Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
6 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   too intelligent to actually be intelligent?
GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 76 of 304 (390357)
03-19-2007 10:39 PM
Reply to: Message 72 by nator
03-19-2007 10:14 PM


Re: Evolution -- God's Design
nator writes:
So, what you seem to be saying is:
"If a design is perfect, that is evidence for an Intelligent Designer."
and
"If a design is flawed, that is evidence against Evolution."
Not at all. You clamed because of flaws that you perceive in the design that any designer is not very intelligent. I just make the point that these same perceived flaws can't be used to make a case for either. The theory of evolution, (which of course is still evolving ), appears to have a solid scientific basis. If there are flaws in the design at our current point in the evolutionary process they could just as easily happened whether the process was set in place by an Intelligent Designer or if it just happened by random chance.

Everybody is entitled to my opinion.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 72 by nator, posted 03-19-2007 10:14 PM nator has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 81 by nator, posted 03-19-2007 11:03 PM GDR has replied

ICdesign
Member (Idle past 4797 days)
Posts: 360
From: Phoenix Arizona USA
Joined: 03-10-2007


Message 77 of 304 (390358)
03-19-2007 10:44 PM
Reply to: Message 69 by crashfrog
03-19-2007 10:04 PM


Re: in my opinion....
I'm sorry I called you a liar. I don't think
you intentionally lie-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.
Here is what I keep asking but am getting no answers to
that aren't 1/2 truths and mis-information: How did all
our body parts end up in the right order grouped in
the right groups? Why, for instance, did our eyes come
out perfectly positioned above our perfectly positioned nose
above our perfectly positioned mouth etc.?
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!!!
All of this spells design not random mutation or natural
selection either one. no way no how.
this is why I'm trying to teach you a thing or two about
what constitutes intelligent design -of which I still await
your answer on that matter.
I have to get up at 2am so am gone for now.
IC

This message is a reply to:
 Message 69 by crashfrog, posted 03-19-2007 10:04 PM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 82 by Chiroptera, posted 03-19-2007 11:06 PM ICdesign has not replied
 Message 83 by crashfrog, posted 03-19-2007 11:06 PM ICdesign has replied
 Message 84 by nator, posted 03-19-2007 11:15 PM ICdesign has not replied
 Message 86 by anastasia, posted 03-19-2007 11:35 PM ICdesign has not replied

GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 78 of 304 (390359)
03-19-2007 10:47 PM
Reply to: Message 72 by nator
03-19-2007 10:14 PM


Re: Evolution -- God's Design
Here is a quote from The Panda's Thumb article by Gould.
Darwin's metaphor for organic form reflects his sense of wonder that evolution could fashion such a world of diversity and adequate design with such limited raw material:
You read this statement and see random chance producing the design that Gould speaks of whereas I continue to maintain that an Intelligent Designer is the more logical conclusion.
Edited by GDR, : No reason given.

Everybody is entitled to my opinion.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 72 by nator, posted 03-19-2007 10:14 PM nator has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 80 by nator, posted 03-19-2007 10:55 PM GDR has not replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2169 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 79 of 304 (390360)
03-19-2007 10:50 PM
Reply to: Message 73 by GDR
03-19-2007 10:24 PM


Re: Evolution -- God's Design
quote:
I see evolutionary forces as part of the design but I don't see them creating the first cell,
Why couldn't they have?
Be specific.
(I do hope your background in Cellular Biology is more extensive than your background in Anatomy and Physiology)
quote:
and although you may come up with a theory of how the first cell was formed I would suggest that there is no empirical method of proving it
Unless you can provide compelling, evidence-based reasoning for why cells couldn't have evolved, there is no reason at all to logically conclude that evolutionary forces could not have created cells.
That's because there is empirical evidence for evolution, and there's no reason to suggest that the formation of cells didn't happen through evolution. There is ongoing research into cell evolution, and progress is being made, even though it is a difficult field.
At any rate, you have moved the goalposts in the debate.
Why have we moved from your claims about the intelligend design of the human body to the evolution if the very first cell?
A cynical person might conclude that you are retreating to a place where the science isn't quite so strong.
And I would actually like to return to extinction and ID.
If an IDer exists, why has extinction been the most common fate of, literally, 99% of all life that has ever existed on the planet?
Edited by nator, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 73 by GDR, posted 03-19-2007 10:24 PM GDR has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 87 by GDR, posted 03-19-2007 11:41 PM nator has replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2169 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 80 of 304 (390363)
03-19-2007 10:55 PM
Reply to: Message 78 by GDR
03-19-2007 10:47 PM


Re: Evolution -- God's Design
quote:
You read this statement as see random chance producing the design that Gould speaks of whereas I continue to maintain that an Intelligent Designer is the more logical conclusion.
How about this, GDR.
Why don't you give me a summary of what Gould was saying in the essay instead of cherry picking quotes out of context.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 78 by GDR, posted 03-19-2007 10:47 PM GDR has not replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2169 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 81 of 304 (390365)
03-19-2007 11:03 PM
Reply to: Message 76 by GDR
03-19-2007 10:39 PM


Re: Evolution -- God's Design
quote:
You clamed because of flaws that you perceive in the design that any designer is not very intelligent.
Or an asshole.
quote:
I just make the point that these same perceived flaws can't be used to make a case for either.
No.
They CAN be used to make a case for evolution, and The Panda's Peculiar Thumb very effectively illustrates this.
The entire thrust of that essay is to show that flaws indicate evolution.
Perhaps you need to read it again without your Creoblinders on.
quote:
The theory of evolution, (which of course is still evolving ), appears to have a solid scientific basis. If there are flaws in the design at our current point in the evolutionary process they could just as easily happened whether the process was set in place by an Intelligent Designer or if it just happened by random chance.
There is no practical scientific difference between:
"Evolution is God's (or the IDer's) method of designing life"
and
"Evolution is a wholly naturalistic process."
If it makes you feel good to think that an IDer directs evolution, then that's cool, but there's nothing logical, nor evidence based, about it.
It's just your religious belief.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 76 by GDR, posted 03-19-2007 10:39 PM GDR has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 88 by GDR, posted 03-20-2007 12:01 AM nator has replied

Chiroptera
Inactive Member


Message 82 of 304 (390366)
03-19-2007 11:06 PM
Reply to: Message 77 by ICdesign
03-19-2007 10:44 PM


Re: in my opinion....
quote:
I just think ... the people that study it have been brainwashed.
I have a question for you, ICPURPLEELEPHANTS.
which is more reasonable: that for the last century and a half the thousands of well educated people who have studied biology day in and day out for their entire lives have been brainwashed,
or that you, who have so far not shown that you understand the slightest bit about biology, are brainwashed?
I know where I'll be betting my money.
Edited by Chiroptera, : darn tags

Actually, if their god makes better pancakes, I'm totally switching sides. -- Charley the Australopithecine

This message is a reply to:
 Message 77 by ICdesign, posted 03-19-2007 10:44 PM ICdesign has not replied

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


Message 83 of 304 (390367)
03-19-2007 11:06 PM
Reply to: Message 77 by ICdesign
03-19-2007 10:44 PM


Re: in my opinion....
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.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 77 by ICdesign, posted 03-19-2007 10:44 PM ICdesign has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 125 by ICdesign, posted 03-20-2007 7:22 PM crashfrog has replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2169 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 84 of 304 (390368)
03-19-2007 11:15 PM
Reply to: Message 77 by ICdesign
03-19-2007 10:44 PM


Re: in my opinion....
quote:
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.
Science doesn't work that way.
Science is very, very competative and contentious. The most famous and respected scientists rock the boat and topple old theories and ideas.
Revolutionaries get the Nobel Prize, not brainwashed people repeating unquestioned doctrine.
Conducting science is completely anathema to brainwashing, since critical thinking and analysis and the constant challenge of and from one's peers prevents it completely.
quote:
Why, for instance, did our eyes come
out perfectly positioned above our perfectly positioned nose
above our perfectly positioned mouth etc.?
What brings you to the conclusion that their positions are "perfect"?
There are other animals that have other arrangements, so obviously there is room for successful variation. In other words, the arrangement that you think is "perfect" didn't have to be that way at all.
quote:
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!!!
You are completely ignorant of human ear evolution, aren't you?
If you don't know anything about it, how can you say it is impossible?
Just because you, personally, can't see how it could have evolved, on account of younot knowing diddly squat about evolution, doesn't mean it didn't.
Are you saying that you, in your nearly complete ignorance, somehow know better than the hundreds of thousands of professional Biologists who have been devoting their lives to the subject over the last 200 years or so?

'Explanations like "God won't be tested by scientific studies" but local yokels can figure it out just by staying aware of what's going on have no rational basis whatsoever.' -Percy
"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool."- Richard Feynman
"Science is like a blabbermouth who ruins a movie by telling you how it ends! Well I say there are some things we don't want to know! Important things!"
- Ned Flanders
"I haven't studied the theory of evolution much because I disagree 100%
with its claims."--ICDESIGN

This message is a reply to:
 Message 77 by ICdesign, posted 03-19-2007 10:44 PM ICdesign has not replied

anastasia
Member (Idle past 5952 days)
Posts: 1857
From: Bucks County, PA
Joined: 11-05-2006


Message 85 of 304 (390369)
03-19-2007 11:27 PM
Reply to: Message 68 by nator
03-19-2007 10:01 PM


Re: Evolution -- God's Design
nator writes:
As far as I can tell, an "intelligent" designer is not a very good one, and in some cases is pretty much an asshole.
Ok, so you do not know what GDR was asking, and you are going to continue making the reverse argument from incredulity. You can't possibly imagine how a perfect God would make a flawed creature, so therefore one didn't? Still not logical because all gods need not be perfect or create perfectly.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 68 by nator, posted 03-19-2007 10:01 PM nator has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 89 by nator, posted 03-20-2007 12:05 AM anastasia has replied

anastasia
Member (Idle past 5952 days)
Posts: 1857
From: Bucks County, PA
Joined: 11-05-2006


Message 86 of 304 (390373)
03-19-2007 11:35 PM
Reply to: Message 77 by ICdesign
03-19-2007 10:44 PM


Re: in my opinion....
ICDESIGN writes:
Here is what I keep asking but am getting no answers to
that aren't 1/2 truths and mis-information: How did all
our body parts end up in the right order grouped in
the right groups? Why, for instance, did our eyes come
out perfectly positioned above our perfectly positioned nose
above our perfectly positioned mouth etc.?
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!!!
I don't mean to be rude, but you keep saying you want answers, and in the same sentence being absolutely sure that the answers you haven't heard yet are impossible.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 77 by ICdesign, posted 03-19-2007 10:44 PM ICdesign has not replied

GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 87 of 304 (390376)
03-19-2007 11:41 PM
Reply to: Message 79 by nator
03-19-2007 10:50 PM


Re: Evolution -- God's Design
GDR writes:
I see evolutionary forces as part of the design but I don't see them creating the first cell,
nator writes:
Why couldn't they have?
Be specific.
I have never claimed that they couldn't. It can't be proven one way or the other.
nator writes:
(I do hope your background in Cellular Biology is more extensive than your background in Anatomy and Physiology)
No such luck. I don't get into discussions about science except to ask questions. I am prepared to accept science, such as the TofE, that has empirical evidence behind. This discussion is about the fact that ideas that aren’t empirically based are no more scientific than is saying that God did it.
nator writes:
That's because there is empirical evidence for evolution, and there's no reason to suggest that the formation of cells didn't happen through evolution. There is ongoing research into cell evolution, and progress is being made, even though it is a difficult field.
What empirical evidence is there that precludes a creator? This is the "Science of the Gaps" argument which is no more scientific than the "God of the Gaps" argument.
nator writes:
Why have we moved from your claims about the intelligend design of the human body to the evolution if the very first cell?
I see them as being connected. As a Theist who accepts the TofE I see the first cell as being the starting point for the design of the human body. I don't see that I have moved the goal posts at all. Even if science can explain how the first cell was formed it still couldn’t explain why it was formed.
nator writes:
If an IDer exists, why has extinction been the most common fate of, literally, 99% of all life that has ever existed on the planet?
Frankly nator I'll give you that one. I don't know. The only answer I can give is that we live in a world that in my view runs like a clock. Mostly it ticks along on its own but it still needed to be designed and it needs someone to wind it up and adjust the time periodically. In a world that has natural occurrence, such as comets and earthquakes etc, stuff happens.

Everybody is entitled to my opinion.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 79 by nator, posted 03-19-2007 10:50 PM nator has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 90 by nator, posted 03-20-2007 12:18 AM GDR has replied

GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 88 of 304 (390377)
03-20-2007 12:01 AM
Reply to: Message 81 by nator
03-19-2007 11:03 PM


Re: Evolution -- God's Design
nator writes:
They CAN be used to make a case for evolution, and The Panda's Peculiar Thumb very effectively illustrates this.
The entire thrust of that essay is to show that flaws indicate evolution.
Perhaps you need to read it again without your Creoblinders on.
We all come to these things with are own blinkers on. I maintain that the incredible complexity of the design, with or without flaws, indicate ID. Neither of us can prove ourselves right. We have just come to different conclusions.
Incidentally it seems to me that if we had evolved totally naturalistically that it would be unlikely that we would be having this discussion as I would think that it would be unlikely that we would evolve in such a way that we would have such widely differing opinions on something as basic as why we exist.
nator writes:
There is no practical scientific difference between:
"Evolution is God's (or the IDer's) method of designing life"
and
"Evolution is a wholly naturalistic process."
I must be missing something here, but this is exactly the point I have been trying to make all along only to have you come back and try to make the latter scientific. I agree with this quote completely.
nator writes:
If it makes you feel good to think that an IDer directs evolution, then that's cool, but there's nothing logical, nor evidence based, about it.
It's just your religious belief.
The patronizing bit about "it making me feel good" doesn't add to the discussion. I don't believe it because it makes me feel good, I believe it because I'm convinced that it is the truth.
I believe that a designer makes more sense than completely naturalistic happenings. I completely agree though that there is no scientific evidence to support my position, but there is no scientific evidence that support the naturalistic position either.

Everybody is entitled to my opinion.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 81 by nator, posted 03-19-2007 11:03 PM nator has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 92 by nator, posted 03-20-2007 12:34 AM GDR has replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2169 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 89 of 304 (390378)
03-20-2007 12:05 AM
Reply to: Message 85 by anastasia
03-19-2007 11:27 PM


Re: Evolution -- God's Design
quote:
You can't possibly imagine how a perfect God would make a flawed creature, so therefore one didn't? Still not logical because all gods need not be perfect or create perfectly.
The moment that an ID supporter points to a poor design feature as proof that we were intelligently designed, I'll eat my hat.
The point is, I'm not saying that life [b]can't[/i] be intelligently designed.
All I am saying is that there is currently no evidence to support the claims that life [b]was[/i] intelligently designed.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 85 by anastasia, posted 03-19-2007 11:27 PM anastasia has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 96 by Dr Adequate, posted 03-20-2007 4:14 AM nator has not replied
 Message 120 by anastasia, posted 03-20-2007 5:19 PM nator has not replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2169 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 90 of 304 (390380)
03-20-2007 12:18 AM
Reply to: Message 87 by GDR
03-19-2007 11:41 PM


Re: Evolution -- God's Design
OK, I'll state this another way.
Why don't you see evolutionary forces creating the first cell?
What specific justification do you have for this position?
quote:
I don't get into discussions about science except to ask questions.
What I actually see is you making rather bold claims about what science understands and what science is capable of, and then quickly backing down and retreating to "it's all just opinion" when you are asked to support those bold claims.
What you don't seem to do, however, is learn a whole lot about evolutionary theory. Sorry, that's how I see it.
quote:
Even if science can explain how the first cell was formed it still couldn’t explain why it was formed.
You also can't use a screwdriver to provide you with legal advice.
Funny how you can't use a tool designed for one purpose and use it for a completely unrelated purpose, huh?
The point, though, is that there is no reason other than your wish to hold a religious belief in God, to conclude that life, the Universe, or anything was or is intelligently designed.
Human evolution certainly doesn't require it in the least.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 87 by GDR, posted 03-19-2007 11:41 PM GDR has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 93 by GDR, posted 03-20-2007 12:50 AM nator has replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024