Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
1 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,818 Year: 3,075/9,624 Month: 920/1,588 Week: 103/223 Day: 1/13 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   What IS evidence of design? (CLOSING STATEMENTS ONLY)
ringo
Member (Idle past 412 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 16 of 377 (607685)
03-05-2011 10:40 PM
Reply to: Message 13 by Buzsaw
03-05-2011 10:29 PM


Re: Valid Evidence
Buzsaw writes:
But the same empirical evidence is often interpreted differently, depending on the hypothesis.
And the best interpretation is determined by further experimentation and observation producing more empirical evidence. You don't get to cling to your pet interpretation after it has been refuted. If you want to challenge the accepted interpretation, you have to produce more empirical evidence, not just make excuses for why there isn't any.

You can have brevity and clarify, or you can have accuracy and detail, but you can't easily have both. --Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 13 by Buzsaw, posted 03-05-2011 10:29 PM Buzsaw has not replied

NoNukes
Inactive Member


(1)
Message 17 of 377 (607686)
03-05-2011 10:55 PM
Reply to: Message 13 by Buzsaw
03-05-2011 10:29 PM


Re: Valid Evidence
quote:
But the same empirical evidence is often interpreted differently
Buz, evidence is not simply some fact. Evidence is a fact that supports a particular conclusion. For the evidence to be meaningful or substantial, it should support the particular conclusion while not supporting an incompatible conclusion.
If there in indeed a "large delta which is Nuweiba beach at Aqaba" something that I don't believe was even established during the discussion, that could be evidence of something. But it wouldn't seem to support the existence of an ancient land bridge any more than it would support the non-existence of an ancient land bridge. So despite the fact that an observation of a delta is empirical, it still is not evidence for your conclusion.
We're probably way off topic here. If you want to present some of what you consider evidence of design, I could at least respond without going off topic.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 13 by Buzsaw, posted 03-05-2011 10:29 PM Buzsaw has not replied

Minnemooseus
Member
Posts: 3941
From: Duluth, Minnesota, U.S. (West end of Lake Superior)
Joined: 11-11-2001
Member Rating: 10.0


Message 18 of 377 (607696)
03-06-2011 2:41 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by jar
03-05-2011 1:10 PM


Design by guided evolution - Example: the dog
I propose that populations (in specific environments) of very genetically similar but very morphologically different creatures (eg. dogs) would indicate design. Some morphologies would be well adapted to the given environment, while others would be poorly adapted.
I also wonder about the "fingerprints" left when cross-species or cross-genus genetic engineering is done. Would examination of the product genome show the "fingerprints" that something outside of natural evolution has happened?
Moose

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by jar, posted 03-05-2011 1:10 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 20 by jar, posted 03-06-2011 9:18 AM Minnemooseus has not replied

Admin
Director
Posts: 12998
From: EvC Forum
Joined: 06-14-2002
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 19 of 377 (607703)
03-06-2011 7:27 AM
Reply to: Message 13 by Buzsaw
03-05-2011 10:29 PM


Re: Valid Evidence
Buzsaw writes:
But the same empirical evidence is often interpreted differently, depending on the hypothesis. Such is the case in interpreting what formed the large delta which is Nuweiba beach at Aqaba or what formed the Grand Canyon, as examples.
You appear to be making the same claims regarding evidence for design that you're making over in the Did the Biblical Exodus ever happen? thread concerning evidence for the Exodus. If you like you could propose a new thread to discuss your ideas about evidence, but please keep these ideas out of other threads like this one. If you can describe what evidence for design would be in concrete terms then please do so. If you want to discuss your ideas about the nature of evidence, what constitutes valid evidence, how evidence builds to make a case, etc., then please propose a new thread.

--Percy
EvC Forum Director

This message is a reply to:
 Message 13 by Buzsaw, posted 03-05-2011 10:29 PM Buzsaw has not replied

jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 20 of 377 (607706)
03-06-2011 9:18 AM
Reply to: Message 18 by Minnemooseus
03-06-2011 2:41 AM


Re: Design by guided evolution - Example: the dog
Minnemooseus writes:
I propose that populations (in specific environments) of very genetically similar but very morphologically different creatures (eg. dogs) would indicate design. Some morphologies would be well adapted to the given environment, while others would be poorly adapted.
I also wonder about the "fingerprints" left when cross-species or cross-genus genetic engineering is done. Would examination of the product genome show the "fingerprints" that something outside of natural evolution has happened?
Moose
Would those be other examples of what I described in the OP, based on our experience of known human design?

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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by Minnemooseus, posted 03-06-2011 2:41 AM Minnemooseus has not replied

jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 21 of 377 (607707)
03-06-2011 9:19 AM
Reply to: Message 8 by Buzsaw
03-05-2011 9:41 PM


Re: Valid Evidence
Buzsaw writes:
Coyote writes:
The same goes for Biblical advocates. The more aggregate corroborative evidence supportive to the Biblical record, the more each account in the record is corroborated.
But how do you count aggregate negative evidence?
Global flood? Young earth? Talking snakes?
Or do you just ignore that negative evidence?
Imo, BB singularity and multi-verse theories have more negative aspects than the above. What is empirical, supportive or what ever will be determined relative to one's ideology.
Do you agree with NoNukes that all evidence must be empirical in order to be considered evidence?
Evidence Buz.
Do you have anything related to the topic?
So what exactly is this "Evidence of Design" that Creationists and Intelligent Design marketeers assert is there?
Do you have anything other than word salad?

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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by Buzsaw, posted 03-05-2011 9:41 PM Buzsaw has not replied

nwr
Member
Posts: 6408
From: Geneva, Illinois
Joined: 08-08-2005
Member Rating: 5.1


Message 22 of 377 (607711)
03-06-2011 9:37 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by jar
03-05-2011 1:10 PM


The evidence of design - awesomeness, as in "Wow! That's awesome; Evolution is refuted."
Actually, I think that ID is taken as an a priori truth, with no need for evidence. Evidence is taken as that which you use to persuade doubters of what is obviously true. And the ID folk often use awesomness as an indicator of evidence.

Jesus was a liberal hippie

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by jar, posted 03-05-2011 1:10 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 23 by jar, posted 03-06-2011 9:48 AM nwr has seen this message but not replied

jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 23 of 377 (607712)
03-06-2011 9:48 AM
Reply to: Message 22 by nwr
03-06-2011 9:37 AM


nwr writes:
The evidence of design - awesomeness, as in "Wow! That's awesome; Evolution is refuted."
Actually, I think that ID is taken as an a priori truth, with no need for evidence. Evidence is taken as that which you use to persuade doubters of what is obviously true. And the ID folk often use awesomness as an indicator of evidence.
"ID is taken as an a priori truth, with no need for evidence"
That is certainly possible, but then ID becomes simply another unsupported assertion, irrelevant.

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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by nwr, posted 03-06-2011 9:37 AM nwr has seen this message but not replied

Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 24 of 377 (607713)
03-06-2011 9:49 AM


Evidence of Design
Biblically, humans are designed after the likeness of their designer, unlike brute beasts. This is evidenced in the huge intelligence and reasoning gap between the most intelligent animal and human kind. Among all of the animals, there is no really significant intelligence and reasoning gap, such as is observed between animals and humans.
Biblically, intelligent humans were determined by the designer to rule over the animal kingdom. This has all been observed throughout recorded human history.

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The Immeasurable Present Eternally Extends the Infinite Past And Infinitely Consumes The Eternal Future.

Replies to this message:
 Message 25 by jar, posted 03-06-2011 9:54 AM Buzsaw has seen this message but not replied
 Message 26 by fearandloathing, posted 03-06-2011 10:37 AM Buzsaw has replied

jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 25 of 377 (607715)
03-06-2011 9:54 AM
Reply to: Message 24 by Buzsaw
03-06-2011 9:49 AM


Re: Evidence of Design
Buzsaw writes:
Biblically, humans are designed after the likeness of their designer, unlike brute beasts. This is evidenced in the huge intelligence and reasoning gap between the most intelligent animal and human kind. Among all of the animals, there is no really significant intelligence and reasoning gap, such as is observed between animals and humans.
Biblically, intelligent humans were determined by the designer to rule over the animal kingdom. This has all been observed throughout recorded human history.
Evidence Buz.
What is the evidence of design, not just some vague assertion.
Evidence of design.
Go back and reread the original post. I point out specific tests I can use to show design.
What tests do you use to show design?
No more word salad or simple assertions. Show us how you determine design?

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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 24 by Buzsaw, posted 03-06-2011 9:49 AM Buzsaw has seen this message but not replied

fearandloathing
Member (Idle past 4145 days)
Posts: 990
From: Burlington, NC, USA
Joined: 02-24-2011


Message 26 of 377 (607717)
03-06-2011 10:37 AM
Reply to: Message 24 by Buzsaw
03-06-2011 9:49 AM


Re: Evidence of Design
So if I understand your line of thought then a mouse has no significant difference in intelligence or ability to reason compared to a chimp or bonobo?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 24 by Buzsaw, posted 03-06-2011 9:49 AM Buzsaw has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 27 by jar, posted 03-06-2011 11:19 AM fearandloathing has not replied
 Message 33 by Buzsaw, posted 03-06-2011 12:53 PM fearandloathing has not replied

jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 27 of 377 (607720)
03-06-2011 11:19 AM
Reply to: Message 26 by fearandloathing
03-06-2011 10:37 AM


Topic folk, Please
fearandloathing writes:
So if I understand your line of thought then a mouse has no significant difference in intelligence or ability to reason compared to a chimp or bonobo?
Please folk, don't let Buz's rabbit holes attract you.
What IS evidence of design?

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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 26 by fearandloathing, posted 03-06-2011 10:37 AM fearandloathing has not replied

Dr Jack
Member
Posts: 3514
From: Immigrant in the land of Deutsch
Joined: 07-14-2003
Member Rating: 8.7


Message 28 of 377 (607721)
03-06-2011 11:47 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by jar
03-05-2011 1:10 PM


How about this: designed artefacts are identifiable because they have been shaped to assist a known third part with identifiable influence on the artefact.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by jar, posted 03-05-2011 1:10 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 29 by jar, posted 03-06-2011 11:49 AM Dr Jack has replied
 Message 63 by Taq, posted 03-07-2011 11:15 AM Dr Jack has not replied

jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 29 of 377 (607722)
03-06-2011 11:49 AM
Reply to: Message 28 by Dr Jack
03-06-2011 11:47 AM


Mr Jack writes:
How about this: designed artefacts are identifiable because they have been shaped to assist a known third part with identifiable influence on the artefact.
Not sure what that even means? Can you expand it for me?

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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 28 by Dr Jack, posted 03-06-2011 11:47 AM Dr Jack has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 30 by Dr Jack, posted 03-06-2011 12:03 PM jar has replied

Dr Jack
Member
Posts: 3514
From: Immigrant in the land of Deutsch
Joined: 07-14-2003
Member Rating: 8.7


Message 30 of 377 (607723)
03-06-2011 12:03 PM
Reply to: Message 29 by jar
03-06-2011 11:49 AM


Okay, I'll expand (and refine a little, thinking about it)
An artefact can be identified as designed if:
1. It can be identified as having a purpose or function to a third party
2. That third party influenced the form of the artefact
3. That influence was intentional
So an object that has no obvious function cannot be described as designed - an amorphous lump of rock is not designed, for example (fails on 1). Whereas as elephant poo could be said to have a function to a dung beatle but the dung beatle is incapable of influencing the elephant poo in any way, so elephant poo is not designed (passes 1, fails 2). Criteria 3 is there to root out symbiosis, and co-evolution - aphids did not design Buchnera, Buchnera did not design aphids.
(Oh, and I see I missed the 'y' in party off my previous post, oops)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 29 by jar, posted 03-06-2011 11:49 AM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 31 by jar, posted 03-06-2011 12:07 PM Dr Jack has replied
 Message 32 by RAZD, posted 03-06-2011 12:48 PM Dr Jack has replied
 Message 54 by NoNukes, posted 03-06-2011 7:28 PM Dr Jack has replied
 Message 93 by Richard Townsend, posted 03-08-2011 9:59 AM Dr Jack has replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024