|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,742 Year: 3,999/9,624 Month: 870/974 Week: 197/286 Day: 4/109 Hour: 0/0 |
Thread ▼ Details |
Member (Idle past 4823 days) Posts: 360 From: Phoenix Arizona USA Joined: |
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Evolving the Musculoskeletal System | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ICdesign Member (Idle past 4823 days) Posts: 360 From: Phoenix Arizona USA Joined: |
Hi Bluejay,
Thanks for your thoughtful and respectful feedback. I really mean that. Your last 2 posts have a lot of good points of view. I see Huntard logged off before my post reached him. I will give him a little time to respond since this particular conversation was for him.
First, why does he have to build a Rolls Royce?
I know what your saying. I have a point I plan to make. It doesn't really matter what the produced product is.
Why can't he build roller skates or a hot dog cooker instead? Why must the end-product be specified beforehand? In evolution, the end-product is not specified beforehand, so this isn't a good analogy for how evolution works. Now, from where we stand in time, we have to explain how evolution produced, e.g., humans, so it looks like we have to have a process that works toward the "goal" of producing humans.
Yes I understand that. But, in actuality, the end-product of "human" was not specified when evolution started: it was just the end-product that came about, and our job is to retell the story of how it went down. -----
But, even if this were the way evolution works, you're analogy has left out one of the principle characters! In this analogy, Mr Selection is the supervisor, who shakes his head every time Mr Chance puts a part in the wrong place, and removes the offending part.
So now your saying Mr. Selection can determine a wrong place then?
What do you think Mr Chance's chances of making a Rolls Royce in a billion years would be then?
I give my answer in a bit.IC
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ICdesign Member (Idle past 4823 days) Posts: 360 From: Phoenix Arizona USA Joined: |
Percy,
Can you lighten up a little and quit being such a tight ass? Dang man, do you moonlite as a prison guard or some thing? If I wanted to get wacked with a ruler all the time I would go enroll at a Catholic School or something. Mutations get constant feedback from the environment about whether they're good or bad. Bluejay's addition of a supervisor who expresses approval or disapproval, analogous to feedback from the environment, is a much more accurate analogy.
feedback? approval or disapproval? How is this not reasoning ability?
In case it helps, we agree with you that in your version Mr. Chance would not have a prayer of assembling the Rolls Roycebut this is not the way evolution works.
Actually with enough time it wouldn't be completely impossible. Do we have an end product that has been assembled? Yes or no?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ICdesign Member (Idle past 4823 days) Posts: 360 From: Phoenix Arizona USA Joined: |
Huntard writes:
Actually, no I don't. All you guys seem to be talking about survival of the fittest for up and running, fully developed creatures. What I have been trying to get to is the construction process of creatures to begin with. Do you agree so far? This whole "self-improvement" program the ToE adheres to is bogus in what would be an impersonal, purposeless and wholly material universe anyway. It should be mentioned here that even among evolutionary theorists there remains widespread disagreement. Because one offspring survives instead of another may not mean it has greater evolutionary potential. The lucky chicken that survived the hungry fox's nocturnal raid on the chicken coop may well have been suffering from insomnia on that night. Survival of the fittest thus becomes "survival of those that survive," which doesn't tell us a great deal. At any rate lets get back to my point of construction, Mr. Chance and your original question of why I think ToE is impossible. In my analogy Mr. Chance would have a chance of success be it ever so slight, correct.But now lets paint a more accurate analogy of reality and take away Mr. Chances brain all together. No thought. Nothing but a blank screen. What are his chances of building anything now? Zero right? It would be completely impossible. Evolution is Mr. Chance with no brain. It wouldn't matter if there WAS a Mr. Selection because without thought nothing can happen. IT IS IMPOSSIBLE !! How can evolution build anything if all it has is a blank screen. It comes right back to being so simple a child should be able to understand. IC I have to run but I would like to talk more about the aforementioned systems and purpose when I return tomorrow.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ICdesign Member (Idle past 4823 days) Posts: 360 From: Phoenix Arizona USA Joined: |
Evolution is full of nothing but double speak. It has no thought, no purpose. no intent, yet constructs all the sophisticated systems that make up life.
In the real world a system cannot be built without intelligent thought and action yet you choose to believe evolution is capable of doing so. You can't produce any evidence or model of this impossible feat taking place anywhere on the planet. The best I have ever seen any of you offer is some insignificant little bacteria mutation that shows nothing of how a sophisticated system can construct without intelligence. Please save your "what is your test for a sophisticated system" comments.That may be valid questioning in your opinion Percy, but its only valid to evolutionists because you have no evidence as to how evolution can produce systems so you play shell games and create a maze of smoke and mirrors that you hide behind. Maybe survival of the fittest is a good enough magic bullet to explain how the impossible became possible for you guys, but it just isn't working for me.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ICdesign Member (Idle past 4823 days) Posts: 360 From: Phoenix Arizona USA Joined: |
jar writes:
I can prove all day long that it takes intelligence to build a system. The burden of proof is on you to show it can be done without intelligence. Its you who has nothing!
Which is fine, but until you can present a model that explains what is seen better than the current model, you have nothing.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ICdesign Member (Idle past 4823 days) Posts: 360 From: Phoenix Arizona USA Joined: |
Percy writes:
I did respond Percy. Why don't you respond with evidence that a sophisticated system can be created without intelligence? All your survival of the fittest theory can show is death of the unfit.
Do you think you could take a stab at responding
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ICdesign Member (Idle past 4823 days) Posts: 360 From: Phoenix Arizona USA Joined: |
natural selection
Show me the observable evidence of natural selection developing sophisticated systems.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ICdesign Member (Idle past 4823 days) Posts: 360 From: Phoenix Arizona USA Joined: |
nwr writes:
Oh yes I can. No, you cannot. In fact you cannot even adequately define "intelligence". There's no clear consensus on what the word means.I think its pretty brave of you to announce you have no clue what intelligence is. Let me help you out; Definition: intelligence (by Webster's) Noun1. The ability to comprehend; to understand and profit from experience. 8. The capacity to know or understand; Edited by ICdesign, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ICdesign Member (Idle past 4823 days) Posts: 360 From: Phoenix Arizona USA Joined: |
How about showing one proof?
As I stated earlier the burden of prove is on the person who claims a system can be built without intelligence. Walking you through the thought process to build a system is all the proof necessary.Can you thread a needle without the thought process of what needs to be done and how to do it? No you can't. That process is called intelligence. I really do have better things to do than participate in these childish wastes of time.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ICdesign Member (Idle past 4823 days) Posts: 360 From: Phoenix Arizona USA Joined: |
If you can respond to at least some of what people said on these topics then we can continue the discussion.
Look Percy, for me it all boils down to what I have just recently posted. There is no need to discusspoints B,C,D,E,...when point A doesn't have an answer. Its a waste of my time dealing with all the smoke and mirror shell games you guys throw out there about what is intelligent or intentional purpose and so-forth. I can prove you can't build a system without an intelligent process. Until any of you can prove it CAN be done, I have nothing further to say. Thanks,IC
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ICdesign Member (Idle past 4823 days) Posts: 360 From: Phoenix Arizona USA Joined: |
Percy writes:
Again, that is fine if you and yours want to believe such a story. In the real observable world we live in we see no such ability. ToE goes against everything we know to be true in the observable, testable world. Sophisticated systems require conscious intent. Almost all meaningful evolution is nothing more than insignificant little mutations. There is no direction, no goal. The complex systems we have today, whether muscles or bones or nerves or blood circulation or excretory or brains or lymphatic, evolved from minutely less complex systems, which themselves evolved from minutely less complex systems, and so forth back to life's beginning. Each minute change survived into the next generation because it provided some minute advantage. ICdesign Edited by ICdesign, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ICdesign Member (Idle past 4823 days) Posts: 360 From: Phoenix Arizona USA Joined: |
subbie writes:
Was there a computer involved? Where did the materials come from to construct? Who constructed the systems? Was intelligence involved to determine what the designs were useful for? Would the systems exist if intelligent man did not determine they were useful then construct them? Did the systems construct themselves? Shall I go on?
Those are examples of two "sophisticated systems" that grew without any intelligent input. Go ahead, ignore or misconstrue these away to your heart's content.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ICdesign Member (Idle past 4823 days) Posts: 360 From: Phoenix Arizona USA Joined: |
subbie writes:
actually your point was that their was no intelligent imput and you were proven wrong.
No need, you've proven my point.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ICdesign Member (Idle past 4823 days) Posts: 360 From: Phoenix Arizona USA Joined: |
Percy writes:
There is an Euglena that has a light sensing spot because that is the feature God chose to give it for its environment. You have an octopus that God designed with its type of eye and many variations in between. So what? You claim it is evidence for evolution we claim it is evidence of a creative Creator.
They have examples of the eye ranging from light sensitive spots all the way up the the modern eyes of mammals and octopus. They have examples of the musculoskeletal system ranging from one tiny hard part all the way to modern animals.
Show me what you are talking about.
Other mutations cause the two hard parts to evolve shapes independently, and mutations that make one hard part nestle more comfortably into the other hard part wld provide an advantage, and these mutations would soon come to dominate the population.
So what Percy? How does a little change in shape and hard or soft spots explain how an entire complex system develops that performs a very specific task? We have system after system after sophisticated system that perform intentional purposes. Hard spots is your evidence as to how this happens? Are you friggin kidding me?
By the way, about your computer discussion, if someone writes a computer program that models the weather then you obviously understand that it's just a model of the real world and doesn't mean that weather requires intelligence. So if someone writes a computer program that models evolution why do you conclude that it means that evolution requires intelligence?
This is exactly what I mean about a waste of precious time. Ho Hum.Because a computer is intelligence. Coming up with a design on a computer program is not simulating evolution. If man has to help in the outcome of a design, it is not evolution. What part of this don't you guys understand? Evolution is what we see in the "real observable world we live in."
No it isn't. In the real world we see it takes conscious intent to design and build systems.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ICdesign Member (Idle past 4823 days) Posts: 360 From: Phoenix Arizona USA Joined: |
void for now
Edited by ICdesign, : No reason given.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024