Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 84 (8914 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 06-18-2019 12:34 AM
25 online now:
DrJones*, PaulK, Pressie, PsychMJC, Tanypteryx (5 members, 20 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: 4petdinos
Post Volume:
Total: 853,982 Year: 9,018/19,786 Month: 1,440/2,119 Week: 200/576 Day: 3/98 Hour: 3/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
RewPrev1
...
16171819
20
21Next
Author Topic:   Can random mutations cause an increase in information in the genome?
AdminOmni
Inactive Member


Message 286 of 310 (288209)
02-18-2006 7:20 PM
Reply to: Message 269 by randman
02-17-2006 4:45 PM


Re: banning the effective creationist?
No one was banned, Rand.

If you have comments to make about that brief suspension, take it to the appropriate thread.


Comments on moderation procedures (or wish to respond to admin messages)? - Go to:
  • General discussion of moderation procedures

  • Thread Reopen Requests

  • Considerations of topic promotions from the "Proposed New Topics" forum
  • New Members: to get an understanding of what makes great posts, check out:

  • "Post of the Month Forum"

  • "Columnist's Corner" Forum
  • See also Forum Guidelines, Style Guides for EvC, and Assistance w/ Forum Formatting

    Trust me.


    This message is a reply to:
     Message 269 by randman, posted 02-17-2006 4:45 PM randman has not yet responded

    randman 
    Suspended Member (Idle past 3063 days)
    Posts: 6367
    Joined: 05-26-2005


    Message 287 of 310 (288210)
    02-18-2006 7:27 PM
    Reply to: Message 283 by fallacycop
    02-18-2006 10:11 AM


    Re: Definition of terms does matter
    since the information here (in the IDers sense) is actually being created during the natural selection phase of the evolutionary process, and that phase of the process is not random at all.

    I think this is clearly the rational evo response, not quibling over trying to define precisely the term. The idea would be that "information" is really the product of the relationships between things, and that since it really is not a random process, but one governed by rules, the needed changes in relationship arise from the interaction of the environment, chemicals, and those rules.

    I think that could be an effective argument against the ID position on this, although I would like to hear what more knowledgeable IDers have to say.

    However, this really subtly moves evolutionary theory more into the ID camp, or theistic evo camp, as it shows that whatever formed the rules indirectly at the least plays a determining role in the formation and development of life and the information for that life on earth.


    This message is a reply to:
     Message 283 by fallacycop, posted 02-18-2006 10:11 AM fallacycop has not yet responded

    Replies to this message:
     Message 288 by Belfry, posted 02-18-2006 7:39 PM randman has responded

    Belfry
    Member (Idle past 3250 days)
    Posts: 177
    From: Ocala, FL
    Joined: 11-05-2005


    Message 288 of 310 (288213)
    02-18-2006 7:39 PM
    Reply to: Message 287 by randman
    02-18-2006 7:27 PM


    Re: Definition of terms does matter
    randman writes:

    However, this really subtly moves evolutionary theory more into the ID camp, or theistic evo camp, as it shows that whatever formed the rules indirectly at the least plays a determining role in the formation and development of life and the information for that life on earth.


    Precisely! And this is exactly why I still hold that theistic evolution is a reasonable position for those who wish to reconcile their religious devotion with the scientific evidence.

    ...even though I am not such a person.


    This message is a reply to:
     Message 287 by randman, posted 02-18-2006 7:27 PM randman has responded

    Replies to this message:
     Message 289 by randman, posted 02-18-2006 7:45 PM Belfry has not yet responded
     Message 290 by robinrohan, posted 02-18-2006 7:52 PM Belfry has responded

    randman 
    Suspended Member (Idle past 3063 days)
    Posts: 6367
    Joined: 05-26-2005


    Message 289 of 310 (288215)
    02-18-2006 7:45 PM
    Reply to: Message 288 by Belfry
    02-18-2006 7:39 PM


    Re: Definition of terms does matter
    But it's not the whole argument and it involves seriously downplaying the significance of randomness in evolutionary theory, so much so it could rightly be called a form of ID....

    Ironically, I feel that if one believes in evolution, that alone ought to make the thinking person believe in God since it is such an improbable theory and so guided by the inherent design and order in the universe.


    This message is a reply to:
     Message 288 by Belfry, posted 02-18-2006 7:39 PM Belfry has not yet responded

    Replies to this message:
     Message 297 by FliesOnly, posted 02-20-2006 11:31 AM randman has responded

    robinrohan
    Inactive Member


    Message 290 of 310 (288218)
    02-18-2006 7:52 PM
    Reply to: Message 288 by Belfry
    02-18-2006 7:39 PM


    Re: Definition of terms does matter
    And this is exactly why I still hold that theistic evolution is a reasonable position for those who wish to reconcile their religious devotion with the scientific evidence.

    There's nothing at all reasonable about theistic evolution--positing, as it does, a cruel god.


    This message is a reply to:
     Message 288 by Belfry, posted 02-18-2006 7:39 PM Belfry has responded

    Replies to this message:
     Message 291 by crashfrog, posted 02-19-2006 12:58 AM robinrohan has not yet responded
     Message 292 by Belfry, posted 02-19-2006 6:24 AM robinrohan has not yet responded

    crashfrog
    Inactive Member


    Message 291 of 310 (288281)
    02-19-2006 12:58 AM
    Reply to: Message 290 by robinrohan
    02-18-2006 7:52 PM


    Re: Definition of terms does matter
    There's nothing at all reasonable about theistic evolution--positing, as it does, a cruel god.

    Or an indifferent one, or a weak one. There would be nothing cruel about a god who created via evolution because he had no power to create otherwise.

    Plus - there's nothing inherently unreasonable about a cruel god. It's just not particularly pleasant a concept, is all. Plenty of religions have cruel gods, though.


    This message is a reply to:
     Message 290 by robinrohan, posted 02-18-2006 7:52 PM robinrohan has not yet responded

    Belfry
    Member (Idle past 3250 days)
    Posts: 177
    From: Ocala, FL
    Joined: 11-05-2005


    Message 292 of 310 (288308)
    02-19-2006 6:24 AM
    Reply to: Message 290 by robinrohan
    02-18-2006 7:52 PM


    Re: Definition of terms does matter
    robinrohan writes:

    There's nothing at all reasonable about theistic evolution--positing, as it does, a cruel god.


    There is much in Scripture that suggests the Abrahamic God is certainly capable of cruelty and indifference on earth. However, it's not a topic for the Science forums.
    This message is a reply to:
     Message 290 by robinrohan, posted 02-18-2006 7:52 PM robinrohan has not yet responded

    Replies to this message:
     Message 293 by Faith, posted 02-19-2006 11:04 AM Belfry has not yet responded

    Faith
    Member
    Posts: 31649
    From: Nevada, USA
    Joined: 10-06-2001
    Member Rating: 1.1


    Message 293 of 310 (288328)
    02-19-2006 11:04 AM
    Reply to: Message 292 by Belfry
    02-19-2006 6:24 AM


    Re: Definition of terms does matter
    Those who believe in the Abrahamic God do not regard him as cruel. Only his enemies do. In any case, evolution is incompatible with belief in Him, whereas it is not incompatible with the God of theistic evolution. The God of theistic evolution presides over a bloody nature, because that is what evolution is all about, death and suffering. The God of the Bible made a perfect world that became corrupted because of human sin which introduced death.
    This message is a reply to:
     Message 292 by Belfry, posted 02-19-2006 6:24 AM Belfry has not yet responded

    Replies to this message:
     Message 294 by ramoss, posted 02-19-2006 11:09 AM Faith has responded

      
    ramoss
    Member
    Posts: 3110
    Joined: 08-11-2004
    Member Rating: 8.2


    Message 294 of 310 (288329)
    02-19-2006 11:09 AM
    Reply to: Message 293 by Faith
    02-19-2006 11:04 AM


    Re: Definition of terms does matter
    On the contrary, if you understood the hebrew in Genesis, evolution is quite compatable with it. But that is off topic in this thread.
    This message is a reply to:
     Message 293 by Faith, posted 02-19-2006 11:04 AM Faith has responded

    Replies to this message:
     Message 296 by Faith, posted 02-20-2006 11:24 AM ramoss has not yet responded

    Garrett
    Member (Idle past 4330 days)
    Posts: 111
    From: Dallas, TX
    Joined: 02-10-2006


    Message 295 of 310 (288594)
    02-20-2006 10:12 AM
    Reply to: Message 283 by fallacycop
    02-18-2006 10:11 AM


    Re: Definition of terms does matter
    I would point out that in your example an outside intelligence was needed to determine which parts were excess and which were meaningful. It seems to support the fact that random changes don't bring new meaning. If they did, nobody would be too impressed with that mountain in South Dakota. Just give it enough time and chance will remove what isn't a part of a president.
    This message is a reply to:
     Message 283 by fallacycop, posted 02-18-2006 10:11 AM fallacycop has not yet responded

    Faith
    Member
    Posts: 31649
    From: Nevada, USA
    Joined: 10-06-2001
    Member Rating: 1.1


    Message 296 of 310 (288642)
    02-20-2006 11:24 AM
    Reply to: Message 294 by ramoss
    02-19-2006 11:09 AM


    Re: Definition of terms does matter
    On the contrary, if you understood the hebrew in Genesis, evolution is quite compatable with it.

    Many Christian pastors read Hebrew, and preach the YEC interpretation of Genesis.

    This message has been edited by Faith, 02-20-2006 11:25 AM


    This message is a reply to:
     Message 294 by ramoss, posted 02-19-2006 11:09 AM ramoss has not yet responded

      
    FliesOnly
    Member (Idle past 2309 days)
    Posts: 797
    From: Michigan
    Joined: 12-01-2003


    Message 297 of 310 (288647)
    02-20-2006 11:31 AM
    Reply to: Message 289 by randman
    02-18-2006 7:45 PM


    Re: Definition of terms does matter
    randman writes:

    Ironically, I feel that if one believes in evolution, that alone ought to make the thinking person believe in God since it is such an improbable theory and so guided by the inherent design and order in the universe.

    You keep saying this kind of stuff but have yet to support any of it. Where is the evidence to support design? Seriously randman, this thread is almost at its end and I have yet to read anything from IDers that can show design. Give me an example of the design. Something that cannot be expained by mutation and natural selection...something...anything.

    If mutations are not random (unpredictabel) but instead are guided...the guide must be blind and deaf, because he (she) certainly did seem to take a rather strange path to many of the features we currently see. You know...more like random wandering.


    This message is a reply to:
     Message 289 by randman, posted 02-18-2006 7:45 PM randman has responded

    Replies to this message:
     Message 298 by randman, posted 02-20-2006 11:45 AM FliesOnly has responded

    randman 
    Suspended Member (Idle past 3063 days)
    Posts: 6367
    Joined: 05-26-2005


    Message 298 of 310 (288657)
    02-20-2006 11:45 AM
    Reply to: Message 297 by FliesOnly
    02-20-2006 11:31 AM


    Re: Definition of terms does matter
    If evolution is true, then it shows design. The reason is that evolution, if true, is the product of the properties and rules and character of the physical laws and make-up of the universe which reflect order, intelligence, design. Everything we know suggests there is an Intelligent Cause to the origin of the universe, even to the point that what many considered an ancient myth "let there be light" has been confirmed by science (the Big Bang).

    So assuming universal common descent was true, it would be very strong evidence for Intelligent Design. What is absurd is to posit the idea that there is no Intelligent Cause, and thus ID is wrong, at any point in the universe. Furthermore, there is considerable evidence that consciousness is intertwined with teh fabric of space-time, and as such, that this Intelligent Cause is interactive at all points in space-time.


    This message is a reply to:
     Message 297 by FliesOnly, posted 02-20-2006 11:31 AM FliesOnly has responded

    Replies to this message:
     Message 299 by FliesOnly, posted 02-20-2006 1:30 PM randman has responded

    FliesOnly
    Member (Idle past 2309 days)
    Posts: 797
    From: Michigan
    Joined: 12-01-2003


    Message 299 of 310 (288690)
    02-20-2006 1:30 PM
    Reply to: Message 298 by randman
    02-20-2006 11:45 AM


    Re: Definition of terms does matter
    randman writes:

    If evolution is true, then it shows design.

    Again, randman, simply saying this does not make it so. Evidence, randman, evidence.

    randman writes:

    The reason is that evolution, if true, is the product of the properties and rules and character of the physical laws and make-up of the universe which reflect order, intelligence, design.

    What does "reflect order, intelligence, design" even mean.

    randman writes:

    Everything we know suggests there is an Intelligent Cause to the origin of the universe, even to the point that what many considered an ancient myth "let there be light" has been confirmed by science (the Big Bang).

    This is not true. There is nothing that suggests an intelligent designer...other than you repeatedly saying there is. In science we use evidence...not "suggestions" and "reflections".

    randman writes:

    So assuming universal common descent was true, it would be very strong evidence for Intelligent Design.

    Nonsense...no such evidence exits. You see to have a real problem supplying this evidence that you continually speak of. Come on randman, step up to the plate and provide actual evidence. Something that can be tested, something that has been experimentally determined...something that is repeatable.

    randman writes:

    , there is considerable evidence that consciousness is intertwined with teh fabric of space-time, and as such, that this Intelligent Cause is interactive at all points in space-time.

    WTF are you talking about? This is a complete dodge and you know it.
    This message is a reply to:
     Message 298 by randman, posted 02-20-2006 11:45 AM randman has responded

    Replies to this message:
     Message 300 by randman, posted 02-20-2006 2:24 PM FliesOnly has responded

    randman 
    Suspended Member (Idle past 3063 days)
    Posts: 6367
    Joined: 05-26-2005


    Message 300 of 310 (288716)
    02-20-2006 2:24 PM
    Reply to: Message 299 by FliesOnly
    02-20-2006 1:30 PM


    Re: Definition of terms does matter
    Again, randman, simply saying this does not make it so. Evidence, randman, evidence.

    Flies, the evidence is that evolutionary processes obey and conform to physical and chemical laws, rules, propabable patterns, etc,...

    The physical structure of the universe, according to you guys (not me), gives rise to the first life form and evolution of life forms. Since it is logical to infer an Intelligent Cause ordering and creating the physical structure of the universe (it had a beginning for example), then that means ToE should rightly be considered ID since it is indirectly at a minimum caused by an Intelligent Cause.

    To assert that life can best be understood as not having been caused by an Intelligent Cause, as many evos claim, is not supported by science at all.

    What does "reflect order, intelligence, design" even mean.

    There are physical principles in the universe. That is order, period. The universe obeys principles. There is not total randomness where no principles exist.

    The Big Bang is evidence the universe has a beginning. Science has always shown us there is cause and effect. So we see the effect, and we know forensically by direct observations of the universe that this effect contains well-ordered principles that give rise to physical form; hence life can best be understood, even under evo models, as arising through the action of an Intelligent Cause.


    This message is a reply to:
     Message 299 by FliesOnly, posted 02-20-2006 1:30 PM FliesOnly has responded

    Replies to this message:
     Message 301 by FliesOnly, posted 02-20-2006 3:39 PM randman has responded

    RewPrev1
    ...
    16171819
    20
    21Next
    Newer Topic | Older Topic
    Jump to:


    Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

    ™ Version 4.0 Beta
    Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019