|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total) |
| |
popoi | |
Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0 |
Thread ▼ Details |
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Is there a legitimate argument for design? | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 9973 Joined: Member Rating: 5.7 |
If you want a spider, why are you thinking Corvairs!??? Here's a spider! Here's a ferocious Dino!!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Meddle Member (Idle past 1271 days) Posts: 179 From: Scotland Joined:
|
As an interesting, if somewhat serious aside, it has been found that during reproduction, the newly synthesised cellular components are not always equally distributed between the two daughter cells. Under good growth conditions, one daughter cell retains the majority of the components of the parent cell, while the other daughter cell is predominately made up of newly formed components and exhibits increased rate of growth.
Conversely, under poor growth conditions cellular components are more equally distributed between cells, with both cells showing showing a reduced rate of growth. Source Edited by Malcolm, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Ed67 Member (Idle past 3329 days) Posts: 159 Joined: |
dadman, did you come back yet? I want to hear more from you. Looks like I'm one of the few people here that agrees with you lol.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member (Idle past 285 days) Posts: 16113 Joined: |
If you agree with what he's saying, could you also translate it into English?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Ed67 Member (Idle past 3329 days) Posts: 159 Joined: |
Yes, there is a legitimate argument for design.
I think the only argument ID needs (though the concept has many) is in the digital code built into the DNA/RNA. The existence of this code is the downfall of abiogenesis, in my opinion.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Ed67 Member (Idle past 3329 days) Posts: 159 Joined: |
ok, dadman, I can't say I agree with this:
" it is now scientifically proven that all life is triune..."
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member (Idle past 285 days) Posts: 16113 Joined: |
Perhaps you should learn the difference between an argument and an assertion.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Ed67 Member (Idle past 3329 days) Posts: 159 Joined: |
Sorry, I assumed the argument for the specified, precision code that is found in the DNA/RNA of even the simplest forms of life was already covered.
How can you guys honestly account for that happening in a completely non-intelligent way? There's more software packed into the nucleus of a cell than, well, I don't know. But lots.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Ed67 Member (Idle past 3329 days) Posts: 159 Joined: |
(sorry, having troubles posting...)
Edited by Ed67, : Accidental double post
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Pressie Member Posts: 2103 From: Pretoria, SA Joined: |
Ed67 writes: I followed the arguments on this thread and the guys who presented the arguments against 'specified, precision code' presented much more compelling evidence than those presented by the Creationist guys. At least the scientists presented peer-reviewed, scientific evidence. The anti-science brigade only presented arguments from incredubility and essays from religious sources.
Sorry, I assumed the argument for the specified, precision code that is found in the DNA/RNA of even the simplest forms of life was already covered. Ed67 writes: Really? Please present the data. I've seen none from your side. How can you guys honestly account for that happening in a completely non-intelligent way? There's more software packed into the nucleus of a cell than, well, I don't know. But lots. Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Theodoric Member Posts: 9076 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: Member Rating: 3.7 |
There's more software packed into the nucleus of a cell than, well, I don't know. But lots.
Maybe you want to actually make an argument for this. Anyone can just spout random crap. That does not make it correct, or incorrect. We can not examine the claim unless you actually make an argument.
quote:-Christopher Hitchens) Source 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.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 412 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Ed67 writes:
I would say that the molecule is the code. Are you suggesting that the code is "written on" the molecule by some designer? What would be the ink?
I think the only argument ID needs (though the concept has many) is in the digital code built into the DNA/RNA.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member (Idle past 285 days) Posts: 16113 Joined:
|
Sorry, I assumed the argument for the specified, precision code that is found in the DNA/RNA of even the simplest forms of life was already covered. How can you guys honestly account for that happening in a completely non-intelligent way? There's more software packed into the nucleus of a cell than, well, I don't know. But lots. What is needed is not an argument for the code, but an argument for an invisible man making the DNA by magic. This is where creationists seem to fall down.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1405 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
Hi again Ed67
... as you are new here, some posting tips: type [qs]quotes are easy[/qs] and it becomes:
quotes are easy and you can type [qs=RAZD]quotes are easy[/qs] and it becomes:
RAZD writes: quotes are easy or type [quote]quotes are easy[/quote] and it becomes:
quote: also check out (help) links on any formatting questions when in the reply window. For other formatting tips see Posting TipsFor a quick overview see EvC Forum Primer If you have problems with replies see Report Discussion Problems Here 3.0 Sorry, I assumed the argument for the specified, precision code that is found in the DNA/RNA of even the simplest forms of life was already covered. Presentation of a concept is not covering an argument
Sorry, I assumed the argument for the specified, precision code that is found in the DNA/RNA of even the simplest forms of life was already covered. You need to look at the conditions that lead to the formation of life and at the simplest form/s of self-replication first, not at the end product of 3.5 billion years of evolution.
Message 125: Yes, there is a legitimate argument for design. You may want to read Is ID properly pursued?. One can argue that there is a legitimate argument for the earth being the center of the universe ... having an argument doesn't mean it is valid or based on evidence, as it could be based on ignorance or misunderstanding.
Message 125: I think the only argument ID needs (though the concept has many) is in the digital code built into the DNA/RNA. First you need to review the way the universe is primed for the development of life: see Panspermic Pre-Biotic Molecules - Life's Building Blocks (Part I) Then you need to review the many chemical paths to self-replication: see Self-Replicating Molecules - Life's Building Blocks (Part II) for some examples.
Message 125: The existence of this code is the downfall of abiogenesis, in my opinion. Unfortunately, for you, opinion has not be observed to alter reality in any significant way. But just to clarify things, do you then believe that this intelligence has not done anything since forming the first cell of life? And that all life since has proceeded according to the process of evolution:
We do know that the earth did not possess cellular life forms 4.5 billion years ago, when it first formed, and we do know that cellular life existed 3.5 billion years ago, when the oldest fossil bearing rocks have been discovered, with evidence of fully formed cellular life (cyanobacteria). Therefore we know that at some point in between these times life began. Or do you then believe that, because you can't believe life could form spontaneously, that there has been all kinds of supernatural interferences, down to and including a world wide flood? Just curious. by our ability to understand Rebel American Zen Deist ... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share. Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Ed67 Member (Idle past 3329 days) Posts: 159 Joined: |
"Please present the data."
I thought, at this stage of the game, that you would have granted this as common knowledge. How many base-pair combinations are there in all the DNA in one single cell? Well, how long is the 'character string' (the DNA in a nucleus straightened out and put in a line)? Surely someone on this thread remembers about how long scientists say the DNA molecule is... So, how many digital 'signals' can be sent in the DNA molecules of a cell?Well, we'd have to know how many signals can be stored per unit length. But let me give you a clue; they're SMALLER than microscopic. So, there's the 'data' that supports my claim that there is "LOTS" of specified information stored in the DNA molecules. As for your comment:"At least the scientists presented peer-reviewed, scientific evidence.", ok I'm too lazy to read through this thread, but we'll see about that. This is a cool forum, guys, I'm glad I found it. But I see it's going to take a lot more work than I'm used to so bear with me...btw, what's with the drama queen? lol. Edited by Ed67, : single wording change
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024