Evolution VS Creation - Page 10 - Talk About Marriage
Politics and Religion This is the place to discuss politics, morality, religion, and anything controversial.

User Tag List

 160Likes
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread
post #136 of 385 (permalink) Old 03-09-2017, 02:43 PM
Member
 
VladDracul's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: Southeast USA
Posts: 851
Re: Evolution VS Creation

Oh believe me Browser, I know the common accepted definition of intelligent design could not possibly be construed to imply the existence of a entity that predates humans that could be capable of designing lifeforms. I mean the "germ theory" became accepted over the miasma theory several years before the Wright brothers flew, so we've have plenty of time since then to analyze, test, and completely understand every possible concept about how life developed on earth.
I'm more curious however, how they evolved seedless watermelons by chemical process (primordial soup) that double the number of chromosomes. Then the pollen from a regular plant was spread by a Jurassic Butterfly to the flower of the chemically altered plant. Abracadabra you have a seedless watermelon. I've done the best I could, but nonetheless, a piss poor job of explaining the intellig..errrr..evolution of a seedless watermelon in a scientific manner.


If you don't embody controversy, what you say will become just another part of the media driven culture of stifling thought and debate about issues.
VladDracul is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #137 of 385 (permalink) Old 03-09-2017, 02:44 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 17,253
Re: Evolution VS Creation

Quote:
Originally Posted by VladDracul View Post
Of course intelligent design is provable. Triploid largemouth bass, and trout have also been designed to be sterile to promote growth rather than reproduction. When you see an hybrid animal, you see an animal thats a product of intelligent design.


Manmade ID. We, H sapiens, are the current gods.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro
Ikaika is offline  
post #138 of 385 (permalink) Old 03-09-2017, 02:47 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: MI
Posts: 3,587
Re: Evolution VS Creation

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ikaika View Post
Hypothesis are building blocks based on other observation or interpretations of evidence. Very few hypotheses are built in isolation.

Laziness would suggest if I don't understand something "it must be god" rather than continuing to probe the underlying process, which is what science does. We don't answer the larger questions, we answer the process questions.

Example: "Does overexpression of PEA-15 play a role in astrocytomas?" There is no inherent way to build a hypothesis and testable aims for a creator, because this is not a process question.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro
Just because you think intelligent design is preposterous, doesn't make it so. Intelligent design =/= god or God. It could or it could not. We don't know.

To deny there is no evidence that could support intelligent design is crazy. There is too much we don't know. That does not mean that intelligent design is right (or wrong), but we don't know.

It is intellectually lazy to say 'we' should not try to prove (or disprove) intelligent design. ('we' = science). This is the same intellectual laziness you expressed a few years back about AGW. You would not look past your beloved peer reviewed papers. You were too lazy to even plot the data, but would not take anyone's word that they had done the work to show that statistically, we were out of control on warming for 10+ years. Not going to belabor this any longer, you get my point.
naiveonedave is online now  
 
post #139 of 385 (permalink) Old 03-09-2017, 02:53 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 17,253
Re: Evolution VS Creation

Quote:
Originally Posted by naiveonedave View Post
Just because you think intelligent design is preposterous, doesn't make it so. Intelligent design =/= god or God. It could or it could not. We don't know.



To deny there is no evidence that could support intelligent design is crazy. There is too much we don't know. That does not mean that intelligent design is right (or wrong), but we don't know.



It is intellectually lazy to say 'we' should not try to prove (or disprove) intelligent design. ('we' = science). This is the same intellectual laziness you expressed a few years back about AGW. You would not look past your beloved peer reviewed papers. You were too lazy to even plot the data, but would not take anyone's word that they had done the work to show that statistically, we were out of control on warming for 10+ years. Not going to belabor this any longer, you get my point.


I'm not saying it is preposterous. I'm telling you unequivocally, intelligent design is not a testable hypothesis or aim. As such, if one wants to believe in a god and that god is a creator, it is fine with me. I'm merely suggesting that science cannot be used to justify ones beliefs anymore than I would expect a scientists to preach from the pulpit on any given Sunday. Our languages and processes are light years apart.

What we don't know yet is not a stopping point in our understanding of the biological algorithm, it is just another challenge to investigate more.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro
Ikaika is offline  
post #140 of 385 (permalink) Old 03-09-2017, 02:56 PM
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: United States
Posts: 10,323
Re: Evolution VS Creation

Dave,
I really like this. In my gut, the universe feels way way to cool and too - cleverly constructed - to be a random construct.
So I believe a creator - existing outside of time and space created the Universe. I truly believe that, which is a belief shared by many physicists who gaze in wonder at how everything works.

That said, the human body - marvelous as it is - seems to have lots of kludgy (details below) components to it. So I lack faith that the creator designed us in his/her image.
----------
That said, intelligent design is about to happen in a big way. Humans completely redesigning our species.

CAS/CRISPR is like a word processor for DNA. And we 'humans' are now on the cusp of being 'post human'.

What happens when we erase disease - genetically? Health care changes to be more of a sports medicine thing

My primary fear (by far) is we figure out how to greatly extend lifespan too early in the process. That single technological advance would have a staggeringly destructive impact on population growth.

We need one partial generation of super humans - to jack our technology and aggregate wealth up by a factor of 10. That leap forward will open the solar system and maybe the galaxy - to humans.

And THEN AND ONLY THEN can we safely allow the widespread proliferation of longevity increasing techniques.


--------------
BABY CROWNING – A human baby has to realllllly squeeze through the birth canal. This often kills the baby, the mother, or both. Why are we built like this? Because walking upright favors narrow hips, while being smart favors big heads. Women’s hips are just barely wide enough to enable birthing big-headed babies. Usually. Good enough. Barely.

Might a better design solution have been possible? Sure – kangaroos!

CHOKING: Our air passages and food passages interconnect with sometimes fatal results. Other animals have separate passages and cannot choke to death on food.

THE EYE: Ah, the favorite of anti-evolutionists: “irreducible complexity” — “what good is an incomplete eye?”

A lot of good, actually. Dr. Hafer showed many examples of creatures with much more primitive light-sensitive organs which still provide them with survival advantages.

Meantime, the human eye is not so great after all. That screw-up designer of ours inexplicably put the wiring in front of the light-sensitive parts, blocking some of the light, and also bunched the optic nerve fibers to cause a blind spot. The result is that we can’t see well in dim light, and our brains must do a lot of “photoshop” type work to collate and make sense of the images, with resulting loss of information. Animals like squids have much better eye design. (And wouldn’t an intelligent design include a third eye in back of our heads?)



Quote:
Originally Posted by naiveonedave View Post
Science starts with a hypothesis and attempts to prove it and disprove it. It starts with observation and there are plenty of observations that 'could' support intelligent design. Is intelligent design the reality? I don't know. To dismiss it out of hand IS intellectual laziness.

Examples in support:
1 - if the gravitational constant is off by <<10% of its value, physics blows up (recollecting this from physics in college from 20-30 years ago. Same can be said for many of the 'fundamental' constants. How is it that they exist just right to allow for anything to exist?
2 - so many missing parts of evolution

I could go on with examples, but that doesn't fit your need to disprove religion. This is not about religion, it is about the truth, whichever it is vis a vis intelligent design.
MEM2020 is online now  
post #141 of 385 (permalink) Old 03-09-2017, 02:58 PM
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 1,456
Re: Evolution VS Creation

Quote:
Originally Posted by naiveonedave View Post
Just because you think intelligent design is preposterous, doesn't make it so. Intelligent design =/= god or God. It could or it could not. We don't know.

To deny there is no evidence that could support intelligent design is crazy. There is too much we don't know. That does not mean that intelligent design is right (or wrong), but we don't know.

Not going to belabor this any longer, you get my point.
Just because you think belief in Santa Claus/Easter Bunny/Leprechauns/Unicorns/Tooth Fairy is preposterous, doesn't make it so. Santa Claus/Easter Bunny/Leprechauns/Unicorns/Tooth Fairy =/= real or fiction. It could or it could not. We don't know.

To deny there is no evidence that could support Santa Claus/Easter Bunny/Leprechauns/Unicorns/Tooth Fairy is crazy. There is too much we don't know. That does not mean that belief in Santa Claus/Easter Bunny/Leprechauns/Unicorns/Tooth Fairy is right (or wrong), but we don't know.

Not going to belabor this any longer, you get my point.
browser is offline  
post #142 of 385 (permalink) Old 03-09-2017, 03:26 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: MI
Posts: 3,587
Re: Evolution VS Creation

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ikaika View Post
I'm not saying it is preposterous. I'm telling you unequivocally, intelligent design is not a testable hypothesis or aim. As such, if one wants to believe in a god and that god is a creator, it is fine with me. I'm merely suggesting that science cannot be used to justify ones beliefs anymore than I would expect a scientists to preach from the pulpit on any given Sunday. Our languages and processes are light years apart.

What we don't know yet is not a stopping point in our understanding of the biological algorithm, it is just another challenge to investigate more.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro
sure it is, science and scientists just haven't figured out the how yet. No different than what physics had to do 100-200 years ago.
naiveonedave is online now  
post #143 of 385 (permalink) Old 03-09-2017, 03:29 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: MI
Posts: 3,587
Re: Evolution VS Creation

Quote:
Originally Posted by browser View Post
Just because you think belief in Santa Claus/Easter Bunny/Leprechauns/Unicorns/Tooth Fairy is preposterous, doesn't make it so. Santa Claus/Easter Bunny/Leprechauns/Unicorns/Tooth Fairy =/= real or fiction. It could or it could not. We don't know.

To deny there is no evidence that could support Santa Claus/Easter Bunny/Leprechauns/Unicorns/Tooth Fairy is crazy. There is too much we don't know. That does not mean that belief in Santa Claus/Easter Bunny/Leprechauns/Unicorns/Tooth Fairy is right (or wrong), but we don't know.

Not going to belabor this any longer, you get my point.
whatever. Intelligent design fits the known as good as any other theory. It has nothing to do with santa claus. It doesn't even have to have anything to do with religion. That is your key mistake, thinking that religion = intelligent design.
naiveonedave is online now  
post #144 of 385 (permalink) Old 03-09-2017, 03:33 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: MI
Posts: 3,587
Re: Evolution VS Creation

Quote:
Originally Posted by browser View Post
Just because you think belief in Santa Claus/Easter Bunny/Leprechauns/Unicorns/Tooth Fairy is preposterous, doesn't make it so. Santa Claus/Easter Bunny/Leprechauns/Unicorns/Tooth Fairy =/= real or fiction. It could or it could not. We don't know.

To deny there is no evidence that could support Santa Claus/Easter Bunny/Leprechauns/Unicorns/Tooth Fairy is crazy. There is too much we don't know. That does not mean that belief in Santa Claus/Easter Bunny/Leprechauns/Unicorns/Tooth Fairy is right (or wrong), but we don't know.

Not going to belabor this any longer, you get my point.
Oh and by the way, I really don't know and to some large extent don't really care which is right. I am, however, incredibly put off by our current view of science in western culture (as to what we really know and what we think are not in alignment very well) and that science is viewed as sacrosanct. I have seen too much BSC science that has harmed people. (Food pyramid is my fav example. Ethanol in gasoline is another.)
naiveonedave is online now  
post #145 of 385 (permalink) Old 03-09-2017, 03:34 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 17,253
Evolution VS Creation

Quote:
Originally Posted by naiveonedave View Post
sure it is, science and scientists just haven't figured out the how yet. No different than what physics had to do 100-200 years ago.


Remember scientist test aims based in the process of the biological algorithms. There is no way test for a possible programmer of these algorithms. Unless, you can suggest a testable experiments. And, you can't start with the conclusion.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

Ikaika is offline  
post #146 of 385 (permalink) Old 03-09-2017, 03:37 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: MI
Posts: 3,587
Re: Evolution VS Creation

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ikaika View Post
Remember scientist test aims based in the process of the biological algorithms. There is no way test for a possible programmer of these algorithms. Unless, you can suggest a testable experiments. And, you can't start with the conclusion.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro
100 years from now, you may sing a different tune. (well probably won't be you, but you get the point).

Particle physics is a great example of how science evolves. Much of the theory was written before physicists had any idea how to measure it, to see if they were even in the ball park. Think even electricity...
naiveonedave is online now  
post #147 of 385 (permalink) Old 03-09-2017, 03:38 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 17,253
Re: Evolution VS Creation

Quote:
Originally Posted by naiveonedave View Post
whatever. Intelligent design fits the known as good as any other theory. It has nothing to do with santa claus. It doesn't even have to have anything to do with religion. That is your key mistake, thinking that religion = intelligent design.

It doesn't? So, the story of Navajo creation or Hawaiian story of creation: turtle giving birth to life or Maui pulling the lands deep from the sea and guiding boats with kanaka Maoli to that land are viable science options?



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro
Ikaika is offline  
post #148 of 385 (permalink) Old 03-09-2017, 03:39 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: MI
Posts: 3,587
Re: Evolution VS Creation

Quote:
Originally Posted by MEM2020 View Post
Dave,
I really like this. In my gut, the universe feels way way to cool and too - cleverly constructed - to be a random construct.
So I believe a creator - existing outside of time and space created the Universe. I truly believe that, which is a belief shared by many physicists who gaze in wonder at how everything works.

That said, the human body - marvelous as it is - seems to have lots of kludgy (details below) components to it. So I lack faith that the creator designed us in his/her image.
----------
That said, intelligent design is about to happen in a big way. Humans completely redesigning our species.

CAS/CRISPR is like a word processor for DNA. And we 'humans' are now on the cusp of being 'post human'.

What happens when we erase disease - genetically? Health care changes to be more of a sports medicine thing

My primary fear (by far) is we figure out how to greatly extend lifespan too early in the process. That single technological advance would have a staggeringly destructive impact on population growth.

We need one partial generation of super humans - to jack our technology and aggregate wealth up by a factor of 10. That leap forward will open the solar system and maybe the galaxy - to humans.

And THEN AND ONLY THEN can we safely allow the widespread proliferation of longevity increasing techniques.


--------------
BABY CROWNING – A human baby has to realllllly squeeze through the birth canal. This often kills the baby, the mother, or both. Why are we built like this? Because walking upright favors narrow hips, while being smart favors big heads. Women’s hips are just barely wide enough to enable birthing big-headed babies. Usually. Good enough. Barely.

Might a better design solution have been possible? Sure – kangaroos!

CHOKING: Our air passages and food passages interconnect with sometimes fatal results. Other animals have separate passages and cannot choke to death on food.

THE EYE: Ah, the favorite of anti-evolutionists: “irreducible complexity” — “what good is an incomplete eye?”

A lot of good, actually. Dr. Hafer showed many examples of creatures with much more primitive light-sensitive organs which still provide them with survival advantages.

Meantime, the human eye is not so great after all. That screw-up designer of ours inexplicably put the wiring in front of the light-sensitive parts, blocking some of the light, and also bunched the optic nerve fibers to cause a blind spot. The result is that we can’t see well in dim light, and our brains must do a lot of “photoshop” type work to collate and make sense of the images, with resulting loss of information. Animals like squids have much better eye design. (And wouldn’t an intelligent design include a third eye in back of our heads?)
that is some scary stuff in there. How do you sleep at night?

I really don't know what the right answer is, but I see too much to think chance is driver.
naiveonedave is online now  
post #149 of 385 (permalink) Old 03-09-2017, 03:43 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 17,253
Re: Evolution VS Creation

Quote:
Originally Posted by naiveonedave View Post
100 years from now, you may sing a different tune. (well probably won't be you, but you get the point).



Particle physics is a great example of how science evolves. Much of the theory was written before physicists had any idea how to measure it, to see if they were even in the ball park. Think even electricity...


A 100 years from now may bring about things far different than even considering ID. Most Christians nowadays don't even consider their own text for knowledge or decisions, it is Google or YouTube, or Siri or,... the database of knowledge algorithms have moved us beyond even needing god here and now. So, not sure why we would concern ourselves with a creator.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro
Ikaika is offline  
post #150 of 385 (permalink) Old 03-09-2017, 03:43 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: MI
Posts: 3,587
Re: Evolution VS Creation

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ikaika View Post
It doesn't? So, the story of Navajo creation or Hawaiian story of creation: turtle giving birth to life or Maui pulling the lands deep from the sea and guiding boats with kanaka Maoli to that land are viable science options?



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro
Slow down and read the post my fine Hawaiian friend. Intelligent design has roots in religion, but it doesn't have to be religious. Again, you are putting what you think in the way of what I am saying. There are intelligent design theories out there that have ZERO basis in any religion. Of course, you won't look for them, as they don't fit what you believe is the gods honest truth.
naiveonedave is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on Talk About Marriage, you must first register. Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

Important! Your username will be visible to the public next to anything you post and could show up in search engines like Google. If you are concerned about anonymity, PLEASE choose a username that will not be recognizable to anyone you know.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in









Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



Thread Tools Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Spent: Sex, Evolution, and Consumer Behavior tech-novelist The Social Spot 2 09-08-2016 02:34 AM
Religion Mr The Other Politics and Religion 585 02-20-2016 07:44 PM

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome