Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
6 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,807 Year: 3,064/9,624 Month: 909/1,588 Week: 92/223 Day: 3/17 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Intelligent (maybe), but far from perfect
Jazzns
Member (Idle past 3911 days)
Posts: 2657
From: A Better America
Joined: 07-23-2004


Message 61 of 91 (233695)
08-16-2005 2:09 PM
Reply to: Message 55 by Darwin's Terrier
08-15-2005 8:30 AM


Err....
Being that bats never were birds how could they have ever had birdlike lungs? Just want to make sure you knew that bats did not evolve from birds.

Organizations worth supporting:
Electronic Frontier Foundation | Defending your rights in the digital world (Protect Privacy and Security)
Home | American Civil Liberties Union (Protect Civil Rights)
AAUP (Protect Higher Learning)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 55 by Darwin's Terrier, posted 08-15-2005 8:30 AM Darwin's Terrier has not replied

  
deerbreh
Member (Idle past 2892 days)
Posts: 882
Joined: 06-22-2005


Message 62 of 91 (233711)
08-16-2005 2:34 PM
Reply to: Message 6 by crashfrog
08-18-2003 1:38 PM


Not to mention the frailty of age. Perfectly consistent with evolution but makes no sense in a creationist framework.
Just be glad you don't live to be 900 like Noah and some of those other cats in the OT.
Back on topic: I can't remember the organism, (think it was an insect) where the female's abdomen basically explodes to release the eggs. - again, doesn't seem like a very clever design but definately something evolution would do.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by crashfrog, posted 08-18-2003 1:38 PM crashfrog has not replied

  
deerbreh
Member (Idle past 2892 days)
Posts: 882
Joined: 06-22-2005


Message 63 of 91 (233716)
08-16-2005 2:43 PM
Reply to: Message 56 by randman
08-15-2005 1:02 PM


Re: via deeper physics
randman writes:
... what we think of as physical reality consists first as a potential for form, QM, and takes on specific form subsequent to events. The earth in space-time is essentially a streak, not a ball, sort of like a large pole.
Imo, it is likely that pole can be affected and cause a vibration so that a different potential reality of it manifests, and thus past, present and future are all affected at once.
What is the meaning of this and what does it have to do with ID/perfection? I am not trying to be funny - I can't follow the argument here.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 56 by randman, posted 08-15-2005 1:02 PM randman has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 64 by randman, posted 08-16-2005 3:06 PM deerbreh has replied

  
randman 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4898 days)
Posts: 6367
Joined: 05-26-2005


Message 64 of 91 (233730)
08-16-2005 3:06 PM
Reply to: Message 63 by deerbreh
08-16-2005 2:43 PM


Re: via deeper physics
Well, this may be getting a little off-topic but just to explain the post. Quantum physics research has indicated for a long time that a particle, for example, exists in a potential for a superposition of states, a wave function, that when observed takes on a specific form in a specific place. Many prominent physcists such as Wheeler goes as far as to say that the particle exists as neither a wave or a "particle" in a single state, but is undefined until observed.
In other words, what is fundamental to physical existence is information, an information energy design, and what is derivative is what we normally associate with "physical" in a classical sense. So physical form is derived from design. Now, we can debate how or why, etc, etc,...the design occurs, but the design precedes the form, and the form is derivative of the design, not the other way around, such that other "solutions" or appearances of the design can occur, but the design remains there the same.
In terms of the pole analogy, that is drawn from General Relativity's perspective of space-time (4-D instead of 3-D). Physicists go way beyond that in the math, and I don't pretend to understand all of that, but it is more accurate to think of the earth not as a ball in space moving through time, but as a streak through space-time, sort of like a pole.
My belief and this is not fully developed scientifically although there are a lot of hints at it is that the whole of the pole, the entire streak, can be affected as one single thing, and in doing so there are causal effects "backwards in time" from our perspective, or perhaps just expansions of potential historical time-lines.
Imagine if you bumped a pole or rod for example and caused it to move slightly, or if the rod was slowly being warped and bent due to weathering. In space-time, if this is possible and I think we are beginning to see evidence it is, although small effects, then the movement in the pole would represent changes in history, changes in the past even.
If they are small, they would not be so noticeable for the present, but over long periods of time could add up significantly
Now, my example is not a perfect one although the streak through space-time is fairly accurate, and I am not overuling lengthening or contracting the streak. It's too much to get into here, but those ideas are where that post comes from.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 63 by deerbreh, posted 08-16-2005 2:43 PM deerbreh has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 65 by deerbreh, posted 08-16-2005 3:21 PM randman has replied

  
deerbreh
Member (Idle past 2892 days)
Posts: 882
Joined: 06-22-2005


Message 65 of 91 (233740)
08-16-2005 3:21 PM
Reply to: Message 64 by randman
08-16-2005 3:06 PM


Re: via deeper physics
Sorry I asked. Look, I know what quantum mechanics is and I know about the wave and particle theory of light and General Relativity. But I don't see the connection to the topic; ID and "perfection". And I don't believe you have even started to make the connection. Until you can discuss this more coherently I don't think it has any place on any of the ID/special creation or evolution threads. Just my opinion, for what it is worth.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 64 by randman, posted 08-16-2005 3:06 PM randman has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 66 by randman, posted 08-16-2005 3:27 PM deerbreh has not replied

  
randman 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4898 days)
Posts: 6367
Joined: 05-26-2005


Message 66 of 91 (233743)
08-16-2005 3:27 PM
Reply to: Message 65 by deerbreh
08-16-2005 3:21 PM


Re: via deeper physics
I can discuss it, and it has relevance, but am not going to as it crosses into perhaps a different thread topic. I was asked something by you and someone else, and I answered.
Maybe I shouldn't have.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 65 by deerbreh, posted 08-16-2005 3:21 PM deerbreh has not replied

  
Carson O'Genic
Junior Member (Idle past 6112 days)
Posts: 20
From: San Francisco, CA
Joined: 08-15-2005


Message 67 of 91 (233857)
08-16-2005 8:56 PM


One of the inconsistencies brought up by an early post is the diversity (imperfections and all) that exists in humans today and the belief that we all come from A&E 6,000+ years ago. It is my understanding that ID accepts microevolution but not macroevolution. If we all started out perfect with A&E, then how did we become so different in such a short time? If one accepts microevolution, DNA mutation leading to minor changes, then one most accept that the rate of this mutation has been well documented for many speicies. The point is that there are too many mutations in the human genome for all of this to have happened in 6000 years.

Replies to this message:
 Message 68 by NosyNed, posted 08-16-2005 11:53 PM Carson O'Genic has replied

  
NosyNed
Member
Posts: 8996
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003


Message 68 of 91 (233903)
08-16-2005 11:53 PM
Reply to: Message 67 by Carson O'Genic
08-16-2005 8:56 PM


Macro or Micro in ID?
It is my understanding that ID accepts microevolution but not macroevolution.
The limited reading that I have done in ID suggests that many of them actually accept macroevolution but not micro! Don't confuse them with YEC creationists (though they want the YEC'ers to be confused).
This backwards view from the YEC'ers isn't something I've seen mentioned before.
They, generally, accept an old earth, the possibility that much evolution is the result of mutation and NS and therefore a lot of the branches between higher taxa. What they are picking away at is very small details like the evolution of specific biochemical pathways. These seem, to me, to be micro indeed.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 67 by Carson O'Genic, posted 08-16-2005 8:56 PM Carson O'Genic has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 69 by Carson O'Genic, posted 08-17-2005 5:18 PM NosyNed has not replied

  
Carson O'Genic
Junior Member (Idle past 6112 days)
Posts: 20
From: San Francisco, CA
Joined: 08-15-2005


Message 69 of 91 (234193)
08-17-2005 5:18 PM
Reply to: Message 68 by NosyNed
08-16-2005 11:53 PM


Re: Macro or Micro in ID?
According to this from the Discovery Institute, IDers are ok with microevolution but not macroevolution. I'm not an ID expert by any means, I've just had discussions with ID beleivers.
http://www.discovery.org/scripts/viewDB/filesDB-download.php
Sorry, I'm new here, but what does YEC refer to?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 68 by NosyNed, posted 08-16-2005 11:53 PM NosyNed has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 70 by Theodoric, posted 08-17-2005 5:23 PM Carson O'Genic has not replied

  
Theodoric
Member
Posts: 9076
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 3.7


Message 70 of 91 (234195)
08-17-2005 5:23 PM
Reply to: Message 69 by Carson O'Genic
08-17-2005 5:18 PM


Re: Macro or Micro in ID?
Young Earth Creationists.
Basically they believe the earth is only a few thousand years old. LIteral translation of the bible. Pretty bizarre stuff

This message is a reply to:
 Message 69 by Carson O'Genic, posted 08-17-2005 5:18 PM Carson O'Genic has not replied

  
Darwin's Terrier
Inactive Member


Message 71 of 91 (234368)
08-18-2005 4:54 AM
Reply to: Message 60 by crashfrog
08-16-2005 1:06 PM


Re: via deeper physics
Ah, of course. Thanks Crash, it all makes sense now.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 60 by crashfrog, posted 08-16-2005 1:06 PM crashfrog has not replied

  
LudoRephaim
Member (Idle past 5083 days)
Posts: 651
From: Jareth's labyrinth
Joined: 03-12-2006


Message 72 of 91 (296287)
03-17-2006 2:17 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by MattS
08-07-2003 3:08 PM


well, if God (whoever you may think it to be, or them to be)wanted to make us perfect, he would make us ten feet tall, bulletproof, fly, leap tall buildings in a single bound, strong enough to lift Chicago, be able to go in and out of parallel universes, omniscient, and be able to crap lighting and thunder out of our asses LOL.
I dont have much knowledge of the biological aspects of ID. I know more about the Anthropic Principle than debating ID and biology. But one reason why we are not perfect is because we are suitable for our environment. We dont need to be superman to survive. With the brains we have, we dont need super strength like a Grizzly or a gorilla. Our brains are more than enough. And even that is not without drawbacks.
Might be back later.

"The Nephilim where in the Earth in those days..." Genesis 6:4

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by MattS, posted 08-07-2003 3:08 PM MattS has not replied

  
tcroth01
Inactive Member


Message 73 of 91 (403157)
06-01-2007 3:00 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by MattS
08-07-2003 3:08 PM


Reason for Imperfection, Disease etc
Granting that God exists and the bible is his word, then we would expect the answer to be explained satisfactorily in it. Originally Adam and Eve had perfect health but due to their disobedience, death entered to human family. So falling from the perfect state of health means disease, death, and infant mortality, etc. However, Jesus' ransom sacrifice will benefit mankind soon so that perfect health and life everlasting can be restored back to how it was originally meant to be. What a grand promise to look forward to!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by MattS, posted 08-07-2003 3:08 PM MattS has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 74 by crashfrog, posted 06-01-2007 9:37 AM tcroth01 has not replied
 Message 75 by herrmann, posted 06-03-2007 8:20 PM tcroth01 has not replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1466 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 74 of 91 (403182)
06-01-2007 9:37 AM
Reply to: Message 73 by tcroth01
06-01-2007 3:00 AM


Re: Reason for Imperfection, Disease etc
Originally Adam and Eve had perfect health but due to their disobedience, death entered to human family.
What evidence do you have for your contention that diseases are caused not by biological agents or congenital flaws but by "disobedience?" According to you, we should find that the disobedient have a higher incidence of disease.
Do you have evidence that's the case? If there's no evidence for that, would we be justified in considering it a strike against literal truth of the Bible?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 73 by tcroth01, posted 06-01-2007 3:00 AM tcroth01 has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 77 by blashmet, posted 04-23-2008 6:29 PM crashfrog has not replied

  
herrmann
Junior Member (Idle past 6141 days)
Posts: 11
Joined: 05-22-2007


Message 75 of 91 (403535)
06-03-2007 8:20 PM
Reply to: Message 73 by tcroth01
06-01-2007 3:00 AM


Re: Reason for Imperfection, Disease etc
After going through the fist 3 chapters of Genesis just to make sure, though some of what txroth said is true, disease is not mentioned in any point before the disobedience. tcroth may have been referencing Romans 6:23, "23 For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord." NIV. However, the term Intelligent design is most likely referencing the being that created us, not the race itself. Thus it is not imperitive that we as a race be perfect because if we were perrfect, we would be god, which we are not.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 73 by tcroth01, posted 06-01-2007 3:00 AM tcroth01 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