How does Complexity demonstrate Design

I'm just curious, yxifix, have you presented any positive evidence of God's involvement with the creation of life?For hypothetical sake, I'm perfectly willing to forego the evidence that has been demonstrated for different theories of abiogenisis right now, if you could present some verifiable evidence that a Divine influence began the process instead. I'd be very comfortable weighing an ID theory with evidence vs. other competing abiogenesis theories. But ATM it seems you are merely attempting to discredit those abiogenesis theories in order to support your idea without positive evidence. This continues to resemble the argument from false dilemna:Page not found - NizkorSo without falling into this fallacy, what positive evidence has been presented for an Intelligent Designer setting all life into motion?This message has been edited by MisterOpus1, 08-16-2004 10:23 AM

All 3 of those "proofs" you've given clearly demonstrate the logical fallacy of argument from ignorance:ForbiddenForget the possibility of DNA possibly forming by itself via abiogenesis processes for a minute. In fact, I'm willing to be a full skeptic like yourself for a second and say it couldn't have happened.Now, being in this position, what would make me inclined to think that an Intelligent Creator helped contribute to the process? And what would differentiate that possibility from, say, a meteor with RNA inside it dropping off in our primordial soup? Or more to the point, what would differentiate a group of martians from creating us from scratch, vs. a Divine Creator starting things up?I personally need to have some positive, verifiable, observed evidence that a Divine Creator was responsible for it all in order for me to fully submit myself to the possibility. I need to be able to see some type of evidence, without attempting to shoot down any other possible ideas of how things started (hence, avoiding the false dilemna fallacy), in order for me to believe a Divine Creator was responsible.Now, aside of trying to shoot down other possibilities like random chance occurrences, martian intervention, and the like, can you present to me any positive, observable, and verifiable evidence that there was a Divine Creator intervening somehow from the getgo?

quote:

---

Welcome on board:

​

message 257
message 259
message 265

​

mark24, crashfrog, wounded king, MisterOpis1.... (hopefully I have mentioned anybody, if not, excuse me)

​

who's next?

---

yxifix,I'm not really interested in what others had to say about this. I am interested in what you are arguing, and the current logical fallacy you are running into here.I told you that I'm willing to negate the possibility of random chance creating the first proteins of life. By doing so I am willing to be "on your side" for a moment, so to speak. I am willing to submit that we just don't have enough information about the origins of life to feel comfortable with the idea of random processes creating the first proteins.Okay?Now, in order for me to feel comfortable with what you are arguing, an Intelligent Designer starting the process, I would very much appreciate some positive, verifiable, and observable evidence that there was, indeed, an Intelligent Designer responsible for it all.You cannot explain to me the reason is because it's just too unlikely for a random event to happen, because I'm willing to forego the argument from ignorance fallacy this is creating and agree with you here for the moment.You cannot therefore conclude that since it a random event is too unlikely the only viable solution is therefore an Intelligent Designer, because this creates the argument from false dilemna fallacy. There are other possibilities of the event occurring, ranging anywhere from a meteor carrying the life's proteins (and perhaps even life's beginning cells), to a martian from another planet dropping off a couple of beginning cells and RNA proteins.So in order for me to be convinced that an Intelligent Designer of some sort, began life's process, I need to have some positive, verifiable, and observable evidence that this ID was responsible.Do you have this positive evidence that clearly demonstrates this?

pink sasquatch writes:

quote:

---

Yxifix - what you describe is true for a fully formed eukaryotic cell, but is not true in general.

​

RNA and DNA can be created by simple chemical reactions requiring essentially none of the details you describe.

​

I routinely create enormous amounts of DNA and RNA in the lab using such a chemical reaction, which includes NO cells, and only a single enzyme.

​

As has been explained already by Ooooook!, some RNAs (as you describe also) can act as enzymes, and self-replicating RNAs have been created that require no other interacting molecules.

​

Here's full text of a peer-reviewed journal article that provides some background on how RNA can form by chemical reactions, and how UV light can act as a selective force to drive RNA evolution. It may not be the best reference but the full text was available....

---

Well crap, that kinda does a little number to my temporary belief with yxifix that RNA and DNA cannot arise randomly and/or spontaneously. Nevertheless, just for argument sake I'm still willing to stick with yxifix's argument that it's just simply impossible for life to come from a few proteins and RNA strands to where we are today. But what I need now from yxifix is positive, verifiable, observable, and falsifiable evidence of his alternative theory of an Intelligent Designer starting it all.Hopefully his answer will be coming soon, because I really think there has to be some evidence out there of some sort that an Intelligent Designer started the whole process of life from non-life.