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

The passage I quoted was about something which has been done.The passage you quoted was about something else which has not been done.These are two different things. This is why one of them has been done and one of them has not been done.

Hi Dr, How does a computer store information?Hard drives store information, CD's, DVD's, memory sticks and other media stores information including books film, records, tapes etc.None of those are a computer.The hard drive can be attached to the computer as well as a CDRW or DVRW which can read and write information to media.While a computer is running information can be stored in the memory also.The CPU processes information and instructs the different media to store that information or present it on the monitor.Remove the CPU from the motherboard and you have nothing but a bunch of mechanical components that can do nothing.It took some very intelligent men to invent and build all these different components with the abilities they have.Yet the most fasinating piece of equipment known to mankind came about by random mutation and natural selection.How did the human mind begin to exist without any intelligent creator involved? If I said a computer program computed information I mispoke and misrepresented the facts. Then enlighten me as to what a CPU does, and where it gets information from. How does a CPU know what the real world is?How does a computer program know what the real world is like? Please don't hold your breath but we will work on 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."

And if the words "CPU" and "computer" were synonyms, you would not be talking garbage. By random mutation and natural selection. Like you just said. So what's new? The CPU gets information from other components that it's connected to and outputs information to other components that it's connected to. Computers do not know things because they are not intelligent.Fortunately, they can simulate reality without knowing anything about it. Perhaps we should defer any discussion of other points until you do.Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.

Hi crash, Thanks for all the information. So we agree then that information can come from a mind.Now if you could just inform me how and what information does not come from a mind I would appreciate 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."

I don't think anyone thought that was in dispute. Happy to! Genetic information does not come from a mind; it comes from random mutation and natural selection.

I'm thinking that this one is long overdue to be wrapped up and laid to rest.How about some final statements? No replies to specific messages; Only one final statement per member.Please include the phrase "Final statement" in your message subtitle. That might (I can live in hope) help keep the final statement thing on track.AdminnemooseusEdited by Adminnemooseus, : Add third paragraph.

---

New Members should start HERE to get an understanding of what makes great posts. ​ Report a problem etc. type topics: Report discussion problems here: No.2 Thread Reopen Requests 2 Topic Proposal Issues ​ Other useful links: ​ Forum Guidelines

Admin writes: ​ It really helps moderators figure out if a topic is disintegrating because of general misbehavior versus someone in particular if the originally non-misbehaving members kept it that way. When everyone is prickly and argumentative and off-topic and personal then it's just too difficult to tell. We have neither infinite time to untie the Gordian knot, nor the wisdom of Solomon. ​ There used to be a comedian who presented his ideas for a better world, and one of them was to arm everyone on the highway with little rubber dart guns. Every time you see a driver doing something stupid, you fire a little dart at his car. When a state trooper sees someone driving down the highway with a bunch of darts all over his car he pulls him over for being an idiot. ​ Please make it easy to tell you apart from the idiots. Message 150

So far no one has posted any evidence for any intelligent designer except man.Edited by Adminnemooseus, : Added the "Final statement:" to the subtitle.

---

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

Those who assume that "design" or "information" or "complexity" or whatever weasel word they care to choose can only come from an intelligent source will continue to do so, either by ignoring, misconstruing or misunderstanding evidence clearly showing that this is not the case. At the same time, they will staunchly defend their position without ever providing a clear definition of what they mean. In all probability, this is deliberate, with full knowledge that any such clear definition will inevitably result in a rapid dismantling of their arguments.Evolutionary algorithms have produced an astonishing variety of successful designs faster and more efficiently than intelligent designers can. And that's not according to me, that's according to the intelligent designers. In fact, evolutionary algorithms have produced so many impressive results in so many different fields that the only way one can consider these results and still believe that it takes intelligence to create a design is to adopt the paranoiac position that scientists and engineers in every field of science are engaged in a massive conspiracy to try to discredit creationists. Amusingly, creationists are, for the most part, self-discrediting. Not that most scientists and engineers would put much effort into discrediting them, but I'm quite sure that they are aware of the superfluousness of such an effort.

---

Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. Ideas must be distinct before reason can act upon them; and no man ever had a distinct idea of the trinity. It is the mere Abracadabra of the mountebanks calling themselves the priests of Jesus. -- Thomas JeffersonFor we know that our patchwork heritage is a strength, not a weakness. We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and non-believers. -- Barack ObamaWe see monsters where science shows us windmills. -- PhatIt has always struck me as odd that fundies devote so much time and effort into trying to find a naturalistic explanation for their mythical flood, while looking for magical explanations for things that actually happened. -- Dr. Adequate

We should expect the designs of a supposedly infinite and divine intelligence to clear a higher bar than the "better than nothing" standard ICDESIGN puts forth in his first message.

Hi crash, I am aware that all the cells contain two copies of the same information.Which does not effect the storage space available in human DNA that is in a body.Am I correct when I say that a single cell is the average size of 10 m with the mass of 1 nanogram?Would I be correct to say that the DNA is contained in that cell and is not the entire cell?Would I be correct to say that the DNA is so small you would have to have a powerful microscope to view it?How many of those strings would be required to contain as much information as a 2 TB hard drive which holds 1,000,204 MB?What would the mass of those DNA strings be?The size of a 2 TB hard drive are: Height 1.028 Inches
Length 5.787 Inches Width 4.00 Inches Weight 1.32 PoundsWould I be correct to say that the mass size of the DNA required would be 1334 m?Would I be correct to say that mass size would be smaller than 10 of the largest human cells which is found in the spinal cord?Would I also be correct to say that if you could unwind all the DNA in a human body it would reach to the sun and back 70 times?Would I be correct to assume that something with less than the mass of 1334 m containing the same amount of information as a mass of 1.028" x 5.787" x 4.00" have better engineering?Would I be correct to assume that the intelligent designer that designed the small footprint storage media would be a superior designer to the one who designed the large footprint storage media?Now if any of my numbers or figureing is wrong please correct me.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."

Excuse me Crash, but what I put forth in the opening of this topic is how you, Crashfrog, claimed that an example of an intelligent design was your opinion of how the eye should have been designed.Incidently, "your" version of the eye design would go blind in a matter of days due to UV ray damage.Let me ask you something Crash. Do you even know anything about designing anything original? I mean, what have you ever designed and then built? Anything?You have made a claim of what you say is an intelligent design but I would like to know once and for all; What is your definition for a design that would qualify as intelligent?What is your definition? Spell it out.Edited by ICDESIGN, : No reason given.

Hi bluegenes,The chicken came first. You will get no argument from me there.We only disagree in where that original information came from.I believe it was provided by an intelligent creator.If I am not mistaken you believe it began to exist because of random mutations and natural selection.My question would be where did whatever it was that first mutated which would need to be information came from?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 crashfrog, 1 cell = 1 nanogram1 billion nanograms = 1 gram1 billion cells would contain 750 billion megabytes.Sorry I was not more specific.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, just one copy. (Some cells have no copies at all.) All your cells have to have almost same genome because they're all descendants of the same original cell. It's not possible to construct a human body out of cells of radically different genetic content.Again, the human genome is only 3 billion base pairs long. Not at all. DNA can often be viewed with the naked eye: Or with a simple light microscope: [img]http://131.229.114.77/microscopy/images/chromosomes1.jpg[/img]-->You've been corrected, already. The data necessary to store a human genome is 750 megabytes, which would fit on a CD. Certainly it's a lot smaller than a CD, I don't know anybody who would dispute that, but 3 billion base pairs in two-bit encoding is only 750 megabytes or so, no matter how you do the math. Would I be correct in pointing out that a one-terabyte hard drive is a lot smaller than a human body?

Indeed. Shouldn't a supposed infinite divine designer produce designs that are smarter than mine? "Smarter than Crash" seems a fairly low hurdle to clear, especially for God. Why was "better than nothing" the standard you decided, then, to defend?Shouldn't "unimprovable by any human being" be the standard that we should be able to hold your designer to? If that's the standard you think is met why do millions of human beings need human-designed corrective eyewear or even surgery? Why are so many human beings unable to see at all? It's amazing that in almost 700 messages you couldn't provide a cite for that claim. Did you not see before when I told ICANT about some of the things I've designed and built?I designed an electrochemical bioassy setup for Loxosceles reclusa for the USDA, for instance. Also I've designed and built a Java-based, collaborative isometric role-playing game environment including a chat client and a dice expression interpreter.What have you ever designed? Please be specific. By a supposedly divine, infinite intelligence? I've just made that definition: unimprovable by any human means. Does the eye rise to that standard? I think it's obvious that it does not. Otherwise what are glasses for?