When does design become intelligent? (AS OF 8/2/10 - CLOSING COMMENTS ONLY)

You do not change the properties of the water. Steam is still just water. Did you actually read what I wrote? Or do you simply enjoy trying to see if we notice you trying to change the subject? That is the only model out there. There is no other model. Do you even understand what a model is?We have evidence that chemical and physical reactions exist.There is no evidence or model that has been presented other than chemical and physical causes.If you have a different model, then present it.

---

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

Hi Ringo, I don't think 2 + 2 = 4 or 5.I know that 2 +2 ='s 22. So you disagree with the sources I provided.That is your privilage.God Bless,

---

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

And all you have is denial. You're like the people in 1902 who insisted that man will never fly. You're confusing "hasn't been done yet" with "can't be done".All of the scientific evidence points to us being able to produce life some day. If you want to learn how, please put more effort into it than just repeating that 2 = 2 = 5.As I mentioned in another thread to Bolder-dash, it's funny how people who are trying to prove intelligent design don't seem to use any intelligence to do it. This is your opportunity to be the first.

---

Life is like a Hot Wheels car. Sometimes it goes behind the couch and you can't find it.

No. You misunderstood your own source. Kindly point out anything in your quote that is not a mechanical process.

---

Life is like a Hot Wheels car. Sometimes it goes behind the couch and you can't find it.

To add to jar's answer, it's a phase change. Do you understand the difference between a phase change and a chemical reaction? Do you understand the difference between physical properties and chemical properties?

---

Life is like a Hot Wheels car. Sometimes it goes behind the couch and you can't find it.

And how is that? I've never heard one of you guys suggest a mechanism either for the origin of the universe from non-existence or for the origin of a non-evolved designer. You seem to be short a little reasoning there.Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.

No he isn't.

Hi Ringo, Then get back to me when that some day comes and we will discuss it.God Bless,

---

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

Hi Ringo, I don't think I misunderstood the source.The same thing that is not a mechanical process in the post I am replying to.The information.God Bless,

---

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

No. I said that to convey that all the reproducible verifiable evidence supports the assertion mentioned.Compare the two following propositions:(1) Since all the reproducible verifiable evidence we have about honey in general shows that it is produced by bees, this is reproducible verifiable evidence that this particular sample of honey was produced by bees.(2) Since all the reproducible verifiable evidence we have about things in general shows that they are produced by natural causes, this is reproducible verifiable evidence that this particular thing was produced by natural causes.Of all scientific propositions about anything ever, proposition (2) is the most strongly supported by reproducible verifiable evidence; because of all scientific observations ever made, practically any one could potentially have falsified it, and none has ever done so.Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.

And as you have been given counter-examples, perhaps it is time for you to stop arguing that. And you are, of course, wrong. Agree, of course. What does that have to do with what I posted?

The problem is that you don't have enough understanding of chemistry to discuss it. That's why I'm trying to give you a head start now. If you were sincere, you'd be trying to learn how things work instead of just denying that they can work.

---

Life is like a Hot Wheels car. Sometimes it goes behind the couch and you can't find it.

Then explain right here, in your own words, what is not mechanical about the reactions of DNA.

---

Life is like a Hot Wheels car. Sometimes it goes behind the couch and you can't find it.

Hi Ringo, Maybe, maybe not.I know that water can exist as a solid, liquid and vapor.I know that for them to cease to be one of these and become one of the others a process has to happen to change them.I also know that you can take superheated water and run it through radiators and heat a building. You can also do the opposite by chilling the water to just above freezing and running it through the same radiators to cool the building.I don't know if you would classify that as a chemical reaction or not. I do know a lot of changes take place in the process.And as I understand chemical reaction it is a process that leads to the transformation of one set of chemical substances to another.I take water and transfer it to heat in a building to me that fits the process of transformation of water into heat.I could also be bonkers.God Bless,

---

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

That's where phase changes come in. Solid, liquid and gas are different phases of the same substance. Water is still water, even if it's a solid or a gas. Phase changes depend on physical properties - e.g. temperature. They don't change the chemical properties. They don't change the structure of the molecule and it's the structure of the molecule that determines its chemical properties. That's not the best way of putting it. You add heat to water, the water transfers the heat to the radiators and the radiators transfer the heat to the air in the building. I'm sure you're old enough to remember the 1972 Presidential election. One editorial comment suggested that America had chosen a smart crook (Nixon) over an honest fool (McGovern). If you want to be seen as an honest fool, that's all right with me but there's always the possibility that you're just playing the fool.

---

Life is like a Hot Wheels car. Sometimes it goes behind the couch and you can't find it.