Intelligent Design explains many follies

I have said over and over again that ID cannot prove Creator God is the cause of intracately complex existance any more than the ToE can prove it is the cause of intracately complex existance.The proof lies in what is logically reasonable, and what is not logically reasonable. ID is and always will be the most logically reasonable explanation why the ToE is folly. The ToE has no way to explain how, assuming a spark of life suddenly transforms inorganic matter to organic matter, this spark of life knows deterministically where it's going so that fully formed creatures are eventually formed.

---

The evil one comes to steal, kill and destroy; but I Jesus have come that you might have eternal Life and have eternal Life more abundantly - John 10:10

You write,"what is is the meaning of complex to you and what logic led you to believe this is a requirement of the ToE? You need to read more about ID since in fact that is what they are claiming..that a god designed everything"If the ToE does not attempt to state/prove it is the cause of intracately complex existance, then what does the ToE hang its hat on?"how is ID reasonable? Your understanding of theories, science and even what ID says seems to be faulty. thats just it how can you assume it was a "spark of life?" and that it had intelligence?"I assume no such thing! Some eminent non-ID scientists believe life possibly formed out there some where, and was transported here via comets. [Some also believe water's existance on earth came from a hail of comets.] If so, how was life formed out there? How does organic matter know where it needs to go to form intracately complex cells and organs, let alone intracately complex creatures that can reproduce with all the cells and organs in the right places?That's what ID is all about, and why it's the best and most reasonable answer to life's complex existance. Call my reasoning faulty if you will, but the shoe in on the other foot.

---

The evil one comes to steal, kill and destroy; but I Jesus have come that you might have eternal Life and have eternal Life more abundantly - John 10:10

If all who believe in ID have is "an emotional commitment to a certain set of beliefs," then we are to be most pitied.When I use the words "intracately complex design" in reference to the macro universe and the micro structure of things, many here do not seem to know what this means.A single atom with electrons, protons, neutrons, bosons, leptons, quarks, gravitons, etc. is an intracately complex structure that most reasonable people should say could not have happened without design.And we who believe in ID are the ones "who have an emotional commitment to a certain set of beliefs which they will not allow to be shaken?"Again, the shoe in on the other foot!

---

The evil one comes to steal, kill and destroy; but I Jesus have come that you might have eternal Life and have eternal Life more abundantly - John 10:10

I know some here question my resume credentials, but I work in an industry where one chance happening in one million is considered an incredible event. Most of our nuclear accident scenarios and the designs against these chance accidents are predicated on this 1/1,000,000 chance. If it's less than 1/1,000,000, more design is required to get the odds greater than 1/1,000,000.The odds that a single atom could have designed itself all by itself is much much greater than 1/1,000,000!Sir Isaac Neuton had this to say concerning our solar system:"The six primary planets are revolved about the sun in circles concentric with the sun, and with motions directed towards the same parts, and almost in the same plane. Ten moons are revolved about the earth, Jupiter, and Saturn, in circles concentric with them, with the same direction of motion, and nearly in the planes of the orbits of those planets; but it is not to be conceived that mere mechanical causes could give birth to so many regular motions, since the comets range over all parts of the heavens in very eccentric orbits; for by that kind of motion they pass easily through the orbs of the planets, and with great rapidity; and in their aphelions, where they move the slowest, and are detained the longest, they recede to the greatest distances from each other, and hence suffer the least disturbance from their mutual attractions. This most beautiful system of the sun, planets, and comets, could only proceed from the counsel and dominion of an intelligent and powerful Being. And if the fixed stars are the centres of other like systems, these, being formed by the like wise counsel, must be all subject to the dominion of One; especially since the light of the fixed stars is of the same nature with the light of the sun, and from every system light passes into all the other systems: and lest the systems of the fixed stars should, by their gravity, fall on each other, he hath placed those systems at immense distances from one another."Sir Isaac NewtonPS - I hope no one here brings up Three Mile Island and Chernobyl. The engineers at these nuclear plants "deliberately disabled" the automatic safety systems designed to protect the cores, thus leading to failures that resulted. The plant operators thought they were smarter than the safety engineers who designed the plants. Some here also believe they are smarter than ..............

---

The evil one comes to steal, kill and destroy; but I Jesus have come that you might have eternal Life and have eternal Life more abundantly - John 10:10

Some of the engineers at Morton Thilkol were a lot more concerned about the launch of the Challenger than 1/100,000, but were overruled by bad management at NASA who wanted to proceed with a launch that had been delayed several times. Let’s not get bad management mixed up with good engineering. The good safety engineering temperature rules were overruled by bad management.You write, “If atoms did not design themselves but occurred naturally without design, then how do you justify applying the odds of design to them?”This is done all the time as we apply risk analysis to everything we do in life. Nothing man does starts out with the assumption that things will occur naturally, except of course evolutionists who believe we and the universe did.If a person of stature such a Sir Isaac Neuton’s arguments are invalid, so also is the so-called wisdom of Richard Feynman.You write, “Oh, and tell us how you rule out all the stuff that you don't know.”I don’t rule out anything that I don’t know, but those who don’t know certainly rule in everything they don’t know. That’s what this ID vs. evolution argument is all about. You keep saying my arguments are invalid, but offer no proof why my arguments are invalid. Again the shoe is on the other foot!You write, “Why don't you design nuclear plants such that the chances of an accident become "incredibly incredible" (1 in 1,000,000,000,000)?”For the same reason you can’t design anything else in life to be perfectly safe. Even if you could, it would be so expensive that no one would build it, and we would not enjoy the benefits from anything because we can’t make them perfectly safe.You write, “If something has a non-zero chance of happening, however small, then, by definition, it can happen.”To hang one’s hat on an infinitely small non-zero chance of happening is not reasonable or good logic, and is certainly not science.

---

The evil one comes to steal, kill and destroy; but I Jesus have come that you might have eternal Life and have eternal Life more abundantly - John 10:10

Since no proof is required for those who believe in the incredible incredible incredible ........... chance happening of evolution without ID, and proof seems to be required only for those who believe in ID, consider this:"New evidence indicates that life in its minimal form is chemically complex even if morphologically simple. The smallest bacterial genomes capable of independent survival include between 1500-1900 gene products.47-50 These bacteria are believed to be the oldest organisms on Earth and quite likely reflect the complexity of first life on Earth and the minimum complexity of independent life.51 The smallest known genome, that of Mycoplasma genitalium, is comprised of 470 gene products.52 However, M. genitalium is not an appropriate model for the origin of life, for it depends on host biochemistry to survive and, therefore, cannot exist independently. Nonetheless, M. genitalium is a good model for determining the bare minimum requirements for life. Theoretical and experimental work using M. genitalium indicate that life requires at least 250-350 gene products (having eliminated, in theory, genes used for parasitic interactions).53-55Biophysicist Hubert Yockey has calculated the probability of forming a single gene product (one that is functionally equivalent to the ubiquitous protein cyctochrome C) as one chance in 1075. 56 Given this probability, Yockey calculated that if the hypothetical primordial soup contained about 1044 amino acids, a hundred billion trillion years would yield a 95% chance for random formation of a functional protein only 110 amino acids in length (a single gene product).57 The universe is about 15 billion years old. This means that less than one trillionth of the time has passed that would be needed to make even one of the 250-350 gene products necessary for minimal life, or one of the 1500 gene products necessary for independent life.Further complicating the supra-astronomical probabilities that must be overcome for even the simplest life to arise by natural processes is the changing view of bacteria. No longer regarded as cells with a random, nondescript internal structure, bacteria are now recognized as having remarkable internal organization, both spatially and temporally, at the protein level.58, 59 This internal organization of bacterial cells is universal and is needed for their survival. This means that origin-of-life researchers must account for not only the simultaneous appearance of 250-350 gene products but also their organization inside the cell."Page not found - Reasons to BelieveAll that will result from this post is more attacks on the messenger, rather than addressing the message.This message has been edited by John 10:10, 04-08-2006 10:07 AM

---

The evil one comes to steal, kill and destroy; but I Jesus have come that you might have eternal Life and have eternal Life more abundantly - John 10:10

You write,Now the main topic of this thread is "Intelligent Design explains many follies" -- So perhaps you can enlighten us on what has been explained by ID to date.Since evolution cannot reasonably explain how the existing universe started from something smaller than a pinhead and then prove how life developed into incredibly complex plant, animal and human life forms on earth, Intelligent Design is and always will be the best explanation for the how of our existance.Once one comes to understand and believe the how, then one is ready for the why.

---

The evil one comes to steal, kill and destroy; but I Jesus have come that you might have eternal Life and have eternal Life more abundantly - John 10:10

It seems that most who disagree with my ID explanations still do not understand what ID means.ID Means exactly this, that an Intelligent Designer designed "the red shift and accelerating expansion." It also means an Intelligent Designer designed fully formed creatures to begin with, with ready made ability to reproduce other creatures after their own kind, according to the DNA designed within them.Man can study how the red shift is proportional to distance, but the full explanation of why is in the mind of the Intelligent Designer.Man can study how creatures reproduce and function, but those who believe in ID do not believe the Intelligent Designer caused gradual changes in the DNA in organisms over time to cause speciation. Those who believe in ID simply believe every life creature was a special creative act to begin with.Defective DNA can result in mutations, and cross breeding can result in similar creatures, but proving gradual DNA changes over time can lead to the vast variety of speciation we see in creatures is what this argument is all about.

---

The evil one comes to steal, kill and destroy; but I Jesus have come that you might have eternal Life and have eternal Life more abundantly - John 10:10

There are some that seem to believe that we must discuss the concept of intelligent design in the universe without recognizing that intelligent design must by definition be connected to an Intelligent Designer. I have given you examples why I believe the simplest cell organisms or atoms could not have assembled themselves into compounds, DNA and living creatures by chance. Most who do not believe in ID recognize the infinitely small probability that chance could be the cause of our existence, and ask for proof that ID is the cause. A few believe that evolution without ID is an indisputable fact proven by evidence. On this point I strongly disagree. Everyone is entitled to their own set of opinions, but not to their own set of facts. There is in no way, shape or form that evolution without ID is the cause of our existence and has been proved. If those who believe in evolution without ID would simply say this, and then give room to ID as an alternate belief, then we could stop asking each other for proof of our beliefs because there are none for either of us. Of course, there are those in the non-ID camp who strongly disagree, offering so-called fact after fact after fact, which are nothing more than opinions and suppositions how the evolutionary process somehow evolved or is evolving over time.

---

The evil one comes to steal, kill and destroy; but I Jesus have come that you might have eternal Life and have eternal Life more abundantly - John 10:10

You have written,"And you have been told that no one believes that this occurred by "chance".quote: Most who do not believe in ID recognize the infinitely small probability that chance could be the cause of our existence....Indeed, which is why most who do not believe in ID recognize that our existence is not due to chance."Since no one here believes that an Intelligent Designer brought our universe into existence and then created all life that exists on earth, and that this is the most reasonable explanation for why we exist, just what do you believe is a better explanation?This message has been edited by John 10:10, 04-16-2006 06:50 PM

---

The evil one comes to steal, kill and destroy; but I Jesus have come that you might have eternal Life and have eternal Life more abundantly - John 10:10

Hi Kalimero,I asked the question because most here at this forum believe there is a better explanation for our existence than attributing our existence to an Intelligent Designer.Leaving aside how matter came into existence in the first place, it seems your better and more reasonable explanation is abiogenesis - the supposed spontaneous origination of living organisms from lifeless matter.Maybe you can show me your odds of abiogenesis occurring?The odds of there being an Intelligent Designer are at least 50/50. Either there is an Intelligent Designer or there isn't.

---

The evil one comes to steal, kill and destroy; but I Jesus have come that you might have eternal Life and have eternal Life more abundantly - John 10:10

The theory of abiogenesis simplified says (1) simple chemicals go to (2) polymers to (3) replicating polymers to (4) hypercycle to (5) protobiont, and finally to (6) bacteria. Laying aside the belief that these simple chemicals did not need to know where they were going and somehow slowly climbed towards organism-hood and beyond to creature-hood, I don’t believe any serious molecular scientist would place the odds much higher than 50/50. The theoretical concepts beyond replicating polymers requires real chemistry and more detailed modeling to confirm, and is so far unknown. But for the sake of argument, let’s say the odds are 50/50 that abiogenesis can explain the cause of our existence. That means the ID should be given equal footing with abiogenesis as an explanation of how life came to be because the odds are certainly no worse than 50/50 that ID is the cause behind our existence, regardless of what the betting odds are in London.This message has been edited by John 10:10, 04-17-2006 01:39 PM

---

The evil one comes to steal, kill and destroy; but I Jesus have come that you might have eternal Life and have eternal Life more abundantly - John 10:10

I think some of you should step back and really consider the wisdom of your arguments, such as, "There could be an completely unintelligent designer. There could be any number of partly intelligent designers."Yes, I'm a man of faith who believes in the almighty God of the Bible who declares He created the heavens and the earth (Gen 1:1), and all creatures on the earth "after their own kind" (Gen 1:21-25) - not through gradual evolution letting the theory of abiogenesis run its course. God then created man after His own image (Gen 1:26).The only proof God gives to us is recorded in Matthew 12,38 Then some of the scribes and Pharisees said to Jesus, "Teacher, we want to see a sign from You."
39 But Jesus answered and said to them, "An evil and adulterous generation craves for a sign; and yet no sign will be given to it but the sign of Jonah the prophet;
40 for just as JONAH WAS THREE DAYS AND THREE NIGHTS IN THE BELLY OF THE SEA MONSTER, so will the Son of Man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth,"and in John 14:21,"He who has My commandments and keeps them is the one who loves Me; and he who loves Me will be loved by My Father, and I will love him and will disclose Myself to him."It's folly to reject this proof.May Him who is the joy of Easter find residence in your hearts.

---

The evil one comes to steal, kill and destroy; but I Jesus have come that you might have eternal Life and have eternal Life more abundantly - John 10:10

It seems most here are very good at insults, and the latest Admin warning contains a few more.I will give you my credentials one more time for those who are interested in facts, not insults.I did not go to Bible College, but do have a good understanding of what the Bible declares, and who our creator God is.I do have a BS degree in Engineering Physics, with a minor in math, and 20 graduate hrs in Mechanical Engineering. I have spent 41 years in the Nuclear Energy Business - 4 years @ Combustion Engineering/ABB, 20 years with GE Nuclear Energy Division, 9 years with Westinghouse @ DOE Savannah River, and now 8 years with Sargent & Lundy (currently working at TVA Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant). I have designed nuclear reactor vessels, steam generators, and other nuclear steam supply system equipment, provided technical direction for the installation of this equipment at many nuclear plants, determined corrective actions for many mechanical problems at nuclear power plants, and spent 9 years at Savannah River where nuclear materials and tritium were made, processed, and safely stored.My engineering abilities and understanding of scientific principles have served me very well for 41 years, and continue to do so.I have stated again and again that I can offer no proof that ID is the reason for our existence, but neither can evolution, abiogenesis, or according to some, any other scientific principle. According to some, nothing is 100% provable. On this point I disagree. Many scientific principles are provable to a very high degree of certainly, but abiogenesis is not one of these. I do not object to teaching parts of abiogenesis as possibly being true, those parts that can be proven to a high degree of certainty. But teaching abiogenesis as proven science from the start to creature-hood is what I object to.If most at this web site want to place their faith in abiogenesis, that is your right to do so. But so also is my faith that an Intelligent Designer or Creator God is the complete cause of our existence.I’m sure this post will generate more insults and questionings of my credentials, but that’s your problem, not mine.

---

The evil one comes to steal, kill and destroy; but I Jesus have come that you might have eternal Life and have eternal Life more abundantly - John 10:10

Admin Director is correct. I provided my resume credentials at his request. I will leave them behind if others will stop impugning my integrity. I will take others at their word, if others will take my word.As for my assertion of there being a 50/50 chance of there being an Almighty God, I offer this explanation.There’s a big difference between saying whether a statement is true or not true concerning the existence of God, than in determining the chances of whether or not an arrow will hit the target when shot. Either God exists or God doesn’t exist - there is no in between. I did not say there was exactly a 50/50 chance God exists. I said the %s were no worse than 50/50 that God exists.But when it comes to shooting and hitting a target with an arrow, it depends on many factors - the component quality of the bow & arrow, the skill of the archer, the distance the arrow has to travel, the weather conditions, etc. Therefore, there’s not a 50/50 chance the archer will hit the target. It could be very low when the archer first starts shooting and much higher after much practice.The same analogy applies to the theory of evolution and abiogenesis. These theories can be offered as theories, but not as science because of the immense times necessary to prove these theories with some degree of certainty. What is at issue here is precisely that - what degree of certainty can the theory of evolution and abiogenesis be proven? Many here believe it’s proven to a very high degree of certainty. On this point I strongly disagree. To prove to a high degree of certainty that the theory of evolution and abiogenesis are true would need the immense amount of time necessary to somehow show these theories really work. Therefore, they must always remain as theories, and not as science.Science must deal with things that can be proven to a high degree of certainty over time with repeatable results, not with theories that can never be proven in their entirety.

---

The evil one comes to steal, kill and destroy; but I Jesus have come that you might have eternal Life and have eternal Life more abundantly - John 10:10