quote:To say those three are the same is not true. I make 3 dimensional models and I have modeled many items that have similar appearing forms and they are not coded the same. Each of these bones is distinctly and spacially different just as the parts on a model car differ from a real car. To assert what you have is to overlook a huge mechanical and coding difference.
Perhaps it would make this discussion more reasonable if the engineer anti-evolution types would finally realize that DNA does not work exactly like computer code does...
I know, that is a stretch, but it would rezally make thier claims a little less.... Silly and irrelevant.
He approvingly cites the 'bombadier beetle' argument, for crying out loud!
Complete with the lies that:
1. A beetle would blow up if the explosion occurred in the beetle...when that's how the expulsion force is generated.
2. The two chemicals explode when mixed...when catalysts are needed to force a rapid reaction. In the lab, they just slowly oxidise and turn brown.
3. That inhibitors exist, but none have been observed.
These IDist need to do their own research, instead of quoting quotes of another person's reference to Gish's own assertions, who himself poorly translated some 45 year old German papers on the beetles.
"Der Mensch kann was er will; er kann aber nicht wollen was er will." (Man can do what he wills but he cannot will what he wills.) - Arthur Schopenhauer
Only skimmed through this thread so bear with me -- been off-site for quite a while and am out of practice :)
Am I right in thinking that the OP has suggested that ID is the ONLY possibility because there are an infinite number of possible shapes, so random mutation plus selection couldn't possibly have created (for example) a femur shaped bone?
I would have thought that the more possibilites that exist, the easier it would be to hit upon a workable one by random mutation ... and then filter it for 'fit to the environment'.
Especially if you have a multitude of parallel attempts.
quote:To be fair to the design of our neck my understanding is that having one pipe allows us to swivel our heads.
I know this is an ancient thread, but I just noticed this.
The reason we have two pipes is becasue this is the way we evolved to make complex speech possible.
It does involve a tradeoff since it also makes us much more vulnerable to choking, but the benefits to the species in being able to communicate complex ideas, particularly to the next generation, far outweighs the higher number of choking deaths in the population.
With complex speech, too, we can pass on the information needed to avoid choking in the first place. :)
quote:There are many specific items in this wide world that none of us know off hand however, being intelligent and a mechanical engineer allows me to solve such problems. An intelligent mechanical engineer can research the required specifics and understand how to use it. Thus biology and its concepts are only a bit of research for an engineer.
God's design is inherent in every single cell and particle that scientists analyze. So scientists rely on the cause-effect workings of the very design they deny exists! So they are simply in denial of God whom they can see every single day in every particle they analyze. And they still don't understand the complete structure and complexity of the smallest particle in the universe!