Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 50 (9179 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: Jorge Parker
Post Volume: Total: 918,204 Year: 5,461/9,624 Month: 486/323 Week: 126/204 Day: 0/26 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Evolving the Musculoskeletal System
cavediver
Member (Idle past 3755 days)
Posts: 4129
From: UK
Joined: 06-16-2005


Message 227 of 527 (579590)
09-05-2010 5:17 AM
Reply to: Message 224 by Meldinoor
09-05-2010 12:24 AM


Percy writes:
Life cannot change in sudden large steps because while reproduction is not imperfect, it is certainly mostly perfect.
Bolder-Dash writes:
If sometimes life changes in relatively sudden, larger steps, does that disprove the ToE?
Meldinoor writes:
Nope
And we wonder why creationists have a hard time believing us scientists

This message is a reply to:
 Message 224 by Meldinoor, posted 09-05-2010 12:24 AM Meldinoor has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 228 by Meldinoor, posted 09-05-2010 5:31 AM cavediver has not replied

  
cavediver
Member (Idle past 3755 days)
Posts: 4129
From: UK
Joined: 06-16-2005


Message 231 of 527 (579603)
09-05-2010 7:05 AM
Reply to: Message 229 by Percy
09-05-2010 6:46 AM


Re: Seeking to understand basis for incredulity
If a millipede of 20 segments gave birth to a millipede with 22 segments, assuming a genetic basis, then that's a fairly large step with new structures popping into existence, but it's still evolution because they're just copies. The gene that said "create 20 segments" mutated into a gene that said "create 22 segments."
If a horse were born with wings, and we looked at the underlying genetics and found genes for wings where neither parent had any such thing, that would pretty much prove intelligent design. It wouldn't disprove what we already know about evolution, but quite obviously there's another process we were unaware of, and we would have to begin figuring what events of natural history had been wrongly attributed to evolution.
Almost word-for-word and example-for-example what I was trying to type this morning, only mine was coming out as gibberish so I abandonded it Nicely put...

This message is a reply to:
 Message 229 by Percy, posted 09-05-2010 6:46 AM Percy has seen this message but not replied

  
cavediver
Member (Idle past 3755 days)
Posts: 4129
From: UK
Joined: 06-16-2005


Message 453 of 527 (599646)
01-09-2011 4:00 PM
Reply to: Message 452 by ICdesign
01-09-2011 3:28 PM


Having an antenna design is only a small part of the equation.
Ah, but it is the central, key, most impotant part of "the equation" that blows apart your entire belief system in design
Irrespective of the computer involved, the materials used to construct the system, the engineers who constructed the systems, the intelligence involved in determining what the designs were useful for, the fact that the antennas did not construct themselves...
... nowhere in all of this is found the information that carries the design of the antenna.
Where is the source of this information???
It is exactly the same source as the entirety of evolution. It is the environment.
If you wish to preserve your belief in the necessaity of a designer, you would do well to run away at this point and try to forget the above, as it is the death blow to Intelligent Design.
Enjoy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 452 by ICdesign, posted 01-09-2011 3:28 PM ICdesign has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 454 by ICdesign, posted 01-09-2011 4:14 PM cavediver has replied

  
cavediver
Member (Idle past 3755 days)
Posts: 4129
From: UK
Joined: 06-16-2005


Message 458 of 527 (599658)
01-09-2011 4:38 PM
Reply to: Message 454 by ICdesign
01-09-2011 4:14 PM


The source is a computer program designed by an intelligent mind.
Wrong - the design of the antenna does not exist in the computer programme.
Would the antenna design exist if you took intelligent man out of the equation? Yes or no?
Irrelevant - I have already addressed this in my previous post - from where does the antenna design originate?
Is information alone enough to create a material system? yes or no?
Irrelevant - I have already addressed this in my previous post - from where does the antenna design originate?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 454 by ICdesign, posted 01-09-2011 4:14 PM ICdesign has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 462 by ICdesign, posted 01-09-2011 5:44 PM cavediver has replied

  
cavediver
Member (Idle past 3755 days)
Posts: 4129
From: UK
Joined: 06-16-2005


Message 466 of 527 (599673)
01-09-2011 5:56 PM
Reply to: Message 462 by ICdesign
01-09-2011 5:44 PM


The antenna was generated by a computer program.
Wrong - the design for the antenna was not in the computer programme.
The design of the antenna evolved via random changes supplied by the computer programme coupled with selection that was defined by the environment.
Would the antenna exist if intelligence was taken out of the equation?
We're not interested in the antenna but ion the design of the antenna. From where did the design originate????
(hint, I wrote the answer above)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 462 by ICdesign, posted 01-09-2011 5:44 PM ICdesign has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 467 by ICdesign, posted 01-09-2011 6:02 PM cavediver 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