Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,819 Year: 3,076/9,624 Month: 921/1,588 Week: 104/223 Day: 2/13 Hour: 1/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   TOE and the Reasons for Doubt
Taq
Member
Posts: 9973
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.7


Message 513 of 530 (571029)
07-29-2010 5:48 PM
Reply to: Message 511 by Bolder-dash
07-29-2010 9:26 AM


Re: cell reproduction
I think that is sort of like how people try to write off the irreducible complexity argument for the bacterial flagellum, by suggesting that everyone of the many complicated moving parts, which must act in complete concert to produce a workable effect COULD have had some other use previously, without the obligation of somehow explaining what all those other uses were, and how they came to change to their final use.
The entire ID argument is based on the principle that it is impossible for the parts to have had a different, selectable function in the past, therefore ID. If you can show in principle that the proteins could have had different functions, such as in the type III secretory system, then the argument has been refuted.
The problem here is that the ID argument is an argument from ignorance. It is a logical fallacy. "I don't know" does not equal "Therefore the intelligent designer did it".

This message is a reply to:
 Message 511 by Bolder-dash, posted 07-29-2010 9:26 AM Bolder-dash has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 514 by Bolder-dash, posted 07-29-2010 7:14 PM Taq has replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 9973
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.7


Message 526 of 530 (571184)
07-30-2010 4:08 PM
Reply to: Message 514 by Bolder-dash
07-29-2010 7:14 PM


Re: cell reproduction
What the ID argument says is that you don't know.
We do know that homologs of flagellar proteins do you have selectable function which falsifies the claim that there are no selectable steps in the construction of the flagella.
So what is the ID step by step explanation for the construction of the flagella? If there is no detailed ID explanation then it had to evolve somehow, just by default, right? Isn't this exactly how the ID argument works?
You make up that there could have been other uses for all the thousands of parts that are involved in every one of the millions upon millions of systems and bodily functions on earth.
We don't have to make it up. It is a fact. Homologs of the flagellar proteins are found in the type III secretory system.
If your side was truly an honest scientific endeavor, it would INSIST that everyone of the weaknesses of your argument be taught in every school in the country.
Why schools where the audience is largely ignorant of the science behind it? Why not do some research and present it at scientific conferences or submit the research to peer reviewed journals? You know, do some actual science instead of making flawed arguments to school boards?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 514 by Bolder-dash, posted 07-29-2010 7:14 PM Bolder-dash has not replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 9973
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.7


Message 527 of 530 (571185)
07-30-2010 4:11 PM
Reply to: Message 520 by Bolder-dash
07-29-2010 9:48 PM


Re: Strengths and weaknesses and other lies...
So what are you saying, that the strengths and weaknesses of the theory shouldn't be taught because you feel it is a strategy?
That scientists have not found an evolutionary pathway for every feature in every species is not a weakness of the theory. It is a lack of knowledge. That is why we need to train new scientists, to figure these things out. The problem here is that IDers are not interested in figuring out these mysteries. They want to stop research into these areas before the answer is found. That is the whole reason for trying to do away with teaching evolution in schools. ID is the cockroach that scurries away when the light of knowedge hits the room.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 520 by Bolder-dash, posted 07-29-2010 9:48 PM Bolder-dash has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024