What is an ID proponent's basis of comparison? (edited)

Um, this begs the question how do you know all genetic material demands a designer. You have done nothing to answer Percy's question but provide a baseless assertion as your first point. This is called circular reasoning i.e.Percy: How do you know this is evidence that the car is blue?SO: Because in the first place all cars are blue.WTF?!? I assume by the term 'mechanism' you are referring to the transposons you mentioned earlier, correct? Or are you referring to other genetic 'mechanisms' as well for inducing genetic mutation? If so what.If you are saying ransposition is the only method for causing genetic changes you are wrong. I trust this is not what you are saying so if you could elaborate I would appreciate it. Mutation is part of the evolutionary process, yes. It is like saying if someone can't walk they can't run very fast. Duh! Um, you lost me. Which mechanisms? You ever heard of genetic frameshifting, single base mutations, insertions, deletions, etc which are not always caused by transposition. Wrong. Define the mechanisms you are talking about and then we can continue to debate the problems with your argument.Edited by DevilsAdvocate, : No reason given.Edited by DevilsAdvocate, : Correct misspelling and quoting errors

---

For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.
Dr. Carl Sagan

I assume you are using Dembski’s term he conjured up out of thin air. Repeating over and over that CSI is evidence for intelligence does not make it so. You must provide evidence. This article is talking about the LexA protein controlling the capability of the bacterium to evolve a resistance to the antibiotics ciprofloxacin and rifampic. It is not stating that the bacterium is not able to evolve at all as a result of inhibiting this protein? You are misinterpreting what this article is stating.Again there are many different varieties of genetic mutations that can occur. This protein is just enables or inhibits the mutation of certain areas of the genome resulting in resistance to certain chemical agents (in this case specific antibiotics). Because these 'mechanisms' aka proteins perform other functions than just enabling or inhibiting genetic mutation (this was the undoing of ID’s irreducible complexity argument) and also these mechanisms do not control all forms of genetic mutations. BS, you have poor reading comprehension. They are talking about resistance to specific antibiotics not all types of genetic mutations.Edited by DevilsAdvocate, : No reason given.Edited by DevilsAdvocate, : No reason given.

---

For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.
Dr. Carl Sagan

Not the way Demski uses it. Orgel never used the entire phrase "complex specified information" and his usage of this concept is completely contradictory to how Demski uses it. This is another case where creationists hijack the academic work of real scientists. Anyways... Says who? Says who? I assume you got this second hand from Demski referring to Seth Lloyd's 'Computational capacity of the universe' article in which Llyod is allegorically representing the physical universe as a computation device aka a computer and trying to determine the information capacity & computation power the universe entails. In other words this is a metaphore. He even states this: How can you determine that the product is not a result of a natural law? This is to assume that something exists outside of natural law (i.e. supernatural); which by definition you cannot determine using empirical evidence which is itself based on natural laws and the scientific method. You are in a catch-22 situation here with your assertion. Or so you thinkanyways What 400 bits in nature? What are you talking about? The reason we can determine that it was designed by humans is because we as human beings are indoctrinated on what human-made objects look like both by through observation of other objects designed by humans and through our own trial and error. Besides, it is still subject to the same natural laws for its creation as does other phenomena not created/designed by man. There is nothing magical about this. You see design from a supernatural entity because that is what you want to see you.How about termite mounds are they intelligently designed by termites? How about stromatolites, are they intelligently designed by cynobacteria? How about natural phenomena formed through the wind and water erosion and seismic activity that earily look like human-made objects, this is called : You are conditioned to see what you want to see. It is called apophenia. Look it up. LOL, is that the best you can come back with? What are you 10 years old? You are no extrapolating you are making shit up out of thin air to back up your preconceived notions. No, that is not what this article is saying. Now you are deliberately lying. The evolution of this bacteria in this article is only taking into consideration its adaption to resist certain antibiotics not the entire evolutionary history of the bacteria. It does evolve without LexA. The presence of LeXA just enables mutation in a certain area of the bacterium’s genome which enables it to be resistant to certain types of antibiotics. Stop making shit up. No, this is not how adaption/evolution works. How are you defining random mutations. All these protein inhibitors are doing is increasing the mutations in one specific area of the genome. This does not mean that mutations are not occurring elsewhere in the genome. Who is saying that these bacterium need these ‘mechanisms’ to evolve overall? These mechanisms are only needed to evolve resistance to certain types of chemical agents. You really need to study some basic biology and molecular biology before you try to attack scientific concepts you are ignorant of. How do you know I misunderstand IC when we have not even discussed it. This statement went over your head so nevermind. Sweeping generalization and incorrect one at that. Did this article state that all bacteria require this mechanism to be resistant to all chemical agents much less all antibiotics. We don’t know uncategorically and 100% that they cannot evolve resistance without LexA. It is assumed based on these studies that they can’t at this time. However, given enough time, the bacteria very well may evolve to build resistances without LeXa. If enough mutations occur who knows this may occur, no one knows. Again why would not having this mechanism inhibit the bacterium from evolving in the past since many of these synthetic antibiotics were non-existent until the last half of this century anyways.Smooth Operator, you are the epitome of someone who has does not have the scientific background necessary to be able to determine true scientific truths from the pseudoscience crap you find on the internet and in creationist/ID propoganda.

---

For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.
Dr. Carl Sagan

All genetic mutations are induced. Some are induced by sources outside the organism and some from within.Random is not synonomous with having no cause. Random means that the mutation can occur anywhere in a given area of the genome and do not form a predictable pattern. There are many causes for random mutations in the genetic code including inaccurate copying of DNA sequences, biochemical agents (virus, prions, etc), radioactive agents (i.e. UV light) There are a multitude of causes for random genetic mutations. Never say never in science. Science is always spoken in the language or probabilities.Edited by DevilsAdvocate, : No reason given.

---

For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.
Dr. Carl Sagan

I love how creationist and IDers just assume if you say something over ad nauseum it makes it true. As Jerry Maguire says "Show me the money!" or in this case the evidence. No, he is making baseless claims. If you make an assertion back it up. Otherwise you bring nothing to the debate. He conducts the same ignorant baseless claims against SR and GR on the physics threads and brings over this same form of irrational bantering to this thread. I don't tollerate it and neither should you. This is a subjective interpretation of nature. How do you know this?A natural arch formed by water and wind erosion can have a specific function and use by animals and humans. A cave can as well. Is there an intelligent agent behind the formation of these natural phenomena? There is nothing magical or special about these natural phenomena. We attribute meaning to them precisely because they do seem to conform to our needs and desires. This is in a way a form of anthropocentrism. What does that mean??? You can't even adequately define CSI, how can you expect anyone else to understand WTF you are talking about??So what is complex and not complex in nature? How are you defining chaos? Chaos means totally unpredictability and randomness. If these phenomena were truely chaotic there would be nothing tangible that you could touch, feel, taste, etc. The termite mound much less anything else would not 'exist' for all intense and purposes of the word. So what would constitute CSI and why?Edited by DevilsAdvocate, : No reason given.Edited by DevilsAdvocate, : No reason given.Edited by DevilsAdvocate, : No reason given.

---

For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.
Dr. Carl Sagan

That is not what you said earlier: You can't even remember what you said in previous posts. You really are dumbing down your cause. No that is not what the random in random mutations means. Do you understand what the word 'random' means?Random means it cannot be accurately predicted meaning we cannot accurately predict where genetic mutations will strike next in an organisms genome. Some mutational sources are more random than others. For example mutations cause by UV sources are almost completely random since nearly all portions of the genome are sucesptable to this radiation source and it would be nearly impossible to determine where exactly these point mutations could occur. Whereas, the areas of DNA which are suseptible to viral agents of mutation may be more predictable in there location of occurance. Obviously not you as shown above. You have yet to show how this helps your case as I debunked your idea that these genetic mechanisms had to develop for any evolutionary changes to occur.

---

For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.
Dr. Carl Sagan

Argument from ignorance/Negative Proof Fallacy. Why should I provide evidence for something you are trying to prove??First you need to adequately define CSI... I assume by 400 bits you are talking about DNA? Please elaborate and educate the CSI illiterate masses. Again define CSI. If I showed you two caves that were identical and one was human made and one created by the forces of nature would this not negate your CSI argument? Neither does the morphology and physiology of biological life intrinsically 'need' to fit a certain standard. Biological life much like other natural occurring phenomena is shaped by the environmental conditions in which it exists. Forces such as electromagnetic radiation and chemical agents can effect the composition of the genome and ultimately the shapes (morphology) of organisms. I apologize, I just get frustrated when people throw around terms without defining them or understanding them, themselves. When you deal with people like SO and the like, sometimes we mistakenly throw you under the same proverbial bus. It is a human vice which I fall prone to as well. Agreed but if you cannot make the distinction between chaos and non-chaos are we sure there really is a substantial difference between the two? That is the whole purpose I post on this board, not just for you but for all of us. Hmm, did you just make up that definition or where did you draw it from. This is unlike any definition of the word 'chaos' I have seen. What do you mean by linear measurements? Can we not predict to a degree the amount of erosion that will occur in a river on a yearly basis? Is that a 'chaotic thing'? So what specifically falls into your category of 'chaotic things'?Edited by DevilsAdvocate, : No reason given.Edited by DevilsAdvocate, : No reason given.

---

For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.
Dr. Carl Sagan

Because that is how our legal system operates. To question this is to question the integrity of our legal system not just one trial. I am not saying this is not a legitimet question just that it is broader in scope than this one specific trial.

---

For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.
Dr. Carl Sagan