IC challenge: Evolve a bicycle into a motorcycle!

quote:

---

Yes, and all those billions in the direction opposite of the direction things observed tend to go, i.e, into chaos.

---

What things are observed to tend to go into chaos?

quote:

---

Yes, ID at work, providing the equipment and setting up the process, creating the capability to accomplish the desired goal of the designer.

---

Right, and we can see and talk to the designer who wrote the program.He can also show us the entire code of the program and explain exactly how he did it.This is positive evidence for this particular designer and exactly how he did what he did.Now, what is the positive evidence for your uberdesigner that is separate from what is designed? Is there any evidence that does not consist of "We don't have a naturalistic explanation so it must have been the IDer"?

quote:

---

No spontaneous generation.......no evolution......simple as that.

---

Nope.A god or gods could have poofed the first replicators into existence and this would not falsify one iota of evolutionary theory.Life could have been seeded here from another planet, either randomly or on purpose by alien life, and this would not falsify one iota of evolutionary theory.Evolutionary theory is an explanation of what happens to life once it got here.How life got here is irrelevant to the Theory, just as the source of wind is irrelevant to the study of aerodynamics.

quote:

---

There are so many questions to be answered from the chance-naturalist group.

---

Don't you mean the Chance plus selection naturalist group?Because leaving out "selection" would be a gross misrepresentation that I am fairly positive you have been informed of approximately one and a half million times by now.

quote:

---

What with the fine-tuned universe etc.

---

So, do we observe the laws of physics changing to accomodate unchanging life, or is it the other way around?

quote:

---

All the order leads us with the most logical and correct position that there is a designer, according to and agreeing with the principle of parsimony.

---

OK.There's a designer.Show me.

quote:

---

My point in all this was to refute the argument that spontaneous generation was not included in the process of evolution. The arguments of my counterparts in this is as silly as trying to argue that creation was not part of the process of intelligent design.

---

A reply to message #48 would be peachy, buz.I especially would like you to address my wind/aerodynamics analogy.

quote:

---

The likelihood of the bike to motorbike is likely equal or better than the likelihood of building a single single functional protein randomly from primordial soup.

---

But it isn't purely random.You "forgot" to include selection yet again, buz.Selection, selection, selection. Why do you ignore selection?What is the mental block all of you Creationists have with incorporating this utterly basic part of the mechanism of how evolution happens into your minds?

quote:

---

The chance of assembling 50 essential amino acids randomly to correct sequence so as to build a single functional "folded" protein would be about 10 to the 65th power or about one in the number of atoms in a galexy according to the following very interesting sight.

---

But it isn't purely random.Selection, selection, selection, selection, selection.

quote:

---

You know them as well as I.

---

No, sorry, I really don't know what you're talking about.Please elucidate.

quote:

---

Off topic, but some of us do.

---

But if everyone cannot talk to your designer the way we can ALL talk to the guy who designed the software inquestion, that means it's NOT the same situation, right?You do see that there is a big difference, right?

quote:

---

Get sensible if you want responses.

---

Excuse me? I wasn't the one comparing the IDer with a human software designer, you were.One of the reasons we can confidently claim that the software was intelligentlu designed is that the designer can show us the entire code of the program and explain and demonstrate to us exactly how he wrote it. He can tell us what programming language it is in, and even teach us how to write in that language....and anyone in the world can do this. They don't thave to take anybody else's word for it that this person exists, if they are that skeptical of his existence.Can I do that with your God?

quote:

---

See link in my recent post.

---

That is still a fallacious Argument from Incredulity, buz.Besides, it is flawed because the very important element of selection is left out of the equasion.

quote:

---

Neither the original nor the changes came about by natural and random processes, or what is known as RM/NS. That intelligent design did it is my argument. It is not about the designer, perse, as your obfuscating post inferrs.

---

What if I could show you that RM + NS HAS, in fact, resulted in changes to species?

A reply to message #48 would be peachy, buz.I especially would like you to address my wind/aerodynamics analogy.(Second bump for this message)

quote:

---

Cool it, Schraf. I'll get to you when I get to you. Amins Moose and Percy often advise that it's ok to slow down, take time and post at one's pace.

---

Of course.But, as the message was put up over 40 posts ago, I didn't want it to be missed.

quote:

---

I'm doing some research on this random/ns bit. I'm not done by a long shot here yet.

---

Excellent.I look forward to your reply regarding the fact that the ToE does not require Abiogenesis.

quote:

---

First though, you people again have come at me so as for the need to defend my character, and that galls me.

---

I'm sure it does gall you, but you have no one to blame but yourself.You SAID that you were aware of natural selection being a key part of evolution, along with random mutation, after being pressed on why you chronically leave it out in your descriptions of Evolution.You were warned that if you brought up randomness without including selection that you would be considered dishonest in the debate.You chose all by your lonesome to do just that, so you've made your own bed here, hon, I'm sorry.

Andya ia, indeed, a muslim but he accepts the ToE along with the rest of modern science.