|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,824 Year: 4,081/9,624 Month: 952/974 Week: 279/286 Day: 0/40 Hour: 0/0 |
Thread ▼ Details |
Member (Idle past 4825 days) Posts: 360 From: Phoenix Arizona USA Joined: |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: too intelligent to actually be intelligent? | |||||||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1494 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
Where I come from (called the real world), the more intelligent a design is the smarter it proves the designer is!! How do you measure the "intelligence" of a design? ...eh, never mind. It's not like you respond to rebuttals, anyway. Are you ever going to address the evidence put before you in that thread?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1494 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
When a feature of the body has to have many functions working together to achieve the feature- and each functions design is complex in and of itself- and everything has to have an exact order or it won't work at all, I call that intelligent design. Why, when we know that mutation and selection working together can produce the same kind of designs?
You haven't answer my questions that opened this thread Crashfrog. You didn't ask any questions. Did you notice that there wasn't a single sentence in your post that ended with a question mark? The only questions in your post are the ones that you quoted but didn't address.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1494 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
How come ,for instance, we don't have like some monkeys with a mouth that ended up on the side of their head type of thing? What makes you think we don't? Deformed animals are kind of creepy but there's no shortage of specimens. How many of your objections to evolution are based on asserting that something doesn't exist just because you don't know about it? It continually amazes me that people like you conclude that ignorance is a great basis from which to attack a scientific theory. Oh, and just to point out how you're not really thinking these things through - all monkeys, and indeed, all hominids, have mouths on the sides of their heads - the front side. Strictly speaking a mouth in-line with the digestive tract, like most animals have, would be on the top of the head. Edited by crashfrog, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1494 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
If "we" knew that mutation and selection produce designs then the 'big debate' wouldn't be going on. Well, I know it, and I just told you for the second time, so why is the debate going on? It seems like you've correctly identified that the debate is between the knowledgable and the ignorant.
I know your side claims the above to be a fact but I disagree with those conclusions and so do a whole lot of other people. In fact, nobody disagrees that genetic programming employs mutation and selection.
Going back to the computer simulating evolution by comming up with positive mutations- or whatever the heck it does- what is the 'natural' computer that evolution took place on. The "natural" computer is the real world. In the way that things in computers happen according to programs, things in the real world happen according to physical laws. In this particular case we can simulate the operation of those physical laws inside a computer. Such a simulation tells us what happens in the real world. That's how simulations work.
Its not even a true simulation when it took place on a man-made computer. What other kind of simulations could there be? Are you saying that simulations are impossible, that they don't exist?
I haven't studied the theory of evolution much because I disagree 100% with its claims. How does that make any sense? If you don't study the claims you don't know what you're arguing against. I disagree with creationism 100% but I still familiarize myself with creationism and what people say in it's defense. How else could I argue against it? Ignorance is not a good basis for discussion.
No matter what you tell me -I will never believe something came from nothing without the help of God. I thought you said that true science followed the evidence? If there's no evidence that you would ever allow to convince you, how can you claim to be doing or representing true science?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1494 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
I would just like you to post your answer for all to see on the quote I sited you made how the body is so far past intelligent- that it proves a designer is not possible. I was simply taking your reasoning to the logical conclusion. There's no known designer with the intelligence to design the human body. Therefore we need to look for a source of design that is non-intelligent. That's mutation and selection, acting together. And already proven to have the capacity to design. The vast fossil record is further evidence. IC, what's the point in debating you? You've admitted you can't be convinced by any data. You're not interested in learning. I've already routed all your self-congradulatory emails to my spam trap. What are you here to do, exactly? You don't respond to rebuttals or answer questions. What does it take to get through to you?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1494 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
If the human body isn't an intelligent design then you tell me what an example of an intelligent design is, in your opinion of course. Something that people made.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1494 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
One of the many reasons that keep me from being able to believe evolution happened as claimed is why aren't their a bunch of the malformed life forms in the fossil record. 1) Fossilization is rare. The odds of a single individual being fossilized are fairly low. 2) If an organism is too deformed, it doesn't even gestate. Miscarriage is the usual result. 3) There are plenty of bizzarely deformed individuals, but it's important to remember that evolution doesn't proceed by gross deformity, but by subtle changes to body structure over a very long time. 4) It's also important to remember that natural selection doesn't create changes in organisms; it selects among variant individuals to allow the best-adapted organisms to reproduce. Random mutation is the process that is responsible, largely, for the variation in individuals that natural selection acts on. Does that make sense?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1494 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
Maybe I don't understand the question. What, exactly, are you asking me?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1494 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
When I ask someone else a question, I'll thank you to stay out of it and let the person I asked corrispond with me. And I'll thank you not to speak to me like a child. It's a public forum; I'll reply to any and all posts as I see fit.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1494 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
....I think much of what you say is mis-information, 1/2 truths, outright lies and bias opinion. Just telling me I'm a liar doesn't mean anything. If you believe that what I'm telling you is false, then why don't you prove it? All I'm doing here is trying to educate you, but the only reply you seem to have is "shut up", and to call me a liar, and biased, and other personal attacks. You repay my efforts by spitting in my face. I don't believe I've ever met someone as ungrateful and rude as you. Is that what you consider Christian behavior, and pleasing to God?
Their should be a multitude of creatures that went haywire not just a few. What makes you think there's just a few? I mean, how many fossils have you gone out to look at, anyway?
Also, what is the mechanizm that causes random mutations to make a correct "choice" without having the ability to think. Who said anything about "choice"? Once again you've confused mutation and selection. Mutation happens at random, with no regard to environment. The results of mutations are good sometimes, and bad other times. It's literally random. The results of selection are anything but random. Natural selection rewards individuals with good mutations with survival, and causes individuals with bad mutations to die. That's the "choice"; it's the environment "choosing" individuals to live and die, based on how their individual traits give them advantages in the environment over each other. Make sense?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1494 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
I'm tired of hearing your rhetoric quite frankly! You know what would really shut me up? Proving me wrong by responding to rebuttals and introducing new evidence. I don't get you, IC. You're the one who sent all those emails to me, begging me to debate you, and now that we are you're telling me to shut up and that you don't want to hear from me. What's wrong with you, exactly?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1494 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
I just think the evolutionary theory in general is made up of the things I mentioned and the people that study it have been brainwashed. If we have evidence that substantiates our position, how can we be brainwashed? And where is this brainwashing happening? Who's doing the brainwashing, and for what reason? Do you see why it's far, far more ridiculous to assert a grand, secret campaign by scientists - including Bible-believing Christians - to brainwash people than it is to accept that natural selection and random mutation are responsible for the history and diversity of life on Earth? There's evidence for evolution. What evidence do you have for your conspiracy theory?
Why, for instance, did our eyes come out perfectly positioned above our perfectly positioned nose above our perfectly positioned mouth etc.? Those things actually vary considerably from person to person. I used to date a girl who had one eye considerably higher than the other. (The weird thing is, I never noticed until I saw her reflection. Face-to-face, you'd never know, but looking at her over her shoulder in a mirror, it was obvious. I've never figured out quite how that worked.) So saying things like "perfectly positioned" don't make that much sense to me. People have eyes above their noses above their mouths because human beings are descended from organisms that have eyes above their noses above their mouths. The basic tetrapod body plan is the same from humans to primates to platypuses; every vertebrate organism has the same body plan that, ultimately, descends as a modification of a certain kind of invertebrate segmented worm. (You can still see the segments in vertebrate organisms - it's your segmented spine.) And, again, the reason you don't see people with eyes under their chins is that it takes a pretty big fuckup of the developmental and genetic process to produce that morphology; so big, in fact, that such an organism is doomed to die before it's even born. But, occasionally, you see really unusual body deformities that survive to be born and even become adults. Conjoined twins. People missing arms, or with extra fingers. The study of such individuals is "teratology" - literally the "study of monsters." We learn a lot about pre-natal development from the instances in which it goes wrong. I think Gould wrote an essay about that.
How could all the functions of the ears come out perfectly with such complex components causing proper hearing to happen without intelligence being involved. ITS IMPOSSIBLE!!! It's possible by random mutation and natural selection operating over billions of years, because that's what happened. We've observed these processes do exactly that in the short term - in the wild, in the lab, in simulations - and there's no reason to believe that they don't work in the long term. And the fossil record proves that they do.
All of this spells design not random mutation or natural selection either one. no way no how. Because you say so? You need to present evidence for your assertions, not simply assert them. You can say whatever you want, but unless you present evidence you're not making arguments and we're not having a debate. You're putting a lot of effort into telling us all how we're brainwashed idiots. Why don't you put some of that energy into finding evidence for your positions?
-of which I still await your answer on that matter. I told you, I don't understand the question. Can you explain it? I tried to answer it but you didn't like my answer, so clearly i misunderstood you. If you can explain more clearly what you meant, I'll be able to answer.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1494 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
I was only trying to point out that nator's argument that we should reject the concept of an intelligent designer because of perceived flaws is not a good argument either. It's a great argument, actually, unless you lower your expectations for what an omnipotent eternal figure should be capable of. You have, apparently.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1494 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
I still contend it is a weak argument against Theistic Evolution. Well, that's fair enough; I wasn't aware that it had been offered in that way. I'm not sure what the specific claims of theistic evolution are. Is that like Deism?
I believe that we are more than just physical beings. I see us as spiritual beings in a physical body. (This is philosophical and 100% non-scientific.) You say that's not scientific, but you're still making an existential claim supported by no evidence. And even philosophy requires that statements be supported by some evidence. What you're talking about is a statement of faith. I can't rebut faith, but I can tell you that there's no evidence of "souls", or of any spiritual realm; and there's a lot loaded into those concepts that's internally contradictory.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1494 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
How about instead of grandstanding, you address rebuttals by introducing evidence?
I'm not interested in a battle of wits with an unarmed man. First you wanted to debate; next you wanted me to shut up; now you're offering to box me or something. The common thread through all these behaviors is a complete inability to address the materials put before you.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024