Discontinuing research about ID

So, you're intelligent designers ... did they design every living thing on this planet? Or are we just talking about humans? Did they just design the Human's DNA ... giving us intelligence as a "gift"?
Did they design Avian Flu ... and then hide it for eons in a (time release gel cap) time capsule?
Then comes the next question in the series ... why design such a world of life as this, and then disappear, never to check on your "masterpiece" again. Don't claim UFOs, either. I am pretty sure that the best of our progress is not found in some corn field in BFE, Kansas.

Fair questions. I would say that my beliefs on the origins of life were originally faith-based. Since then observations of genetic diversity have strengthened my beliefs, but they were originally faith based.I believe the same applies to anyone who chooses to prefer abiogenesis despite a lack of evidence, this is a faith based decision, in many instances coming from a cynical place of emotional hurt rather than a pure scientific decision. The science supporting abiogenesis is lacking. I believe God is the intelligent one. I don't put much value in our finite and biased minds to come to truth. The process of reaching some truths is a far higher process than one of intelligence, its a spiritual process.

I'm sorry I wasn't clear until now, I have been using more general terms. I believe in God, not just any alien intelligent designer. Yes I believed He designed all biological life as per the bible in Genesis chapter 1.Most life has retained its original DNA , but some have undergone some minor changes of reduced complexity (disabled genes). Other life forms have undergone dramatic changes atrributable to changes to allele frequencies, ie no major genetic changes, merely changes of the expresssion of certain allelle combinations in a given population.Since the fall of man (the sin of Adam and Eve) disease and mortality has become part of earth, it was not originally intended. God gave this earth to mankind, and instead of ruling this earth properly, mankind sinned, and evil now rules this earth through mankind. God will come soon to put this right again. In this sense planet earth is a "rogue planet", this situation will soon be corrected.

In other words, you don't have evidence or argument, just blind unquestioning belief. Got it.

Dude, god's creation myth creating life out of clay and stuff, IS ABIOGENESIS TOO.Nobody knows exactly how life began, so while we collect the evidence to prove abiogenesis without divine intervention, I'll grant you the argument from ignorance.Problem is we'll have to rewrite the bible and add something like "And God made the prokaryote to his own image"

quote:

---

God will come soon to put this right again. In this sense planet earth is a "rogue planet", this situation will soon be corrected

---

FML, you are the scary uber-deluded fundamentalist type.

So ... if Earth is a "rogue planet" ... do you believe there are other planets out there that were also designed with life?
Perhaps James and Sarah did NOT eat the fruit of knowledge and thus kept their planet pure and Eden like? No need for progress on that planet ... all of the people born there are worthy to be god's friends.
If these other planets birth enough friends for god, perhaps he won't need ANY of the ones from here ... and when ... He'll just flood the place again ... without giving anyone the chance to build an ark.ooooooo Intelligent supreme being design sure is scary!!!!

"Abiogenesis is the process by which a living organism arises naturally from non-living matter, as opposed to biogenesis, which is the creation of living organisms by other living organisms."Both abiogenesis and creation are in the realm of the supernatural. Life had to start somewhere. Sure attempts can be made to rationalise abiogenesis, but the science behind it does not exist.

There could be other planets out there designed with life. I believe there are, the bible is pretty silent on that. Whatever the motivation for your off topic rant, I hope it helps you. He sent his own son Jesus to reconcile us to Him. He allowed his own son to be mutilated and killed. Whoever relies on Jesus gets restored to that original condition, in a relationship with God.

Many of my points of view are based on evidence. What is your evidence for the origin of life?

This thread is for discussing Dubreuil's work on developing a theory of ID, which means the current discussion is off-topic. Dubreuil is not active at present, and while his presence isn't required to discuss his ideas, that isn't happening right now, so this thread should remain dormant for the time being.Anyone desiring to continue the current discussion should propose a new thread over at Proposed New Topics.

Welcome back mindspawn, You should bring your observations over to Evolution Requires Reduction in Genetic Diversity, it is what we are discussing over there. Faith could use some help and sounds like you might have some knowledge of population genetics.HBD

You're just underlining the fact that intelligent minds can only work with existing processes. ID, even if it could be substantiated, tells us nothing about the origin of the process itself. And if the process already existed, how can you establish a "need' for intelligence to manipulate it?

Curiously, my (deist) .belief is that the universe is\was designed to produce life, and earth just happens to be one of the lucky locations where that came to be.My evidence is listed in:
Panspermic Pre-Biotic Molecules - Life's Building Blocks (Part I)
and Self-Replicating Molecules - Life's Building Blocks (Part II)One of the questions for anyone looking into the origin of life is what is the definition of life (when do you know life has begun)? My definition is that life is something that can evolve, where the process of evolution (changes in the composition of hereditary traits, and changes to the frequency of their distributions within breeding populations from generation to generation, in an iterative feedback response to the different ecological challenges and opportunities for growth, development, survival and reproductive success in changing or different habitats) begins.EnjoyEdited by RAZD, : .

I received now the decision about the peer-review of four months. The paper was not accepted for publication. The editor also stated: "In fact, one of them was at great pains to describe for me how meticulously your pattern followed the scripts of the episodes of the shows in question". But the reviewers also agreed that an unconscious human origin is implausible. There were to many other influences for example intentionally created patterns by humans. These additional influences would also change the pattern, and no common pattern would emerge. The paper would be not ready to publish in this state and was not accepted for publication.
I agree with this, this is the reason why the paper supported ID before. But there is no journal that accepts a mathematical paper about ID for a peer-review, therefore I will send the paper to a few more journals and hope they will overlook this part about the explanation of the pattern. Sergii and me originally started with this to mathematical describe unconscious decision processes of humans. Unfortunately it turned out to support ID, which makes it impossible to find a journal to review it without changes. I'm not interested to support an unpopular topic among academicians because I'm more interested in my personal advancement. Therefore it is not a big loss for me to see this paper not published, I never was an ID proponent before anyway. If you don't hear from me again after three years, then I probably gave up to sent it to other journals for a peer-review with this additional mistake to get it peer-reviewed. If someone is interested about it, then the paper is available in [Msg=1]. There was already a preprint from 18 months ago. It contained the same pattern, but only applied to one series. It was shown for the same pattern one year later, how it applied to three more series. There could be added every year three more series, which all would fit with the same pattern. But no one will review it, therefore the work about this paper was discontinued a half year ago. This was also explained in the paper with common and modern mathematics, but the timestamps at viXra also show that the pattern was created first over 18 months ago and was afterwards shown fitting again with three other data sources one year later. I absolutely agree with you. The difference among the convictions is obvious. The persons who want to research freely comment under their real names and are polite. The persons who are absolutely against ID comment under different names and are insulting as hell. How could I take this people serious?
If you have finished your work about your biological theory, then you should send it to BIO-Complexity for a review, no other journal will review a paper about ID. But you have to register there and prove your academic affiliation before you can submit a paper. For us this wasn't a problem, we are both academically affiliated. If you are not affiliated, then you should show them your simulation of life, maybe they will make an exception for you.