Designed Virus

MIT Builds Batteries with Viruses
By Ed Oswald, BetaNews
April 7, 2006, 12:49 PM Thus the viruses do something new and novel as a result of intelligent design - we know this because it was done by intelligent design humans.The point is that viruses are an easy proven means to implement designed elements into organic systems, so why don't we see design improvements being delivered by various viruses?In fact every mechanism that transmits a disease - whether mosquitos or kinky sexual behavior - is a possible means to deliver new design information, but the evidence is that all such "information" that is so delivered corrupts or harms the recipient and the only beneficial result is for the recipient to become immune to further delivery ... if it survives. If this is design for a purpose, it is a curious, if not a silly¹, purpose.So, how does "Intelligent Design" explain all the bad design carried by viruses and other {vector\delivery} systems?Enjoy..(ID forum)

---

¹ The pictures are back, thanks.

This is of course the YEC reason for bad design.This means that using it for ID equates ID with YEC.Thanks.Enjoy.

---

Join the effort to unravel {AIDS\HIV} with Team EvC! (click)

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand

​

RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

Whether they do or not is irrelevant to how ID explains the question. If it needs to 'fall back' on a stock YEC answer, then it has nothing to add to the argument, and it is a waste of (your and my) time.The basic concept of ID is that we can see the evidence of design without needing to know the designer - it could be any god and it could be an evolved alien - in a scientific manner.Therefore to be a valid ID argument it needs to stand without reference to any creationist position, and be based on a logical evaluation of the evidence -- the ID answer must allow the full spectrum of "possible designers" in the answer.What is the evidence for design in bad designs carried by viruses and other {vector\delivery} systems?Enjoy.Enjoy.

Thanks holmes. Unfortunately IDers seem to be fewer than ever ... But that doesn't explain how counterproductive systems are allowed to interfere with the design process then. This points to a certain lack of competence, eh? In other words the lab "lights are on but nobody's home" answer?Given that we can trace viruses back to the beginning of life, or at least to time of the split of the three major divisions of life that puts them in a major position to be a force majeure in the process control arena.The structure of a thermophilic archaeal virus shows a double-stranded DNA viral capsid type that spans all domains of life (click for the full PNAS article): This means that either (a) the designers are incompetent at preventing them from acting against their design processes or (b) they are design mechanims but haven't been used in some time and thus have become corrupted by lack of quality control, and that this has been going on for some time. This is a "god works in mysterious ways" cop-out, and is - of course - an unfalsifiable precept (and hence is not scientific), and one that only works (as does most of ID) on continued ignorance of {who\what\when\where\why\how} (otherwise known as the rest of the story ...).So we are left with:

1. incompetent {supreme of some kind} being(s)
2. {supreme of some kind} being(s) that no longer are involved in the minutae of daily human life (a deist position btw) or
3. "we can't know" - as the essence of ID "scientific" input

If they could not rule out normal mutation as a process then that leaves them with a real challenge eh? It would be interesting to see if any of their design identification concepts could be applied to this virus and show significant differences from other viruses.Enjoy.

---

Join the effort to unravel {AIDS\HIV} with Team EvC! (click)

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand

​

RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

At a time when global warming trends are changing habitats around the world and while human effort is causing massive habitat destruction on an equally global scale, to the point where species extinction rates have risen noticeably?Maybe they just want to get rid of failed experiments (gets back to competence issues)?

---

Join the effort to unravel {AIDS\HIV} with Team EvC! (click)

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand

​

RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

yes, but did he publish?

---

Join the effort to unravel {AIDS\HIV} with Team EvC! (click)

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand

​

RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

Well now, this may be the biggest problem in the whole concept of ID, eh? What is the probability that a designer would be interested in this little backwater world on the outer arm of a rather insignificant galaxy?It's certainly not the center of the universe eh? Certainly there is no major "universety" nearby for aspiring designers to have their abilities improved, honed and tested ... refined.Or is this where the rejects go? (which explains the incompetence ...)Adding to the list started in Message 30 we now have:

1. incompetent {supreme of some kind} being(s)
2. {supreme of some kind} being(s) that no longer are involved in the minutae of daily human life (a deist position btw)
3. {supreme of some kind} being(s) that were just never really interested in this backwater corner of existence, or
4. the old faithful fallback - "we can't know" - as the essence of ID "scientific" input

Perhaps it's all some kind of "designer bingo" game - in which case it is more in line with The Silly Design Theory.Enjoy.This message has been edited by RAZD, 04*10*2006 08:43 PM

---

Join the effort to unravel {AIDS\HIV} with Team EvC! (click)

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand

​

RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

How does that work? Wouldn't it be a lot easier to just walk up and introduce yourself, and then do a few miracles? No.It would just be harder for the IDests and Creatortionistas to make the silly (and invalid) probability argument. Identical life forms on planets around different stars that had no means of communication would be strong evidence of interference in natural processes (whether alien or supernatural would be the question then eh?)I would think it would be better evidence of a creative universe if life existed on virtually every single little rock in the universe and a lot of really diverse environments (acidic atmosphere anyone?). And if it's built into the way materials come together in the right environment there may be little "random chance" about it ... other than finding the right environment, eh? Look at all the organic molecules in deep space: {Building Blocks of Life} column.It's like the difference between me winning the lottery and someone winning the lottery: one has low probability, the other has high probability.Welcome to the fray,Enjoy.

---

Join the effort to unravel {AIDS\HIV} with Team EvC! (click)

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand

​

RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

I think of it more as looking at the concept of ID (and the assumption of interest in life here) and seeing where the conclusions lead.

---

Join the effort to unravel {AIDS\HIV} with Team EvC! (click)

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand

​

RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.