When does design become intelligent? (AS OF 8/2/10 - CLOSING COMMENTS ONLY)

You don't need biology to know it is wrong, just the basics of information theory. Any change to the existing pattern will indeed alter existing information and if you measure the total number of information bits then the change does not add any, but the result is new data which may encode information if it can be 'read'.
If we imagine a replicator with a huge entropy (ie many possible states it could be in) then any particular ordering of the information corresponds to one possible state, but says nothing about the actual outcome. There is sufficient redundancy in DNA for a number of changes to the base information with no deleterious, or even noticable effect. However, a single bit change can, theoretically, produce a vastly different end result, which could well be very much more complex than the original.Say you have 10 bits of information. The point is that the number of bits alone only gives you the entropy, not the actual information content. It could be ASCII with two check digits, in which case you have 256 codes possible. It could be EBCDIC in which case you only have 127. Alternatively it could be a binary number which just codes the equivalent decimal value - in which case you have 1024 possible values.
It gets a bit complex after the basic intro and I'll not bore with it - the upshot is that the potential information space is no measure of the actual information or complexity of outcome. A chimp, for example, has more genes than we do, and an ear of corn has yet more. I don't think many people would argue that corn is more complex than a human....:-)

That's easily demonstrated to be false: As you can see, at least two types of mutation add information to the genome. (Those chromosomes need not necessarily belong to the same organism, even.)

Hi Biker, The intelligent existent one has just as much chance of poping out of nowhere as the universe did.The eternal existent one does not reside in the Universe.His existence is where the universe resides.God Bless,

---

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

Since we've claimed neither it's pointless for you mention.Apparently you don't understand that we're using YOUR logic when asking such things.You assert
1.complexity requires a creator
2. information requires a creator
3.intelligence requires a creator
4.existence requires a creatorThen by default your god MUST apply. You cannot have it both waysEdited by DC85, : No reason given.

What thing? Almost anything. What would be the point of a computer program having its output the same as its input?

* sigh *Let's start at the beginning. Do you admit that some genomes contain more information than others?

Hi, ICANT. Keep up with me, ICANT. This was already explained. You do know what Deism is, don't you? God set the universe up, then let it run.When they talked to you about the rules of a simulation, you talked about the person who designed the rules upon which the simulation was based.They said, "Look, a simulated universe can run on non-intelligent rules."And you replied, "Yes, but the rules had to be created by an intelligent designer."My response, Welcome to Deism, ICANT. Showing that the rules were set up by intelligence only supports Deism.In order to support Intelligent Design, you need to show that intelligence is one of the rules that the intelligent designer put into the simulation.The example shown was an evolutionary simulation that did not incorporate intelligence into its rules, but still resulted in an object that looked designed.This means evolution can happen just as evolutionists think it does. There’s no need to refer to design: we just have to refer to the rules.

---

-Bluejay (a.k.a. Mantis, Thylacosmilus)Darwin loves you.

Hi DC85, You mean you don't believe there are laws of physics that control the universe.The universe is the way it is because those laws are what they are. I thought DNA was inherited. Then as it is needed it divides and multiplies through specific information contained in tje DMA pf each human cell. The amount of information contained in each cells DNA is more than is in a set of Encyclopaedia Britannica. That information is contained in almost all the cells in the human body.So no stars forming can not compare to what human DNA accomplishes. We have point mutation, frame-shift mutation, deletion, insertion, inversion and DNA expresion mutation.I can't find where any of these are good.Point mutation is a change in one base of the gene.
Frame-shift is when one or more bases are inserted or deleted.
Deletion is when DNA is missing.
Insertion is when extra information is used which results in nonfunctional protein.
Inversion is when an entire section of DNA is reversed.
DNA expression mutation is when proteins are made at the wrong time and type. Also it can be too little or too much protein.That being the case how can we evolve upwards.We can only degenerate until we eventually die when enough mutations happen.The intelligent designer messed up there didn't He. He could have created us where we would never get sick or our body parts wear out. Shucks He could have made our body where it could replace all it bad parts and we could live forever. But that would create a lot of problems wouldn't it. Maybe He knew best.Maybe He was pretty Intellegent after all.God Bless,

---

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

No, because three bases inserted or deleted wouldn't be a frame-shift.A frame-shift mutation is a mutation that introduces a downstream shift in the reading frame. This has a profound effect on protein translation. Insertions almost never result in "nonfunctional protein" unless the insertion is a stop codon, which is not a frequent mutation. Insertions are the process by which new information enters the genome. Species don't evolve "upwards", they evolve outwards. And the way that they do so is by random mutation and natural selection, which adds new information to the species' gene pool. Didn't he, in the Garden of Eden? Somebody needs to re-read their Bible.

Of course and some laws are the way they are because of others... If one of them was different the things in the Universe would be different. I'm saying that they aren't in perfect balance for things to exist the way they do but that things exist the way they do because of the way it is. (I do hope you got that ) Last I checked reproduction was a natural process and that is the driving force.Gravity is to star formation as reproduction is to DNA formation. I think that my DNA being different from my parents and not just a combination is a good thing Why would this ever be the case? You assume every single mutation will appear in the population as a whole? Edited by DC85, : No reason given.

And yet curiously enough we observe beneficial mutations. Only if you die of cancer, which is of course not a germ-line mutation.Sheesh. Yeah, eternal life is bad. Though some people seem to think that it would be heaven.

Hi DC85, You did declare that my God could not have just poped in out of nowhere.The universe exists.It was either created by an intelligent being, has existed forever, or poped into existence out of nowhere or non-existence for a better word.Makes no difference where you claim anything or not. Sure I do that is the reason I answered as I did. Where have I asserted complexity requires a creator?I have asserted information requires a creator. I think somewhere back there I provided source for that assertion.Where did I assert intelligence requires a creator?Where did I assert existence requires a creator?I did assert that the etenal existent intelligent creator was existence from which all things began to exist. At least that is what He claims in the Manuel.

---

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

You seem to make a distinction between simple molecules, such as hydrogen, and more complex molecules such as DNA. Do you agree that hydrogen contains "information" in the same way that DNA does?

---

Life is like a Hot Wheels car. Sometimes it goes behind the couch and you can't find it.

Hi jay, But the intelligent designer of the universe did not design a simulation. He designed the real thing. He then created the real thing. He then supplied the created universe with all the things that have ever existed or will exist.So no The intelligent designer did not start a simulation and then take a fishing trip.He had hands on managment until about 6,000+ years ago.God Bless,

---

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

quote:

---

The intelligent existent one has just as much chance of poping out of nowhere as the universe did.

​

The eternal existent one does not reside in the Universe.

​

His existence is where the universe resides.

​

God Bless,

---

No, you are getting even more wrong, if such is possible.
The universe at the BB was an extremely simply thing - in fact the simplest thing possible - a naked singularity. We KNOW that such can appear 'out of nowhere'.
You could look at it thusly:
zero energy to start. Big Bang starts and a spacetime framework comes into existence and starts stretching rapidly, filled with a single type of energy at massive temperature and pressure.
This process continues and as the heat declines (volume increases and temp decreases). Fundamental symmetries are now broken at this new conditions, gravity, em, strong and weak nuclear forces all emerge from the broken symmetries as different forces. It becomes cool enough after about 360,000 years for electrons and atomic nucleii to come together into atoms - mainly hydrogen. Now, you might think that this is creating something from nothing, but not necessarily.
We can model matter/energy vs gravity (I can give you a more detailed reasoning but I suspect it would be a waste of time) so when considered in this way the entire energy of the universe is 0, (the quantity represented by mass/energy is exactly cancelled by the quantity we know as gravity).So the universe can easily pop out of nothing and we have observational and theoretical underpinning for that.A complex entity CANNOT do the same. Any designer must be extremely complex - it requires intelligence, self awareness, the ability to manipulate spacetime ...etc. Such an entity cannot just appear from nowhere - not possible.So we have 1 theory which says the universe pops into existence. This is logically OK and scientifically fine.
Then we have a God doing the same - which is logically and physically 'impossible'.
And after all that, it still does not solve any problem that the first theory fails with. So you have replaced a theory which could work with one which could not and achieved nothing.....