Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 65 (9073 total)
64 online now:
AZPaul3, jar, nwr, PaulK, Phat, Tangle, Tanypteryx (7 members, 57 visitors)
Newest Member: MidwestPaul
Post Volume: Total: 893,290 Year: 4,402/6,534 Month: 616/900 Week: 140/182 Day: 20/27 Hour: 2/0

Announcements: Security Update Released


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Why would an intelligent designer design these?
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 705 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 29 of 108 (214786)
06-06-2005 5:44 PM
Reply to: Message 20 by Eledhan
06-06-2005 10:17 AM


Your theory is just as good as mine.

Maybe it is, maybe it isn't. My theory - that is, evolution, which isn't of course "my" theory in any sense that I came up with it - not only explains all the data, but it makes predictions which have been tested and found accurate. It provides a way to make sense of populations and predict how they'll respond to changes in their environment.

Does your theory do those things?

There is no way that any devout Christian is going to be persuaded otherwise

I was a devout Christian when I came to accept evolution; I came to that position because of the strength of the evidence for it.

but there is also no way that a strong believer in evolution is going to change his beliefs either.

Also not true. Come up with a better theory, one that explains all the data evolution does better than evolution does; one that makes better predictions than evolution does, and you'll see scientists abandon evolution in droves. You'll also get a Nobel prize.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 20 by Eledhan, posted 06-06-2005 10:17 AM Eledhan has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 31 by Eledhan, posted 06-06-2005 5:47 PM crashfrog has taken no action
 Message 38 by gnojek, posted 06-06-2005 7:05 PM crashfrog has taken no action

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 705 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 35 of 108 (214796)
06-06-2005 6:04 PM
Reply to: Message 28 by Eledhan
06-06-2005 5:38 PM


What ever happened to real, hard evidence?

Not everything that happens leaves evidence. We're talking about organisms that may have no hard parts whatsoever. What, exactly, do you think would be left to fossilize?

How come it's okay for an evolutionist scientist to say this, but it's not okay for a Christian to say something very similar about God, and still be taken seriously?

Because we know organisms exist, and we know that some of them are sexed, and we can directly observe the difference between them.

We don't know that God exists. We don't know anything about God for sure. There's absolutely nothing about God that we can directly observe.

Nothing you can say about God can be disproved, ever. Therefore statements about God don't tell us anything. They're just make-believe.

I believe that they are terrified of the thought of actually having to answer to a higher power, but that's just my oppinion.

Why would I be afraid of such a thing? Don't you think that there are higher "powers" that I answer to, every single day? As an atheist, trust me, there's nothing more that I would like than for there to be a God, a higher power to which people would be accountable, a power that would intervene to make things right for people.

But to every indication, there isn't. I'd love there to be a God. But there's no indication there is.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 28 by Eledhan, posted 06-06-2005 5:38 PM Eledhan has taken no action

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 705 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 51 of 108 (215131)
06-07-2005 7:02 PM
Reply to: Message 45 by Eledhan
06-07-2005 8:54 AM


So, next time you want to attempt to slander "religious people", think again; because some of the most powerful people in the world are "religious"

sigh... more threats from the Christers.

Well, that's the life of the atheist.

And why is it that we can't say that evolution has numerous flaws without bringing another theory that has to be better?

I dunno. Why don't you talk to any expert in any field and start telling him all about the flaws in how he does things, without offering any solutions or better plans, and see how friendly he is?

You may call them "flaws"; the word that would be more precise is "frontiers." Why would you expect evolution to be flawless? What would biologists do if that were the case? Or did you not notice that biologists were still very hard at work indeed, trying to derive a better understanding of the natural world?

One "flaw" in medicine is that we don't have a cure for cancer. The solution to that isn't that we tear down all the hospitals; the solution is that we build more schools. Similarly, the areas where evolution seems weak, or where explanitory models seem lacking shouldn't prompt us to abandon reason and science altogether; rather, these are the areas where the work needs to be done.

I am simply trying to say that the evolutionary theory is not perfect, but neither is my own theory.

Of course evolution isn't perfect; that's why biologists still have jobs. But it is better than your theory. I've already pointed out what evolution does that your own theory does not.

Ah, but I see how it works on your planet. Because we don't know everything, we know nothing; and because we know nothing who's to care if we substitute dogma for reason?

How very mature. How does anything get done where you live?

I was simply trying to make a point that I do know that God exists because I have experienced Him, and that I know you at least have an inkling that He exists, because you could feel Him when you read that post.

It must absolutely drive you nuts that people, like myself, exist who absolutely experience none of the feeling you're talking about.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 45 by Eledhan, posted 06-07-2005 8:54 AM Eledhan has taken no action

Replies to this message:
 Message 53 by Silent H, posted 06-08-2005 5:19 AM crashfrog has replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 705 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 54 of 108 (215282)
06-08-2005 7:40 AM
Reply to: Message 53 by Silent H
06-08-2005 5:19 AM


I believe you wrote something else like this before... I know someone did. Did you come up with this yourself?

As far as I know. Feel free to bandy it about with no attribution.

I think this matches nicely with the error ID makes in rushing to judgement:

Indeed. And of course they rush to judgement - this isn't just science for them, it's a battle for the souls of mankind. Apparantly they don't feel they have the luxury of allowing knowledge to develop at its own pace.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 53 by Silent H, posted 06-08-2005 5:19 AM Silent H has taken no action

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 705 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 58 of 108 (215710)
06-09-2005 5:32 PM
Reply to: Message 57 by Kraniet
06-09-2005 3:13 PM


Since neither can be sure that there arent/are a God existing.

Atheism isn't the position where one is certain that there is no God. Atheism is the position that one is sure that there's no known evidence for God.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 57 by Kraniet, posted 06-09-2005 3:13 PM Kraniet has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 59 by Kraniet, posted 06-09-2005 6:25 PM crashfrog has taken no action

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 705 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 88 of 108 (293091)
03-07-2006 6:22 PM
Reply to: Message 87 by inkorrekt
03-07-2006 6:17 PM


Re: Bizarre logic.
In order to make a protein whichis biologically active, the amino acid sequence must be exact.

Hrm, I can't help but think I've rebutted this claim of yours before. Nonetheless:

quote:
Functional sequences are not so rare and isolated. Experiments show that roughly 1 in 1011 of all random-sequence proteins have ATP-binding activity (Keefe and Szostak 2001), and theoretical work by H. P. Yockey (1992, 326-330) shows that at this density all functional sequences are connected by single amino acid changes. Furthermore, there are several kinds of mutations that change multiple amino acids at once.

http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CB/CB150.html


This message is a reply to:
 Message 87 by inkorrekt, posted 03-07-2006 6:17 PM inkorrekt has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 89 by inkorrekt, posted 03-08-2006 8:37 PM crashfrog has replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 705 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 90 of 108 (293483)
03-08-2006 9:13 PM
Reply to: Message 89 by inkorrekt
03-08-2006 8:37 PM


Re: Bizarre logic.
What if the activity required is for ATPase?

I don't understand the question.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 89 by inkorrekt, posted 03-08-2006 8:37 PM inkorrekt has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 91 by inkorrekt, posted 03-08-2006 9:25 PM crashfrog has replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 705 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 92 of 108 (293498)
03-08-2006 9:52 PM
Reply to: Message 91 by inkorrekt
03-08-2006 9:25 PM


Re: Bizarre logic.
If the particular desired activity is for ATP hydrolysis, then ATP binding activity will not be useful.

Why not?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 91 by inkorrekt, posted 03-08-2006 9:25 PM inkorrekt has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 93 by inkorrekt, posted 03-14-2006 4:50 PM crashfrog has replied
 Message 94 by inkorrekt, posted 03-14-2006 4:51 PM crashfrog has taken no action
 Message 96 by inkorrekt, posted 03-30-2006 8:31 PM crashfrog has taken no action

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 705 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 95 of 108 (295345)
03-14-2006 7:41 PM
Reply to: Message 93 by inkorrekt
03-14-2006 4:50 PM


Re: Bizarre logic.
It does not make any sense to me. What do you think is the possibility? If that happens, what is the purpose?

Could you make a greater effort to be clearer? It's still not at all clear what you're asking.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 93 by inkorrekt, posted 03-14-2006 4:50 PM inkorrekt has taken no action

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.1
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2022