Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 65 (9077 total)
99 online now:
AZPaul3, Tanypteryx (2 members, 97 visitors)
Newest Member: Contrarian
Post Volume: Total: 893,958 Year: 5,070/6,534 Month: 490/794 Week: 116/89 Day: 0/14 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Is there a legitimate argument for design?
Pressie
Member
Posts: 2102
From: Pretoria, SA
Joined: 06-18-2010


Message 52 of 638 (720063)
02-20-2014 1:22 AM
Reply to: Message 41 by dadman
02-19-2014 11:02 PM


Life
Duplicate post

Edited by Pressie, : Duplicate post


This message is a reply to:
 Message 41 by dadman, posted 02-19-2014 11:02 PM dadman has taken no action

  
Pressie
Member
Posts: 2102
From: Pretoria, SA
Joined: 06-18-2010


(1)
Message 53 of 638 (720064)
02-20-2014 1:25 AM
Reply to: Message 38 by dadman
02-19-2014 9:17 PM


life
Nope. No such thing. Nothing about three elements.

Life

quote:
Definition

noun, plural: lives

(1) A distinctive characteristic of a living organism from dead organism or non-living thing, as specifically distinguished by the capacity to grow, metabolize, respond (to stimuli), adapt, and reproduce

(2) The biota of a particular region

Supplement

There is no consensus regarding the answer to the question as to when does life begin. Does it begin at the time of fertilization or the time before or after that? The origin of life is also contestable. Despite of the irresolute answer for questions about life, the basic characteristics of a living thing are as follows:

•with an organized structure performing a specific function
•with an ability to sustain existence, e.g. by nourishment
•with an ability to respond to stimuli or to its environment
•capable of adapting
•with an ability to germinate or reproduce

Word origin: Old English lîf (life, body)


Please try to use standard language and meanings of words on this forum. That's the only way we will be able to effectively communicate.

Making up meanings for what you want words to mean won't help anyone.

Edited by Pressie, : Added last sentences


This message is a reply to:
 Message 38 by dadman, posted 02-19-2014 9:17 PM dadman has taken no action

  
Pressie
Member
Posts: 2102
From: Pretoria, SA
Joined: 06-18-2010


(1)
Message 54 of 638 (720067)
02-20-2014 2:23 AM
Reply to: Message 46 by dadman
02-19-2014 11:24 PM


Re: For the last time
quote:
I'm new here as you can see ..... do I take it that you have no answer for the third element ?? .. at this point I'm looking for a yes or no . . .
this is a train of thought / logic . . . it's important not to derail or try to jump too far ahead

Actually, you're the one jumping ahead. We're still looking at your first statement on this thread.

It was:

quote:
well .. before you give up .. you might think about (aside from the evolution debate) how it is now scientifically proven that all life is triune and derives from a source of intelligence . . . I would call this going from point A to B

You made a statement. That's it.

We're still trying to get you to provide evidence for that statement. You're jumping the gun.

Who, when, where did anyone got it 'scientifically proven'? Provide references to those studies.

To me you sound so much like the washing powder adverts we see on tv everyday . They all claim that their products are 'scientifically proven' to wash 'the cleanest'. Complete with some random guy in a white coat; and with thick Harry Potter glasses covering their eyes; putting washing powder into some machine.

Yet, they never produce those studies when asked for them...

So, return to your first claim. Provide reliable sources so that we can investigate them.

You are jumping the gun. Without those studies you're just doing another Gish Gallop.

Edited by Pressie, : Spelling, amongst others

Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 46 by dadman, posted 02-19-2014 11:24 PM dadman has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 55 by dadman, posted 02-20-2014 10:13 AM Pressie has replied
 Message 56 by dadman, posted 02-20-2014 6:27 PM Pressie has replied

  
Pressie
Member
Posts: 2102
From: Pretoria, SA
Joined: 06-18-2010


Message 61 of 638 (720211)
02-20-2014 10:41 PM
Reply to: Message 55 by dadman
02-20-2014 10:13 AM


Re: For the last time
Not a good way to start off by insulting people.

All I asked for is:

1. We use words with their accepted meanings. This enables effective communication. Without that you might as well try to communicate with me in Fanagalo. A language both you and I can neither speak, nor understand.
2. Provide references and evidence for your wild claims. We are in the science forums here, after all.

To me it seems as if you're just here for preaching purposes. Not debate.

Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 55 by dadman, posted 02-20-2014 10:13 AM dadman has taken no action

  
Pressie
Member
Posts: 2102
From: Pretoria, SA
Joined: 06-18-2010


Message 62 of 638 (720213)
02-20-2014 10:53 PM
Reply to: Message 56 by dadman
02-20-2014 6:27 PM


Re: For the last time
You're jumping the gun, again.

First provide references for your first claim you made on this thread.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 56 by dadman, posted 02-20-2014 6:27 PM dadman has taken no action

  
Pressie
Member
Posts: 2102
From: Pretoria, SA
Joined: 06-18-2010


Message 63 of 638 (720214)
02-20-2014 10:55 PM
Reply to: Message 60 by dadman
02-20-2014 7:35 PM


Re: shall we continue ???
quote:
I do believe ...

Luckily your beliefs don't count for anything on science forums.

Those references for your wild claims, please.

Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 60 by dadman, posted 02-20-2014 7:35 PM dadman has taken no action

  
Pressie
Member
Posts: 2102
From: Pretoria, SA
Joined: 06-18-2010


Message 130 of 638 (724439)
04-17-2014 7:54 AM
Reply to: Message 128 by Ed67
04-17-2014 2:38 AM


Ed67 writes:

Sorry, I assumed the argument for the specified, precision code that is found in the DNA/RNA of even the simplest forms of life was already covered.

I followed the arguments on this thread and the guys who presented the arguments against 'specified, precision code' presented much more compelling evidence than those presented by the Creationist guys. At least the scientists presented peer-reviewed, scientific evidence. The anti-science brigade only presented arguments from incredubility and essays from religious sources.

Ed67 writes:

How can you guys honestly account for that happening in a completely non-intelligent way? There's more software packed into the nucleus of a cell than, well, I don't know. But lots.

Really? Please present the data. I've seen none from your side.

Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 128 by Ed67, posted 04-17-2014 2:38 AM Ed67 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 135 by Ed67, posted 04-18-2014 8:37 AM Pressie has replied

  
Pressie
Member
Posts: 2102
From: Pretoria, SA
Joined: 06-18-2010


(2)
Message 159 of 638 (724888)
04-22-2014 5:29 AM
Reply to: Message 135 by Ed67
04-18-2014 8:37 AM


Ed67 writes:

"Please present the data."
I thought, at this stage of the game, that you would have granted this as common knowledge.

Err, actually, the occurrence DNA is common knowledge. Everything else about DNA is not common knowledge. The guys who know much about it are the geneticists who actually study DNA. What is common knowledge is that creationists make up their own meanings of words and then pretend that it's 'scientific'.

Ed67 writes:

How many base-pair combinations are there in all the DNA in one single cell?

Well, according to the specialists, it depends on the species.

Ed67 writes:

Well, how long is the 'character string' (the DNA in a nucleus straightened out and put in a line)? Surely someone on this thread remembers about how long scientists say the DNA molecule is...


Well, according to the specialists, it depends on the species.

Ed67 writes:

So, how many digital 'signals' can be sent in the DNA molecules of a cell?


Digital signals from DNA? This doesn't make any sense.
Ed67 writes:

Well, we'd have to know how many signals can be stored per unit length. But let me give you a clue; they're SMALLER than microscopic.

This doesn't make any sense. How do you measure the amount of signals stored per unit lenght? What units do you use to measure those?

Ed67 writes:

So, there's the 'data' that supports my claim that there is "LOTS" of specified information stored in the DNA molecules.

This sounds like an essay. How do you meaure the amount of 'specified information'?

Ed67 writes:

As for your comment:
"At least the scientists presented peer-reviewed, scientific evidence.", ok I'm too lazy to read through this thread, but we'll see about that.

Well, you should start reading peer-reviewed biological journals. And the responses.

Ed67 writes:

This is a cool forum, guys, I'm glad I found it. But I see it's going to take a lot more work than I'm used to so bear with me...btw, what's with the drama queen? lol.

So far it seems as if you're the only drama queen around on this thread.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 135 by Ed67, posted 04-18-2014 8:37 AM Ed67 has taken no action

  
Pressie
Member
Posts: 2102
From: Pretoria, SA
Joined: 06-18-2010


Message 165 of 638 (724946)
04-23-2014 6:07 AM
Reply to: Message 164 by Ed67
04-22-2014 11:05 PM


Re: DNA evolves
Ed67 writes:

What I mean is that DNA contains detailed instructions on how to REPLICATE,..

Exactly like salt crystals can do. Just get a bit of rain water, dissolve a bit of the salt crystal, and depending on the temperature and pressure, they can replicate. All by themselves.

Ed67 writes:

...or 're-create' an organism.

Or salt crystals.

Ed67 writes:

These instructions must have originally come from some cause...


Causes. Chemistry.

Ed67 writes:

...they could have come from an intelligent source

Well, if you think that all those Na and Cl ions need something intelligent to form salt crystals, you don't know much about chemistry.

Ed67 writes:

...as intelligence is known to be sufficient cause for the kind of instructions contained in the 'recipe' of DNA.

Really? Any evidence for that 'intelligence'?

DNA is chemistry.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 164 by Ed67, posted 04-22-2014 11:05 PM Ed67 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 166 by Ed67, posted 04-23-2014 8:42 AM Pressie has taken no action

  
Pressie
Member
Posts: 2102
From: Pretoria, SA
Joined: 06-18-2010


(1)
Message 345 of 638 (734342)
07-28-2014 8:15 AM
Reply to: Message 336 by mram10
07-26-2014 5:43 PM


mram10 writes:

Sexual v asexual reproduction shows design more-so than evolution.

How so? Some unicellar organisms have both sexual and asexual reproduction. Doesn't show any design. They just show what's more advantageous to the survival and reproduction of those organisms in the environment they live in.

Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.

Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 336 by mram10, posted 07-26-2014 5:43 PM mram10 has taken no action

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.1
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2022