The Evolution will not be televised
Out of context: Reply #72
- Started
- Last post
- 81 Responses
- discipler0
mikotondria,
Let me try to address everything in your last post... Firstly, yes you are essentially correct about my position on irreducible complexity: there are many biological organs which function like "machines”: they work only if all their parts are present. If one part is removed, the entire machine “breaks down” and will not function. Evolution (natural processes + random mutation) cannot build irreducibly complex structures because evolution requires that biological structures arise in small steps, each of which allows for the structure to perform some function. For irreducibly complex organs, the organ is only functional if all parts are present. Now, here's the deal breaker for the dated-naturalist view: Intermediate stages of evolution in these machines are impossible because they would not function. Period. So, it's not a question of enough time - billions of years does not help. So, your suggestion that enough time and enough failures will ultimately render these machines, is unscientific. Furthermore, I disagree that this is fundamentally a philosophical issue. It's about observing this complexity and making a logical conclusion that selective natural processes could not, I repeat, could not produce said complexity. It would be one thing if these machines could function with one or more of their components removed, but they cannot. Keep in mind that random mutations do not add information... information is always lost. And even if we were to assume that beneficial mutations occured, they could not structurally develop into an irreducibly complex machine (because of my above explanation).
It is therefore innacurate to posit that the "unseen hand" of I.D. is to be likened to things like gravity and such. The fact that science has proven that chemical attractions mixed with electricity cannot produce life, let alone irreducibly complex machines, is no secret in the mainstream scientific community. There simply is no materialistic explanation for this so what you end up with are exotic faith-based theories by scientists which present a sort of evolution-of-the-gaps. An "unseen hand" of natural processes, somehow. Your "unseen forces", to put it as you did. I maintain that science has no sufficient evidence that such a long trial and error sequence even occurred.
"Natural selective processes arranged us..." - do you realize how lacking in evidence that statement is? How would you explain the "autograph" in every DNA and it's code-like sequence? This is information my friend and some nebulous naturalistic "something" cannot generate information. Again, information is lost in physical mutations. What I'm demonstrating is that when you combine irreducible complexity, with things like the Cambrian Explosion, human consciousness, the precision fine-tuning of our planet and position in the solar system, the embarrasment of the fossil record, you have no choice but to arrive at the conclusion that an intelligent designer is responsible for it all. This of course does not negate microevolutionary adaptation due to environment, etc... It simply suggests that ultimately, a cognizant designer would have to be the cause.
Stardust? In a sense, sure. Molecular Homology would demonstrate that, just as a human engineer would re-use the same or similar materials, so does the engineer of the universe in his "machines". So, I would agree that man is, in a sense, "one" with the creation. Fundamentally, all matter is broken down to the same material, even on the quantum level. Again, demonstrating the "stuff" of the designer. Yet at the same time, our consciousness also demonstrates that we are more than just the collection of biological material. Our longings, our emotions, our first-person perspective... hardly the bi-product of simply brain activity.
At the end of the day, something does not come from nothing. Wherever there is design, there must be a designer. And all the time and natural processes acting on random mutation, in the world would not and could not produce what science observes. I believe I have found the light. :)