quote:
Mere complexity does not necessitate an intelligent designer. Complexity with purpose and function seems to indicate an intelligent designer. I have never witnessed nature [the natural universe] creating anything. I have witnessed intelligent individuals creating machines, works of art, structures, theories, literature.
Let's compare the purposes found in observed intelligent design and the purpose of complexity in biology.
This gets us back to Paley's Watchmaker analogy. If we found a watch sitting on the ground we would assume that there was a watchmaker. But what is the purpose of the watch? To tell time, something that does not benefit the watch in anyway. Also, the only way for a watch to come about is through human manufacture. We can also observe a watch being made.
None of this is true for biological organisms. What is the purpose of a flagella? To help the survival of the organism. What is the purpose of a clotting cascade? Survival of the organism. None of the IC systems listed by Behe have any outside use like the watch does. All systems have one goal, survival of the organism. Also, biological organisms do not need an outside manufacturing process to create them. Simple biological reproduction does just fine. There is no need for a watchmaker, just reproduction.
Comparing design created through human manufacturing can not be compared to design created through biological reproduction. The two processes create different purposes for design and design arises through different mechanisms. Also, in all cases of design we have a designer that is independently evidenced. If I see a pot shard do I assume that God put it there? No, I assume humans made it since I have independent evidence of humans manufacturing pot shards.
quote:
quote:
now we know that the constellations are just coincidental arrangements of stars. The apparent design of one group of stars, obscures the that fact that the vast majority of stars are arranged in a random pattern.
How do we know this? Is there a mathematical formula that proves this apparent supposition?
How do we tell the difference between a naturally occuring random pattern and a random pattern created by an intelligence? Do humans force the shape of a warrior onto the constellation Orion, or was Orion designed by an unknown intelligence to look like a warrior? Pleas tell me how we can differentiate between the two.
Or, just look at my avatar. The image is of gram stained bacteria. Is it a random pattern that looks like a man, or did someone have to move the bacteria into that arrangment? How can we tell the difference?
quote:
Of course our planet’s life systems are dependant not only on the above mentioned factors, but the presence of the moon to activate the tides and prevent the oceans from stagnating, and the unique quality of water as a solid becoming less dense than the liquid form, thus preserving life in bodies of water by forming an insulating blanket of ice on the surface, rather than the entire body freezing solid. Sounds perfectly reasonable to me that it's all chance.
We really don't know what is required for life to occur. We are only going on a sample of 1 (ie the earth). Could life arise in a stagnant ocean? Could life arise without an ice blanket? Maybe. We really don't know. Could life arise in liquid hydrocarbons, such as the conditions found on other planets? Possibly. We know too little about how life can form to form any conclusions.
This message has been edited by Loudmouth, 03-14-2005 03:53 PM