|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,889 Year: 4,146/9,624 Month: 1,017/974 Week: 344/286 Day: 65/40 Hour: 1/5 |
Thread ▼ Details |
Member (Idle past 4826 days) Posts: 360 From: Phoenix Arizona USA Joined: |
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Evolving the Musculoskeletal System | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ICdesign Member (Idle past 4826 days) Posts: 360 From: Phoenix Arizona USA Joined: |
cavediver writes:
The source is a computer program designed by an intelligent mind. Where is the source of this information???Would the antenna design exist if you took intelligent man out of the equation? Yes or no? Is information alone enough to create a material system? yes or no?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ICdesign Member (Idle past 4826 days) Posts: 360 From: Phoenix Arizona USA Joined: |
Percy writes:
Then you should know without me having to point out such a simple truth. I write design software for a living. Your computer uses chips designed using software that I helped write. I specialize in the areas of logic simulation and timing analysis. I am intimately familiar with how both computer hardware and software work, and I will not steer you wrong.Would a computer or a computer program exist without an intelligent mind such as yours? yes or no? Although you have been asked to address how you tell when something has "intentional purpose," you've never answered. A watering hole on the Savannah has the purpose of providing water for the animals in the area. How do you know whether that purpose was "intentional" or not? Is it just a case of you can't explain "intentional purpose," but you know it when you see it? If so then you need to develop some scientific criteria for establishing when something has "intentional purpose" or not
Does your heart have an intentional purpose?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ICdesign Member (Idle past 4826 days) Posts: 360 From: Phoenix Arizona USA Joined: |
Percy posted a detailed, considerate post.
Because I am not interested in debating a chapter of information. That's why.
I am wondering why you decided to ignore most of it, and simply cherry pick a couple of random points.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ICdesign Member (Idle past 4826 days) Posts: 360 From: Phoenix Arizona USA Joined: |
Wrong - the design of the antenna does not exist in the computer programme.
The antenna was generated by a computer program.
Irrelevant - I have already addressed this in my previous post - from where does the antenna design originate?
Maybe its irrelevant to you but not to the truth. Would the antenna exist if intelligence was taken out of the equation? Yes or no? That is the relevant question.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ICdesign Member (Idle past 4826 days) Posts: 360 From: Phoenix Arizona USA Joined: |
Are you still obtusely missing the point, yes or no?
No. I seem to be the only one around here able to grasp the relevant questions.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ICdesign Member (Idle past 4826 days) Posts: 360 From: Phoenix Arizona USA Joined: |
Who designed these stalactites and stalagmites?
All design comes from the same source. God
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ICdesign Member (Idle past 4826 days) Posts: 360 From: Phoenix Arizona USA Joined: |
We're not interested in the antenna but ion the design of the antenna.
OK then. Would the design of the antenna exist if you took intelligent mind out of the equation?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ICdesign Member (Idle past 4826 days) Posts: 360 From: Phoenix Arizona USA Joined: |
Hi Percy,
Your point was that a simulation of a natural process means that that process is itself intelligent.
No that isn't my point exactly. My point is that all computer related products are an extension of an intelligent source. Simulations are an extension of an intelligent mind. Anything done on a computer would not exist if you took the intelligent mind out of the equation. Do you now understand? I'll have to come back to the other points you reposted later. Do you think your heart has an intentional purpose? I much prefer a point or two at a time.Thanks, IC
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ICdesign Member (Idle past 4826 days) Posts: 360 From: Phoenix Arizona USA Joined: |
Percy writes:
No, it isn't irrelevant to this discussion and I did not change the point I have been making the entire time. Think about what you are saying Percy. How can you simulate a process void of intelligence using an intelligent mind to create the simulation on equipment of intelligent design. That is a double oxymoron.
but what you're saying now is irrelevant to this discussion. You were trying to claim that simulating a natural process like evolution means that that process was created by an intelligence. Let's not introduce new topics like whether the heart has "intentional purpose"
Well you were all ready to talk about it 2 or 3 posts ago when the drinking hole was your example.
My suggestion would be to pick up the Mr. Chance/Mr. Selection discussion that we were having.
I'm not into investing all the time and effort it would take to go down that road. The issues of complex systems with intentional purposes cut more to the heart of the matter than Mr. no brain and Mr. no ability to recognize a beneficial mutation if it were staring him in the face. Edited by ICdesign, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ICdesign Member (Idle past 4826 days) Posts: 360 From: Phoenix Arizona USA Joined: |
Percy writes:
Righting a simulation based on known laws of physics is one thing. A program written on a computer that produces an antenna after a bunch a brilliant scientists imput a bunch of information does nothing to prove that evolution was capable of producing complex systems that perform meaningful purposes.
I can write a simulation of a marble rolling down an inclined plain, but neither the marble nor the inclined plane nor gravity has any intelligence or "intentional purpose." we're discussing whether evolution requires intelligence, not simulations.
And the answer is yes. We know in the real world that you cannot achieve building a complex system without the aid of intelligence. You cannot simulate a THEORY that took place without intelligence. Its impossible!Without a computer the antenna has no place to develop, correct? A watering hole on the Savannah has the purpose of providing water for the animals in the area. How do you know whether that purpose was "intentional" or not?
Just because water gathered in a hole from rain storms doesn't prove anything other than it rained. That is called subjective purpose. It would exist whether animals drank from it or not.The heart has an objective purpose. It has the obvious sole purpose of pumping blood to the body and that is all it does. That makes it intentional. In order to show it is not intentional you have to show other reasons why it would exist. Edited by ICdesign, : No reason given. Edited by ICdesign, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ICdesign Member (Idle past 4826 days) Posts: 360 From: Phoenix Arizona USA Joined: |
Percy writes:
Think about that phrase for a second Percy. The entire project to gain the design of the antenna was lead by a predetermined goal. To intentionally use all the knowledge and tools at their disposal to "create" a better antenna. How can you possibly call this simulating evolution?
The approach used Just as a weather forecasting program might employ a simulated model of the weather to make predictions, an antennae design program might employ a simulated model of evolution to produce designs. But neither the weather nor evolution requires an intelligence.
What does weather have to do with the theory of evolution?A weather simulation is based on known laws of physics. Evolution is based on a theory that has never been observed and in fact goes against known laws of physics. If stalactites and stalagmites that are created by the dripping of mineralized water were actually designed by God (see your Message 464), then isn't a watering hole also designed by God. And doesn't anything designed by God have "objective intentional purpose?"
Just because something has been created by God doesn't necessarily mean it has an objective intentional purpose. Rain has an objective intentional purpose but that doesn't mean every puddle from the rain has an objective intentional purpose. In my opinion this is you just hiding behind more smoke and mirrors. Has nothing to do with being a Marine or having a fighting spirit, I'm just calling 'em as I see 'em. The issue is whether or not the heart has an objective purpose. All it does is pump blood so you can live. If it did not exist neither would you. How much more intentional can anything be?There are only two choices. It just happened to show up in the exact place performing the exact function mandatory for life or someone put it there on purpose. If you have the enormous faith to believe in the miracle that it just happened along, you do so at your own intellectual suicide. When you ad all the systems mandatory for life besides the circulatory system....well, its way beyond having your head in the sand. I'm thinking your head would have to be somewhere else entirely to believe such a fantasy. The problem you're having is that you didn't arrive at your position through reasoning,....You believe what you believe because it feels right to you, not because you've done any analysis of real world evidence.
My views and conclusions make compete rational sense.You live in a fantasy world of illusion. I think its time to pick up my marbles and go home. This is like playing against a player using square marbles.Later, IC
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ICdesign Member (Idle past 4826 days) Posts: 360 From: Phoenix Arizona USA Joined: |
Percy writes:
Oh, you mean those antennae that were intelligently designed? You mean those ID antennae that were then intelligently written into the intelligently designed computer program on the intelligently designed computer? You mean those antennas? Oh, I see what you mean now. Yes, very evolutionary.
This means they began with an initial population of antennae designs. The antennae designs were assessed for performance
How do you assess performance without using intelligence again? All you have is antenna that were generated by a man-made computer. Nothing more.
and it illustrates the power of the evolutionary approach.
No it does not. It illustrates the ingenuity of intelligent man.
Evolution has been observed in both nature and the lab Show me where life was created from nothing and then show me where complex systems have developed by themselves. If this had been observed evolution would not be called a theory.Mutations that develop different shapes and hard spots is not a demonstration of new systems developing functions. [qs]If the watering hole on the savanna didn't exist then the animals using the watering hole wouldn't exist, either[/.qs]And? ......What about the hole with water that is never used by an animal? Science believes the heart evolved in the same way way that all other structures evolved
No, evolutionary scientists believe this. Its is a belief of a bias community. Belief is not science.
one little step at a time through descent with modification filtered by natural selection.
This is a theory not science.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ICdesign Member (Idle past 4826 days) Posts: 360 From: Phoenix Arizona USA Joined: |
Who designed the antenna?
A computer generated the design.However many times you ask the question, the answer is the same. Evolution does not have a computer.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ICdesign Member (Idle past 4826 days) Posts: 360 From: Phoenix Arizona USA Joined: |
Huntard writes:
Yes, but when you are talking about the development of existence you have to start at the beginning of that existence do you not. That is why I include it.
We're talking about evolution. You do know evolution is only about the development of life once it exists, right? For example, gravity is considered a theory in science.
No, gravity is not a theory, its a fact. The reasons of how it exists is the part that is a theory. Micro- Evolution is based on observed science.Macro-Evolution is nothing more that a theory (an unproven guess) It is the first step on the way to a new system or function. Sadly, we don't live long enough to observe an entire new system form.
And this is one of your contradictions that I still haven't figured out. You claim their are no incomplete systems because an organism cannot survive with an incomplete system, correct? Yet there would have to be many incomplete stages between the first step and a complete system, correct? ie; "we don't live long enough to observe an entire new system form."Where is this system all this time?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ICdesign Member (Idle past 4826 days) Posts: 360 From: Phoenix Arizona USA Joined: |
What did the computer generate the design from?
A program designed by intelligent people.
But it does have life that competes for limited resources which is all that evolution needs .This designs nothing. This builds nothing.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024