What is science?

Hi John Paul-quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
True but we have observed intelligent agents design objects that exhibit specified complexity and we have observed intelligent agents designing information-rich systems.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MisterOpus1:
I was wondering if we could maybe expand on your statement here with another example - cancerous tumors. Could we not agree that cancer cells fit the category of specified complexity, and could therefore infer an intelligent agent somewhere in its creation and/or evolutionary processes?John Paul:
If cancer cells were cells unto themselves, ie not a part of an organism, then I would say that yes we would infer ID. However we never see cancer cells except in an organism, which we would infer that organism is a product of ID. I would infer cancer cell are a defect in the design. A defect that ID should be able to correct. How so? Once we start looking at organisms as a result of ID we will start looking at genomes as an intelligent construct. I believe this will help us decipher genomes and by doing that help us fix the defects.

MrH:
Again, no intelligent agency has ever been observed creating a baby, a tree, a bacterium, or anything in biology.John Paul:
Really? Humans create baby humans. Humans would be considered an intelligent agent. Nature has never been observed giving life. Nature has been observed taking life.Why is it up to me to support my claim when you can't support yours?

MrH:
John Paul, in response to my request that he provide an example of intelligent agency being responsible for the design of a biological organism or structure, claims:
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Humans create baby humans. Humans would be considered an intelligent agent. Nature has never been observed giving life. Nature has been observed taking life.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------John Paul:
MrH's continued dishonesty is duly noted. My above response was NOT in response to MrH's request that I "provide an example of intelligent agency being responsible for the design of a biological organism or structure". Rather it was in response to this:
MrH:
Again, no intelligent agency has ever been observed creating a baby, a tree, a bacterium, or anything in biology. MrH:
Humans do not sequence the genomes of their offspring and consciously administer the process of cell division that makes a fertilized egg into a baby.John Paul:
How do you know? Are you saying that nature does sequence the genomes? Where is your evidence?MrH:
This is not an example of intelligent design, it's controlled by the biochemical DNA replication process. This natural process, too, has never been shown to depend on intelligent agency.John Paul:
Can you provide any evidence that DNA replication or the reproduction of a cell or cellular differentiation is a natural process, ie created by nature?Once again MrH has refused to show that nature can do anything in biology.And yes I consider bacteria and trees to be intelligent agents. You may not understand their intelligence but that does not mean it doesn't exist.This message has been edited by John Paul, 06-17-2004 12:31 PM

LM:
OR, did you rely on the natural process of gametogenesis with random cross overs via meiosis, fertilization, placental impregnation, natural hormonal feedback between mother and fetus, etc.John Paul:
Please provide any evidence that these processes originated naturally.Intelligent design does not hold that only humans can produce ID.

MrH:
Well, the fact that it happens at the subcellular level, acts according to understood chemical laws, and takes place automatically whether or not the organism being replicated intends to be replicated, I'd say it qualifies as a natural process.John Paul:
Do you the evidence that shows "acts according to understood chemical laws"?MrH:
But what are we discussing here?John Paul:
The thread topic is "What is science?". So that is what we are supposed to be discussing. The fact remains that detecting intelligent design is already part of science.MrH:
I answered your question concerning the natural process of DNA replication.John Paul:
Your "answer" was no more than an assertion.MrH:
Once again, if you can demonstrate that such a process requires a directing intelligence, please do so.John Paul:
Your continued misrepresentation is duly noted. A directing intelligence is not required any more than it is required by a computer program. All the instructions were designed in.This message has been edited by John Paul, 06-17-2004 12:50 PM

Guys, so no one thinks I am running away- I have to go but will return to this board hopefully in a couple of days- Saturday or Sunday. I apologize for any inconvenience.