intelligent design
- Started
- Last post
- 383 Responses
- deep_throat0
check this wikipedia article for a clearer example of what i'm talking about.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Con…
look how life springs!
- ********0
So, is this thread evolving in complexity? Does this thread evolve in complexity by a designer? (the QBN maybe?). As more people join the thread and there are more connections and it gets more complex, what does that tell us?
Or it can't evolve and only decay (which some people will certainly argue - in quality iof not quantity...)
* snark over
- megatron51500
This video will explain all:
- ********0
Great book, by the way:
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obido…
Discipler, I suggest you order it and read it, and then come back and we can continue this discussion.
- ribit0
Discipler:"The issue we are discussing is how does nothingness produce something? How does no matter, produce matter?"
I thought we were discussing evolution... not 'how does no matter, produce matter' (which is a meaningless phrase in itself).
The alternative to the intelligent design theory isnt just 'randomness' or 'something from nothing'... its a natural process of design, which to me at least seems far more powerful than any 'individual' designer could be (unless he is really really really amazing :), but more importantly the outcome of a natural evolutionary design process seems to be evident in the nature of the lifeforms that we see around us.
- deep_throat0
i love you ribit
xx
- ********0
Discipler:"The issue we are discussing is how does nothingness produce something? How does no matter, produce matter?"
----------------
Not that difficult of a question: planty of ongoing theories on this, all probable. String theorists postulate "membranes" crashing into each other in hyperdimensional space and the energies released create "universes".Remember that thanks to einstein we already know that matter and energy are in fact the same thing, so "nothingness" is "producing" "something" all the time.
Energy is producing matter all the time. Heck energy from the sun is right this second being used by some planet to make sugar and live, so we can pick it and eat it, and you know make something, like a website or a magazine with it. Wow. Matter form nothing...amazing!!
- deep_throat0
dont forget string theory Tick!
omg, we've just opened a whole multiverse of complexity, how will discipler cope?????????
- ribit0
But thats not matter from nothing, thats a conversion of energy to matter. Matter cant be created or destroyed, only converted to energy and vice versa...etc..
- deep_throat0
what about quarks? neutrinos and anti-neutrinos?
man, you learn so much in these threads....
- ribit0
*within this space-time of course..
- ********0
- ********0
Read my last post on 2nd law and then read the christianist take on it:
http://www.christiananswers.net/…
and have fun finding the little rhetorical tricks they play with the actual information...
- -sputnik-0
look, teaching evolution in school does not prevent from those of faith to go one step further at home and explain how this evolution might be driven by ID.
the difference is that this conversation needs to happen in the home or church/synagogue/temple, NOT in the classroom.
- discipler0
as I thought, deep_throat is kuz.
Ok, there is no question that in a system governed by calculations, one can produce complexity from seeming simplicity. My point is the plan and governing rules require an author. This doesn't take a phD to figure out. Essentially, what you have in number generators is an artificial pattern of simplicity which (when an intelligent agent intervenes) becomes more complex. And these models are rediculously limited and have little bearing in the realm of biological complexity. This is demonstrated by irreducibly complex organisms which need all of their constituent parts to function, at once.
kuz, you are taking an obscure number game and trying to say it demonstrates how life can produce itself from nothingness. And saying "see there!" The disconnect is obvious. Just because you shout loudly, doesn't make your point valid. This is called the steamroller tactic.
ribit - what you are positing is essentially theistic evolution. Evolution driven by design. And what we observe in nature is microevolution or adaptation. We most certainly do NOT see changes which produce novel species. Check your facts here.
- mrdobolina0
stop being so pretentious, discipler, FUCK!
- ********0
And evolution has absolutely nothing to say about an omnipotent creator. Really nothing at all. You can believe in the process of Evolution and say coherently that an supreme being somehow kick started the whole thing. No contradiction there in anyway shape or form...
This is all about religio/political influence in society and getting there by propping up strawmen you can attack. This is why I have Discipler on ignore. He has a big giant red suit on and I can see him coming from a mile away. He's going to say nothing surprising other than his Party line...
- discipler0
Tick, what you miss is that according Einstein's general relativity, matter and energy are synonymous. And science has demonstrated that matter/energy had a very definite beginning point and has not eternally existed. Enter: Intelligent Cause. Einstein himself pondered how his theory pointed to a causal factor.
Subatomic particles, whether you believe that the base particle is strings or quarks (strings is still highly contested at this point), it doesn't matter. Because you end up with core matter. Which would demonstrate economy of design - a designer who used a fundamental (and not eternal) particle of matter (energy) with which to bind everything together. Pretty efficient, aye?
- veraicon0
bottom line:
NO one in science has proved anything. no proof as to who/what created the first molecules that made the so called big bang or how they came about. i think we all know this and can agree.
until man proves his "theories" as fact, big bang theory/ the theory of evolution, this discussion will last as long as we do.
i am not taking sides here, just stating why this will be a never ending discussion.
xoxox
- -sputnik-0
right on, Tick.
people who believe in evolution understand that those two things are not mutually exclusive.
those who believe in creation have to shove that this is the only truth down everybody's throat.