly divested of illusions and lights, man feels an alien, a stranger. His exile is without remedy since he is deprived of the memory of a lost home or the hope of a promised land. This divorce between man and his life, the actor and his setting, is properly the feeling of absurdity.” – Albert Camus

"...the pious hope that by combining numerous little turds of variously tainted data, one can obtain a valuable result; but in fact, the outcome is merely a larger than average pile of shit." - Barash, David 1995...

"Many that live deserve death. And some die that deserve life. Can you give it to them? Then be not too eager to deal out death in the name of justice, fearing for your own safety. Even the wise cannot see all ends." - Gandalf, J. R. R. Tolkien: The Lord Of the Rings

"The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death."
1 Corinthians 15:26King James Version (KJV)

Nihil supernum


This message is a reply to:
 Message 139 by MrIntelligentDesign, posted 12-26-2022 2:39 AM MrIntelligentDesign has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 141 by MrIntelligentDesign, posted 12-26-2022 10:48 PM Rahvin has replied

  
MrIntelligentDesign
Member
Posts: 238
Joined: 09-21-2015


Message 141 of 246 (904310)
12-26-2022 10:48 PM
Reply to: Message 140 by Rahvin
12-26-2022 12:17 PM


Re: Merry Trollmas
I made only a few claims - that evolution is extremely well supported and is the cornerstone of biology. I can defend that claim,
but it feels rather like supporting that the sky is blue - we wouldnt be having this discussion,
you wouldnt be trying to overturn the established theoretical model, if evolution were not...
the established theoretical model.
Your first post to me on Message 136 was an insult. You wrote like this: "All I see is word salad and a half-formed argument from semantics that doesnt appear to have an actual point."
Your intention was to insult me, because you are probably thinking that you have the best theory or model in Biology, that is Evolution Theory, thus you posted that. Remember that you become a member here on 2005 AD, and you posted almost 4000 posts in this Forum, which only means that either you are seriously looking for discussion or looking just to insult people like me.
You do not know me, you do not know my capabilities and discoveries in science, but you arrogantly insulted me.
Now, you must defend your theory against me in science, or I will be asking you to say "Sorry to me, for your
ad hominin attack and your ignorance of science and reality", and I will be showing why below.
Once again, you had claimed that Evolution is the cornerstone in science, thus, you are very sure that Evolution is
correct and since Evolution is correct, therefore any scientist or person like me will be crushed by Evolution. THEREFORE,
Fight and defend your Evolution Theory, or admit that you are wrong.
I mentioned a few other basic elements. If you want to point to a specific claim I've made,
I'll be happy to support it. But I'm not obligated to argue for claims I've not made just because you want me to.
Do your own homework.
This was your claim and your post on Message 136/140: "Yet every instance of life of which we are aware has spontaneously self-assembled...with heritable variation. And self-assembly with heritable variation makes evolution an inevitable process,
without the requirement for any design, intelligence, intent, agency, etc."
As you can see, you wrote these words and phrases: (1) spontaneously self-assembled (2) design (3) intelligence
(4) intent,
As you knew that we are discussing science, and when you used and claimed those words and phrases, you are
assuming that you knew them all, for if not, why you wrote them here and used as supports to Evolution?
BUT IN SCIENCE, if you are well educated, science has explanation (the one you wrote) and science has falsification
(the one that you should show, by contrasting your explanation, as falsification criteria, to verify or not verify your claim). If you did not know falsification process, we will discuss it. But I believe, since you are being here from 2005 AD, you knew the
falsification criteria of your claims.
Thats not how this works. Im not going to do your work for you. I can support specific positive claims I make.
You need to support positive claims you make.
You had claimed many things in science, by assuming that Evolution is correct, since you boastfully wrote that
Evolution is the cornerstone in science. Below was your claim from Message 136, and I had just picked one topic, so that
your intellectual burden will be easy.
This was your claim, from Message 136: "Yet every instance of life of which we are aware has spontaneously self-assembled"
Now, you boastfully claimed that Evolution is correct since Evolution had explained that X is "spontaneously self-assembled",
in Biology. That is your explanation, That is your narratives. That is your claim. Once again, since we are discussing science, I need, or you must present falsification process/criteria. Your explanation is positive, agreed, but the falsification must be negative, thus, for the THIRD TIMES, I knew that you are not stupid,
Once again, tell us here the differences between

spontaneously self-assembled X
non-spontaneously self-assembled X....(to falsify your claim)

and their numerical limits, and let us apply that in Biology. I need experiment on where you derive your answer. Remember, Evolution is the cornerstone of science, or cornerstone of stupidity. Your answer will give us on which one is applied to Evolution.

I NEED THAT ANSWER badly. Do it, for if not, just surrender to the new theory.
I have made no claims about these word-salad terms you appear to have made up yourself.
Your claim on Message 136 was "Yet every instance of life of which we are aware has spontaneously self-assembled...with heritable variation. And self-assembly with heritable variation makes evolution an inevitable process, without the requirement for any design, intelligence, intent, agency, etc."
REMEMBER that I never yet asked you to defend your position on the topic of "intelligence" etc, since you used the
word "intelligence" in your post. If you made a mistake, just say sorry like this, "Sorry, I made a mistake. I was ignorant of reality and Evolution is not correct", is forgivable. Which one is easy for you? Fight and defend your claim, or say sorry?
From what I can tell, you have no model. You make no predictions, you just want to try
to gish gallop nonsense and claim that somehow you have disproved evolution.

So let's try something even more basic - ignore evolution. Pretend nobody has ever heard of it.
What model do you propose, what elements of observed reality do you believe this model explains,
and what observations can we make to increase or decrease the likelihood of your model accurately
reflecting reality?
I have model. That should be your first post to me, instead of insulting me, asking me of why I dis-agree with Evolution, instead of insulting me on Message 136. Now, before I share to you my model, you have responsibility to answer your claims, since you did not only insult me, but you claimed many things.
Thus, for the THIRD TIMES,
Once again, tell us here the differences between

spontaneously self-assembled X
non-spontaneously self-assembled X

and their numerical limits, and let us apply that in Biology. I need experiment on where you derive your answer. Remember, Evolution is the cornerstone of science, or cornerstone of stupidity. Your answer will give us on which one is applied to Evolution.

I NEED THAT ANSWER badly. Do it, for if not, just surrender to the new theory.
TO THOSE OF YOU WHO are supporters of Evolution, please help this poster defend Evolution Theory, since this poster claimed that Evolution is a well supported theory and a cornerstone of science. If you do not want to support this poster, it means, either you are being dishonest or intellectual coward and indirectly saying that "Evolution is really wrong in science".

This message is a reply to:
 Message 140 by Rahvin, posted 12-26-2022 12:17 PM Rahvin has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 142 by AZPaul3, posted 12-26-2022 11:22 PM MrIntelligentDesign has not replied
 Message 143 by Rahvin, posted 12-27-2022 12:22 AM MrIntelligentDesign has replied

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 7476
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 3.2


(2)
Message 142 of 246 (904311)
12-26-2022 11:22 PM
Reply to: Message 141 by MrIntelligentDesign
12-26-2022 10:48 PM


Re: Merry Trollmas
TO THOSE OF YOU WHO are supporters of Evolution, please help this poster defend Evolution Theory ...
Nah. I'll just sit here and watch you get torn a new one.

Stop Tzar Vladimir the Condemned!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 141 by MrIntelligentDesign, posted 12-26-2022 10:48 PM MrIntelligentDesign has not replied

  
Rahvin
Member
Posts: 3976
Joined: 07-01-2005
Member Rating: 10.0


(1)
Message 143 of 246 (904312)
12-27-2022 12:22 AM
Reply to: Message 141 by MrIntelligentDesign
12-26-2022 10:48 PM


Re: Merry Trollmas
I started writing a very long post, but in the end, it doesnt matter. You dont understand what an ad hominem is, you dont understand what the burden of proof is, and discussions about evolution are honestly a distraction and Im going to try to get you to focus.
quote:
quote:
So let's try something even more basic - ignore evolution. Pretend nobody has ever heard of it. What model do you propose, what elements of observed reality do you believe this model explains, and what observations can we make to increase or decrease the likelihood of your model accurately reflecting reality?

I have model. That should be your first post to me, instead of insulting me, asking me of why I dis-agree with Evolution, instead of insulting me on Message 136. Now, before I share to you my model, you have responsibility to answer your claims, since you did not only insult me, but you claimed many things.
Interestingly I dont need to do anything of the sort. Youre proposing a new model, or so you say. What is your model? This is the simplest of all possible questions given what you've said - I'm suggesting that we table the discussion of evolution and simply describe what your model is. If you dont have a model there's nothing to discuss.
quote:

Thus, for the THIRD TIMES,

Once again, tell us here the differences between

spontaneously self-assembled X
non-spontaneously self-assembled X

and their numerical limits, and let us apply that in Biology. I need experiment on where you derive your answer. Remember, Evolution is the cornerstone of science, or cornerstone of stupidity. Your answer will give us on which one is applied to Evolution.

I NEED THAT ANSWER badly. Do it, for if not, just surrender to the new theory.
So let me get this straight. I need to answer an arbitrary, apparently-meaningless question, and if I cannot do so, you win a Nobel Prize and overturn the theory of evolution? Without even proposing a model, without any experiments, no observations, no need for exhaustive research or peer-reviewed publications.
Again, this is not how anything works.
Even if you prove evolution to be 100% incorrect, your model would not be the new "winner." At best you'd have upended biology, and we'd have to answer "I dont know" to questions about the origin of species and how traits within populations change over time. You're pretending at a false dichotomy, where if you just get a random debater on the interwebs to be unable to answer your inscrutible question, somehow that means you're right, evolution is wrong, and I assume some sort of "designer" something or other.
That is not how science works. Its not even how debate works. You are proposing that we throw out evolution and replace it with "something else." The burden of proof lies with you. But before evidence we at least need to know what the heck it is that you actually propose.

Explain your model. Even just a high-level summary. Tell us what it is that you propose.

“The human understanding when it has once adopted an opinion (either as being the received opinion or as being agreeable to itself) draws all things else to support and agree with it.” - Francis Bacon

"There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs." - John Rogers

“A world that can be explained even with bad reasons is a familiar world. But, on the other hand, in a universe suddenly divested of illusions and lights, man feels an alien, a stranger. His exile is without remedy since he is deprived of the memory of a lost home or the hope of a promised land. This divorce between man and his life, the actor and his setting, is properly the feeling of absurdity.” – Albert Camus

"...the pious hope that by combining numerous little turds of variously tainted data, one can obtain a valuable result; but in fact, the outcome is merely a larger than average pile of shit." - Barash, David 1995...

"Many that live deserve death. And some die that deserve life. Can you give it to them? Then be not too eager to deal out death in the name of justice, fearing for your own safety. Even the wise cannot see all ends." - Gandalf, J. R. R. Tolkien: The Lord Of the Rings

"The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death."
1 Corinthians 15:26King James Version (KJV)

Nihil supernum


This message is a reply to:
 Message 141 by MrIntelligentDesign, posted 12-26-2022 10:48 PM MrIntelligentDesign has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 144 by MrIntelligentDesign, posted 12-27-2022 1:43 AM Rahvin has not replied

  
MrIntelligentDesign
Member
Posts: 238
Joined: 09-21-2015


Message 144 of 246 (904313)
12-27-2022 1:43 AM
Reply to: Message 143 by Rahvin
12-27-2022 12:22 AM


Re: Merry Trollmas
OK, below was your Message 136 Post: I put or added (P1, ...) so that you will know what I am talking about...
(P1)"What are you even actually asking for? All I see is word salad and a half-formed argument from semantics that doesnt appear to have an actual point.

(P2) Evolution is the cornerstone of virtually all of modern biology and is confirmed by literally every observational test we have ever tried. It's one of the best-supported and most successful (in terms of making accurate, useful predictions) theoretical frameworks across all scientific disciplines.

(P3) If you have a competing theoretical model that provides even more accurate predictions relating to the diversity of species and their relationships than evolution, please do so - your Nobel Prize awaits.

(P4) Bear in mind that such a competing model would need to still need to explain the directly-observed change in allele frequency in populations over time - directly-observed evolution.

(P5) Evolution is not a dictionary and does not seek to define "intelligence" or "intention." Those are descriptive words we simply use - like "allele" or "frequency." They're relevant to evolution, but evolution doesn't define them.

(P6) As is the case with many English words, the terms "intelligence" and "intention" are fraught with multiple definitions based on context. But in the context of Intelligent Design, cdesign proponentists are typically using those terms to mean something at least vaguely reminiscent of human intelligence - that is, a specific entity that has goals, an internalized comprehension of what those goals are and how to achieve them, and agency to take actions to achieve those goals. Something like how I (as a discrete entity separate from you) am trying to describe how your words dont appear to make much sense or approach the correct way to challenge a scientific theory, and how I posses the ability to understand that I can communicate that to you through this message forum and have the agency to decide to do so.

(P7) The evolutionary model includes zero variables for such an intelligence - it's simply observed to be not a required factor, any more an such an intelligence is required to create snowflake structures. The mechanisms of the universe simply make such temporary organization from chaos inevitable.

(P8) We have examples of things that do require the specific intent of an aware actor - many, and requiring varying degrees of awareness. We know that an Apple iWatch does not spontaneously self-assemble - we know in precise detail the amount of engineering design that goes into the product and even the tools to create the tools to create the product, as well as the specific steps in assembly. Yet every instance of life of which we are aware has spontaneously self-assembled...with heritable variation. And self-assembly with heritable variation makes evolution an inevitable process, without the requirement for any design, intelligence, intent, agency, etc."
------------------------------------------------------
As you can see, if you were just asking for my model, then, you would not be writing P1, P2, P5, P6, P7, P8...
YOU HAD JUST WRITTEN P3 and P4, and wait for my reply, and I will tell you. But you had insulted me in P1, you claimed stupendous claims in P2, P5, P6 and P7, P8...
That is why, you are asking for an intellectual fight through your insult and your claims. Thus, for the FOURTH TIMES, let us intellectually fight, answer the challenges and see who has the best model/explanation...and YOU MUST READ ALL my other posts before Message 136 of yours and know me who I am..
Thus, for the FOURTH TIMES,

Once again, tell us here the differences between

spontaneously self-assembled X
non-spontaneously self-assembled X

and their numerical limits, and let us apply that in Biology. I need experiment on where you derive your answer. Remember, Evolution is the cornerstone of science, or cornerstone of stupidity. Your answer will give us on which one is applied to Evolution.

I NEED THAT ANSWER badly. Do it, for if not, just surrender to the new theory.
ONCE AGAIN, which is easier for you, SURRENDER and say SORRY, or intellectually fight with me?
Do not intellectually fight me if you do not know my discoveries...you will be very intellectually sorry for yourself.
TO BE FAIR, for I pity you, I will share the new correct theory or model. The name is Biological Interrelation, BiTs.
The basis: intelligence. I discovered intelligence. DO NOT CRITICIZE me here if you do not know this topic "intelligence", for you will be very sorry intellectually to yourself.
I can give you links of my books and videos, if you like if you are really serious in defeating me.
BiTs explains change and origins of life and species through intelligence. BiTs falsified Evolution, since BiTs is using the powerful explanation of/from Intelligent Design, both from me.
ONCE AGAIN, my basis is my discovered topic of intelligence. Defeat me in this topic of intelligence, you will defeat me all. If you do not know this topic, do not criticize me. Be humble to listen to real scientist like me, and I will be very glad to teach you real science..
Amazon.com

This message is a reply to:
 Message 143 by Rahvin, posted 12-27-2022 12:22 AM Rahvin has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 148 by Taq, posted 12-27-2022 10:41 AM MrIntelligentDesign has replied
 Message 149 by Theodoric, posted 12-27-2022 10:43 AM MrIntelligentDesign has not replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 9296
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 3.2


Message 145 of 246 (904332)
12-27-2022 10:30 AM
Reply to: Message 126 by MrIntelligentDesign
12-25-2022 4:29 PM


Re: ID About to Fail?
MrIntelligentDesign writes:
One examples of Evolution's fantasy of explanation is Natural Selection. No one had ever tested and confirmed that nature could select for life.
Natural selection is tested and confirmed in this paper (which is one out of many):
Just a moment...
Yes, in all published dictionaries, publishers must invent definitions for every words so that they could publish the dictionaries, like the word intelligence or intentional, etc, by using Evolution as basis.
You are really, really confused. Dictionaries simply record how people are using words. Dictionaries do not tell people how to use words.
But when you use them in science, for example in the change in frequency alleles, (CIFA) you cannot simply use them.
There are no such things as frequency alleles.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 126 by MrIntelligentDesign, posted 12-25-2022 4:29 PM MrIntelligentDesign has not replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 9296
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 3.2


Message 146 of 246 (904333)
12-27-2022 10:35 AM
Reply to: Message 129 by MrIntelligentDesign
12-25-2022 4:47 PM


Re: ID About to Fail?
MrIntelligentDesign writes:
Of course, I agreed that those REPAIR and DEFENSE mechanisms are natural systems, but their origins are not since how could a spontaneous X think of repairing and defensing itself without thinking mind?
It could do so through natural mutations and natural selection, none of which are intelligent. The pocket mice didn't think to themselves that they needed better camouflage, and then change their DNA so they could have darker fur. Rather, spontaneous and natural mutations produced a darker fur color, and it was naturally selected for in environments with dark rocks.
You need to provide test that any spontaneous X could do that without thinking mind.
I already provided it many, many times. Here it is again:
https://www.evcforum.net/dm.php?control=msg&t=20367
Again, anybody could claim and invent definitions of intelligence. That is why, in here, define intelligence based on spontaneity and why you invent that.
You ask science to come up with definitions for natural and intelligence. YOU ASKED FOR THIS!!!! Now you are just handwaving them away when they are presented.
Sorry, but this is not an honest way to approach the subject.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 129 by MrIntelligentDesign, posted 12-25-2022 4:47 PM MrIntelligentDesign has not replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 9296
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 3.2


(1)
Message 147 of 246 (904334)
12-27-2022 10:40 AM
Reply to: Message 137 by MrIntelligentDesign
12-25-2022 10:30 PM


Re: Merry Trollmas
MrIntelligentDesign writes:
I am asking all of you is to kick Evolution out in science, society and in all schools, right now, and replace Evolution with Biological Interrelation, BiTs, since BiTs is the only correct theory for biology.
BiTs doesn't explain the evidence. Evolution does. Sorry, but we aren't going to replace a real and functioning theory with the mad ravings of someone who doesn't understand the very basics of biology. For example, you keep talking about frequency alleles which don't even exist.
REMEMBER that one of the immediate impacts of bad theory like Evolution, is the distortions of definitions of every words, as published in dictionaries. Remember that Evolution was started on 1860 AD, and after that, many publishers published dictionaries, and they will surely rely on science, for some of them or all of them are educated in Evolution. And since Evolution is the supposed to be the cornerstone therefore, correct, then, publishers will surely use Evolution as the basis, for if not, people like you will call those publishers stupid, or probably make a law so that their publishing companies will be bankrupted for not following Evolution.
What words have been distorted?
If I were you, you must call Nature and the Nobel Committee for that Prize to me. The new theory is called Biological Interrelation, BiTs, and I had submitted four articles for the falsifications of Evolution but they were all rejected, for professional envy.
BiTs was rejected because it can't explain the most basic observations in biology, such as the nested hierarchy.
And again, stupidity is Evolution cannot stop! They knew already that there are many examples in reality of intentional, intelligence, control, etc, why not check them all FIRST instead of claiming spontaneous?
We observe that the mechanisms that produce change in species are spontaneous. Stomping your feet and throwing a fit doesn't change this fact.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 137 by MrIntelligentDesign, posted 12-25-2022 10:30 PM MrIntelligentDesign has not replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 9296
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 3.2


Message 148 of 246 (904335)
12-27-2022 10:41 AM
Reply to: Message 144 by MrIntelligentDesign
12-27-2022 1:43 AM


Re: Merry Trollmas
MrIntelligentDesign writes:
Once again, tell us here the differences between

spontaneously self-assembled X
non-spontaneously self-assembled X

and their numerical limits, and let us apply that in Biology.
That's exactly what I do in this thread:
https://www.evcforum.net/dm.php?control=msg&t=20367

This message is a reply to:
 Message 144 by MrIntelligentDesign, posted 12-27-2022 1:43 AM MrIntelligentDesign has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 153 by MrIntelligentDesign, posted 12-29-2022 3:05 AM Taq has replied

  
Theodoric
Member
Posts: 8082
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 2.5


Message 149 of 246 (904336)
12-27-2022 10:43 AM
Reply to: Message 144 by MrIntelligentDesign
12-27-2022 1:43 AM


Re: Merry Trollmas
Present the damn model or shut the fuck up.

What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence. -Christopher Hitchens

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts

"God did it" is not an argument. It is an excuse for intellectual laziness.

If your viewpoint has merits and facts to back it up why would you have to lie?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 144 by MrIntelligentDesign, posted 12-27-2022 1:43 AM MrIntelligentDesign has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 151 by nwr, posted 12-27-2022 12:40 PM Theodoric has not replied

  
ringo
Member
Posts: 20810
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 2.4


(4)
Message 150 of 246 (904352)
12-27-2022 11:25 AM
Reply to: Message 130 by MrIntelligentDesign
12-25-2022 4:53 PM


Re: ID About to Fail?
MrIntelligentDesign writes:
One of the reasons why Evolution is wrong is for the carelessness and lack of precision of Evolution and its supporters.
As I said, you have no clue.
Evolution is the most robust theory that science has ever devised. Evolution is many times more complete, precise and accurate than gravity, for example.
MrIntelligentDesign writes:
You cannot simply invent definition of intelligence at will.
I haven't invented anything. I have boiled down the definition of intelligence as far as I can - but apparently it's still too much for you yo understand.
MrIntelligentDesign writes:
You must support your definition with test and experiment...
Nonsense.
MrIntelligentDesign writes:
... and your definition must be universal that applicable in all topics.
It is.
MrIntelligentDesign writes:
Thus, Evolution and you are all totally wrong in science.
Your problem is that you've started from a totally false premise. Learn what evolution is before you try to make conclusions about whether it's "right" or "wrong". Your sources have been lying to you. You just look like a fool repeating those lies here.
MrIntelligentDesign writes:
You must do better than that.
I'm doing fine. Notice that none of the smart people are disagreeing with me.
YOU are the one who must do better if you hope to destroy the whole edifice of science. And make no mistake, you are trying to attack ALL of science, not just evolution. Your sources have lied to you, telling you that evolution is the only "bad" part of science. Evolution is an integral part of science. NOBODY can separate evolution from science, least of all a know-nothing like you.

Come all of you cowboys all over this land,
I'll teach you the law of the Ranger's Command:
To hold a six shooter, and never to run
As long as there's bullets in both of your guns.
-- Woody Guthrie

This message is a reply to:
 Message 130 by MrIntelligentDesign, posted 12-25-2022 4:53 PM MrIntelligentDesign has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 152 by MrIntelligentDesign, posted 12-29-2022 2:50 AM ringo has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2022 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.1
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2023