Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 1/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Who designed the ID designer(s)?
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 284 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 241 of 396 (617403)
05-28-2011 3:59 PM
Reply to: Message 240 by SavageD
05-28-2011 11:47 AM


Re: Who designed the designer?
Yes I would accept the possibility of complexity without design, but only when it comes down to 'the first cause' of the universe, as pointed out earlier.
But there is no reason why it should be possible only in that case. Once you have admitted that something complex enough to design the whole universe could exist without having a designer, then I see no basis for denying that that is at least possible also in the case of the things we see around us, all of which are (by your reasoning) less complicated than your hypothetical designer.
They do not have to say so out rightly but, atheist do believe that matter existed before time.
If you want to know what atheists think, you would do better to ask some atheists instead of making stuff up.
I, for example, am an atheist, and I do not even find the phrase "before time" meaningful.
If the universe began with a bang, your going to have to assume that something banged. Like wise if you assume that there was a universe before this one, your also going to have to assume that matter was already present to create that universe.
You know, "matter" is a technical term, it doesn't include everything that has existence. (It would not, for example, include the standard God of the theists.)
Also, if I'm not mistaken, there is a new theory which suggests that two membranes of other universes made contact with one another to form this universe. If this is the case then two other universes would have had to exist before these two to create other universes, thus making the number of universes infinite.
Even if all atheists believed in this collision of universes idea, which I do not because I've barely heard of it, then the deduction that you ascribe to them would not necessarily follow. After all, there is a theory that I was produced by two people having sex, but although I accept this theory I do not deduce from it an infinite number of people.
Really, you should not be so free in ascribing views to atheists. First you make up what we think, then you figure out what you, not we, would deduce from the views that you ascribe to us, and then you generously attribute these deductions to us too.
I take it that this is your stance as to why you believe that the universe is here by chance...
Then you should read it again, since I do not subscribe to that belief (nor deny it) and was explaining why not.
If you do not attribute the universe to coincidence or creation, then what is your stance? Why couldn't bricks fall up and not down?
The immediate answer to that is that gravity is an attractive and not a repulsive force. As to the cause of this, that too might well be a matter of necessity rather than chance.
When I observe an order universe such as galaxies, planetary seasons, the various laws of physics (gravity for instance) etc which holds together everything we know as the universe, I am forced to believe in a creator.
You are not forced to, you choose to. There is no reason either a priori or a posteriori why the reason for the universe should be possessed of a personality.
Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 240 by SavageD, posted 05-28-2011 11:47 AM SavageD has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 256 by SavageD, posted 05-29-2011 10:13 AM Dr Adequate has replied

  
intellen
Member (Idle past 4356 days)
Posts: 73
Joined: 05-23-2011


Message 242 of 396 (617405)
05-28-2011 4:34 PM
Reply to: Message 218 by jar
05-25-2011 5:36 PM


Re: Still a form of faith
jar writes:
I will as soon as you place Jesus out there so we can test Jesus just as we test for the galaxies.
Can you put up forces or gravity and bring them to lab? hahahahahaha...
Just admit that ToE has no explanatory power now.

Nothing makes sense in science except in the light of the new Intelligent Design .

This message is a reply to:
 Message 218 by jar, posted 05-25-2011 5:36 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 244 by jar, posted 05-28-2011 4:46 PM intellen has replied

  
intellen
Member (Idle past 4356 days)
Posts: 73
Joined: 05-23-2011


Message 243 of 396 (617406)
05-28-2011 4:34 PM
Reply to: Message 218 by jar
05-25-2011 5:36 PM


Re: Still a form of faith
jar writes:
I will as soon as you place Jesus out there so we can test Jesus just as we test for the galaxies.
Can you put up forces or gravity and bring them to lab? hahahahahaha...
Just admit that ToE has no explanatory power now.

Nothing makes sense in science except in the light of the new Intelligent Design .

This message is a reply to:
 Message 218 by jar, posted 05-25-2011 5:36 PM jar has not replied

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


Message 244 of 396 (617407)
05-28-2011 4:46 PM
Reply to: Message 242 by intellen
05-28-2011 4:34 PM


Re: Still a form of faith
intellen writes:
jar writes:
I will as soon as you place Jesus out there so we can test Jesus just as we test for the galaxies.
Can you put up forces or gravity and bring them to lab? hahahahahaha...
Just admit that ToE has no explanatory power now.
Of course I can. Hell we did experiments involving forces and gravity in the fifth grade.
The TOE of course has explanatory power, in fact it is the ONLY model that explains the diversity of life we see today. To say otherwise is simply to exhibit extreme *** of the TOE.

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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 242 by intellen, posted 05-28-2011 4:34 PM intellen has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 250 by intellen, posted 05-29-2011 9:02 AM jar has replied

  
intellen
Member (Idle past 4356 days)
Posts: 73
Joined: 05-23-2011


Message 245 of 396 (617409)
05-28-2011 4:49 PM
Reply to: Message 223 by Percy
05-26-2011 7:42 AM


Re: A form of faith
Percy writes:
If Jesus Christ is the Intelligent Designer of everything and everyone, including Hindus, Buddhists, Moslems, Jews, etc., then shouldn't the music be non-denominational? Or, even better for a presentation that claims to be science, no music at all?
Jesus Christ is the sole Intelligent Designer, all gods and deities of all the world are not included. They could not be proven.
Percy writes:
So you're defining intelligence as the ability to solve problems. When bacteria are deprived of their primary nutrient, thereby being presented the problem of how to survive, and then they evolve the ability to metabolize other nutrients in their environment, is that intelligence?
That is not intelligence. That is an instinct. An intelligence living organism can reinforcement itself. The bacteria should make nutrient for themselves if they are really intelligent. They don't, so they are not intelligent.
Percy writes:
Could you provide a few examples of "naturen"?
Leaves falling on the trees. Rocks rolling. Sea waves. Dust moving. Tsunami.
Percy writes:
So if a rock's shape is sculpted and made by wave action, that's an example of the principle of intelligence?
No. They are only naturen.
Percy writes:
First you say "naturen" is "life + no defenses + no senses", then you say "naturen" is an event that is neither symmetric nor asymmetric, and then you say nature is neutral. You've got two different and unrelated definitions of "naturen", and I'm guessing it's somehow related to nature, but you don't explain how. You haven't provided any justification for the invented terms "intellen" and "naturen".
I'm afraid I can't see much sense in what you say, nor can I see any connection to an Intelligent Designer, and certainly not to Jesus Christ.
Naturen = not symmetry, not asymmetry, neutral, one side only
They are all the same category.
Well, if you don't see connection to Jesus Christ, then, I don't know why.
Edited by Admin, : Remove the six empty intellen quote boxes and the six unnecessary "--Percy" signatures that were included inside each quote box.

Nothing makes sense in science except in the light of the new Intelligent Design .

This message is a reply to:
 Message 223 by Percy, posted 05-26-2011 7:42 AM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 249 by Percy, posted 05-29-2011 6:50 AM intellen has replied

  
intellen
Member (Idle past 4356 days)
Posts: 73
Joined: 05-23-2011


Message 246 of 396 (617410)
05-28-2011 5:04 PM
Reply to: Message 222 by RAZD
05-25-2011 11:05 PM


Re: and Still a form of faith
RAZD writes:
Hi intellen,
The topic of this thread is whether or not ID is a form of faith or not.
Yes, I had redefined the word "intelligence" ...
We need to be careful here that you are not (a) just making stuff up or (b) equivocating on the meanings of words (which is especially difficult here, where english is not your primary language - I am assuming that most of your communication problem is due to the difference between your primary language (japanese?) and english).
The basic problem I see is that you (re)define intelligence to be some aspect that is observed in nature and then claim that as intelligence is observed that (1) there must be an Intelligent Designer and (2) that this designer is the biblical god/z.
In answer to (1) you first need to understand that defining something to be intelligent does not make it so. For instance, you could define a tossed coin landing on heads or tails to be intelligence, yet coins are notorious for landing on heads and tails for randomly falling on either heads or tails. Second, you did NOT need to redefine it: there are several usable definitions of intelligence, including definitions that could develop into means of quantifying intelligence.
The equivocation here comes into the second use of intelligence -- in the term Intelligent Designer: using the above example of redefining intelligence to be the tossed coin landing on either heads or tails, means that intelligence is random choice, and what you have is a random designer. In other words, if you redefine a term, then you must be consistent in its application.
In answer to (2) you have not posted anything here on how you get here - why not Vishnu or Odin? Without any evidence for your conclusion then I can only conclude that it is a matter of faith for you.
If all you are doing is claiming that something is so, without providing any evidence or rational for your claim, then it is based on faith.
,
I don't make definiton without any proof of experiment. To make time shorter, I've just post them in Youtube.
Here they are: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O7ldamidu78
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h5ielV1yp-0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KatovQdwC8Q
Yes, there are almost 50 definitions of intelligence. 50! too many, but no one had dared to test them in lab. I'm the only one who did it.
RAZD writes:
Here again we have a potential for misunderstanding what you mean here.
Science is perfectly adequate to explain how the natural world works, in fact this is precisely what science does. What science does not explain is why it works that way. We could ask the question "why is the sky blue?" and most people would respond that it is because the atoms in the atmosphere absorb blue frequency light from the sunlight and then re-emit it in random directions, however this is just how the blue light occurs in the atmosphere, not why it happens to be blue.
Gravity works, we have seen several theories on how it works, each increasingly accurate compared to previous theories, however there is no theory (or really any way to form one) for why we have gravity at all (although without it there would be no "we" to contemplate the issue\question).
If you are going to claim\assert\etc that "why" is explained by intelligence then that is a matter of faith ... unless you can show a way to test it and invalidate it.
Enjoy,
I did not say that the new Intelligent Design answer all the "WHYs" in science. The new answer the "HOWs" too. How come that the nylon-eatring bacteria could eat nylon? The answer: instinct. The better answer is: interrelation.
RAZD writes:
Getting a useable definition of intelligence is more of a problem for IDologists than for scientiests.
The issue there -- if you are going to claim a scientific definition -- is to be able to quantify intelligence and make objective empirical measurements of it, rather than just claiming that "{X} is intelligent because I say so."
My definition quantify intelligence. Detection of intelligence is the primary goal. Then, after that, quantification. Yes, the old ID that had collapsed in Donver
was wrong since it did not have any testable definition of ID. But this time, no, we had already.

Nothing makes sense in science except in the light of the new Intelligent Design .

This message is a reply to:
 Message 222 by RAZD, posted 05-25-2011 11:05 PM RAZD has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 305 by RAZD, posted 06-23-2011 7:43 AM intellen has not replied

  
intellen
Member (Idle past 4356 days)
Posts: 73
Joined: 05-23-2011


Message 247 of 396 (617411)
05-28-2011 5:05 PM
Reply to: Message 228 by New Cat's Eye
05-26-2011 10:13 AM


Re: Still a form of faith
Catholic Scientist writes:
You don't make science. U just make religion.
Huh?
Do you want to discuss this or not?
Or do you run from everyone who disagrees with you?
Yes. I don't run since I can show it. Will u run?

Nothing makes sense in science except in the light of the new Intelligent Design .

This message is a reply to:
 Message 228 by New Cat's Eye, posted 05-26-2011 10:13 AM New Cat's Eye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 282 by New Cat's Eye, posted 05-31-2011 9:54 AM intellen has not replied

  
intellen
Member (Idle past 4356 days)
Posts: 73
Joined: 05-23-2011


Message 248 of 396 (617412)
05-28-2011 5:10 PM
Reply to: Message 232 by RAZD
05-26-2011 7:36 PM


Re: Still a form of faith
RAZD writes:
hi again intellen,
The experiment about egg and tissue paper and how I detect intelligence.
No, this is how you define intelligence. Just like my example with the flipped coin - the actual result is rather arbitrary. Different eggs, different tissue, different results. Is 9 {intelligent} but 8 isn't when, in another test the egg has a "safe" landing at 8 tissues?
Enjoy.
I've just used one egg. 68 gram of egg. I've used different sheets of tissue, same brand. The result of course will vary as I put more tissue papers on them. 8 sheets is safe but since nature can mimic the product of intelligence, then, I think we can not say that it is intelligent process.

Nothing makes sense in science except in the light of the new Intelligent Design .

This message is a reply to:
 Message 232 by RAZD, posted 05-26-2011 7:36 PM RAZD has seen this message but not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22392
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 249 of 396 (617458)
05-29-2011 6:50 AM
Reply to: Message 245 by intellen
05-28-2011 4:49 PM


Re: A form of faith
Hi Intellen,
How did it come about that each of your quote boxes contains both an empty intellen quote box and my signature? I am not so vain that I sign my name beneath each paragraph. It's a bit redundant for a quote box to begin "Percy writes:" and conclude with "--Percy".
The empty quote boxes along with all the "--Percy" signatures makes your post unnecessarily long and not all fit on the screen, so took I advantage of my admin status and removed them.
Anyway, my reply is brief. I can see little sense in anything you say, certain no coherent chain of logic or argument, and you don't appear interested in composing comprehensible answers for those asking questions, so I'll just let this be. I understand you believe that Jesus Christ is the intelligent designer, and if at some point you say something I can make sense of I'll rejoin the discussion.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 245 by intellen, posted 05-28-2011 4:49 PM intellen has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 251 by intellen, posted 05-29-2011 9:06 AM Percy has seen this message but not replied

  
intellen
Member (Idle past 4356 days)
Posts: 73
Joined: 05-23-2011


Message 250 of 396 (617460)
05-29-2011 9:02 AM
Reply to: Message 244 by jar
05-28-2011 4:46 PM


Re: Still a form of faith
jar writes:
intellen writes:
jar writes:
I will as soon as you place Jesus out there so we can test Jesus just as we test for the galaxies.
Can you put up forces or gravity and bring them to lab? hahahahahaha...
Just admit that ToE has no explanatory power now.
Of course I can. Hell we did experiments involving forces and gravity in the fifth grade.
The TOE of course has explanatory power, in fact it is the ONLY model that explains the diversity of life we see today. To say otherwise is simply to exhibit extreme *** of the TOE.
Yo did not. You cannot even bring gravity into your pocket! Or test tube! ToE has no explanatory now since ToE has no scientific definition of intelligence and natural, and no boundary line, too.

Nothing makes sense in science except in the light of the new Intelligent Design .

This message is a reply to:
 Message 244 by jar, posted 05-28-2011 4:46 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 252 by jar, posted 05-29-2011 9:13 AM intellen has replied

  
intellen
Member (Idle past 4356 days)
Posts: 73
Joined: 05-23-2011


Message 251 of 396 (617462)
05-29-2011 9:06 AM
Reply to: Message 249 by Percy
05-29-2011 6:50 AM


Re: A form of faith
Percy writes:
Hi Intellen,
How did it come about that each of your quote boxes contains both an empty intellen quote box and my signature? I am not so vain that I sign my name beneath each paragraph. It's a bit redundant for a quote box to begin "Percy writes:" and conclude with "--Percy".
The empty quote boxes along with all the "--Percy" signatures makes your post unnecessarily long and not all fit on the screen, so took I advantage of my admin status and removed them.
Anyway, my reply is brief. I can see little sense in anything you say, certain no coherent chain of logic or argument, and you don't appear interested in composing comprehensible answers for those asking questions, so I'll just let this be. I understand you believe that Jesus Christ is the intelligent designer, and if at some point you say something I can make sense of I'll rejoin the discussion.
--Percy
Me too. I could not even see any logic from your arguments. Why you don't have a dividing line between natural to intelligent? Or supernatural? I thought that ToE ha 150 years of research. Why?
If natural processes are all therein, why can't you even recognize like, a PC, a purely natural processes? Is ToE a religion or science? If it is science, you could easily shown me my fault. But no, no one here could do that.

Nothing makes sense in science except in the light of the new Intelligent Design .

This message is a reply to:
 Message 249 by Percy, posted 05-29-2011 6:50 AM Percy has seen this message but not replied

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


Message 252 of 396 (617463)
05-29-2011 9:13 AM
Reply to: Message 250 by intellen
05-29-2011 9:02 AM


Re: Still a form of faith
intellen writes:
jar writes:
intellen writes:
jar writes:
I will as soon as you place Jesus out there so we can test Jesus just as we test for the galaxies.
Can you put up forces or gravity and bring them to lab? hahahahahaha...
Just admit that ToE has no explanatory power now.
Of course I can. Hell we did experiments involving forces and gravity in the fifth grade.
The TOE of course has explanatory power, in fact it is the ONLY model that explains the diversity of life we see today. To say otherwise is simply to exhibit extreme *** of the TOE.
Yo did not. You cannot even bring gravity into your pocket! Or test tube! ToE has no explanatory now since ToE has no scientific definition of intelligence and natural, and no boundary line, too.
HUH?
When I put coins in my pocket do they fall to the bottom?
When I pour a liquid into a test tube does it fall to the bottom?
Does intelligence offer a critter an advantage towards living long enough to reproduce?
Do you know what the Theory of Evolution really says?

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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 250 by intellen, posted 05-29-2011 9:02 AM intellen has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 253 by intellen, posted 05-29-2011 9:22 AM jar has replied

  
intellen
Member (Idle past 4356 days)
Posts: 73
Joined: 05-23-2011


Message 253 of 396 (617465)
05-29-2011 9:22 AM
Reply to: Message 252 by jar
05-29-2011 9:13 AM


Re: Still a form of faith
jar writes:
intellen writes:
jar writes:
intellen writes:
jar writes:
I will as soon as you place Jesus out there so we can test Jesus just as we test for the galaxies.
Can you put up forces or gravity and bring them to lab? hahahahahaha...
Just admit that ToE has no explanatory power now.
Of course I can. Hell we did experiments involving forces and gravity in the fifth grade.
The TOE of course has explanatory power, in fact it is the ONLY model that explains the diversity of life we see today. To say otherwise is simply to exhibit extreme *** of the TOE.
Yo did not. You cannot even bring gravity into your pocket! Or test tube! ToE has no explanatory now since ToE has no scientific definition of intelligence and natural, and no boundary line, too.
HUH?
When I put coins in my pocket do they fall to the bottom?
When I pour a liquid into a test tube does it fall to the bottom?
Does intelligence offer a critter an advantage towards living long enough to reproduce?
Do you know what the Theory of Evolution really says?
You can't put gravity in test tube but you can test it effect. You have a double-standard position. That is how a religious person works, not scientific.
You did not even get it. If u poke a rat, why it hides?

Nothing makes sense in science except in the light of the new Intelligent Design .

This message is a reply to:
 Message 252 by jar, posted 05-29-2011 9:13 AM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 254 by Straggler, posted 05-29-2011 9:29 AM intellen has replied
 Message 255 by jar, posted 05-29-2011 9:36 AM intellen has not replied

  
Straggler
Member
Posts: 10333
From: London England
Joined: 09-30-2006


Message 254 of 396 (617466)
05-29-2011 9:29 AM
Reply to: Message 253 by intellen
05-29-2011 9:22 AM


Re: Still a form of faith
How exactly do we test for the effects of an intelligent designer?
We know that natural processes can result in complexity don't we? So how exactly do you decide when to invoke intelligent design?
Is everything designed? Or do you think some things aren't intelligently designed?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 253 by intellen, posted 05-29-2011 9:22 AM intellen has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 260 by Bolder-dash, posted 05-29-2011 11:15 AM Straggler has replied
 Message 263 by intellen, posted 05-29-2011 11:31 AM Straggler has replied

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


Message 255 of 396 (617467)
05-29-2011 9:36 AM
Reply to: Message 253 by intellen
05-29-2011 9:22 AM


Re: Still a form of faith
intellen writes:
You can't put gravity in test tube but you can test it effect. You have a double-standard position. That is how a religious person works, not scientific.
You did not even get it. If u poke a rat, why it hides?
Of course we can test gravity.
We can actually test gravity, in a lab, in a pocket, in a test tube.
How do we test Jesus as we test gravity?
What are the tests we can perform on Jesus?
Edited by jar, : take out extraneous quotes.

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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 253 by intellen, posted 05-29-2011 9:22 AM intellen has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024