A simple case for intelligent design

[tas8831]

And... way to ignore the rest of my post.

Pot - kettle much?

As is so often the case, it is almost more entertaining and informative to see what creationists ignore or dodge in their replies than what they do reply to.
Not as unfair - and dishonest - of you to bring up abiogenesis when discussing evolution, especially when you refuse to offer evidence of the mechanism by which silicates were turned into a man with no intermediates and no known means by which to do so.

You believe in an ancient middle eastern tribal deity poofing the universe into existence all at once from nothing and then forming a man from the dust of the ground (silicates) all at once via magic - after He had created all the other animals and such.

But thanks for telling me what I believe in an effort to avoid admitting your laughable errors.

It was most informative to see what you dodged or failed to reply to. Here is my original post - what you ignored/dodged is in red:

Amazing stuff - I was unaware that bacteria are now considered fluids and that their movements require neurological and multiple systems also moving/catalyzing - even at a level devoid of life! Amazing insights!

But I note that did not explain why none of the papers (at least one of them from which you must have gleaned your appendix information) even contained the word "enzyme" even as they described the function of the appendix.

I would also like to learn more about this movement and catalysis - what is moving and what needs to be catalyzed for fluid bacteria to re-colonize the gut after a bout of diarrhea. I am especially intrigued about this prior-to-life level that you speak of - is that the spirit realm? Can't wait to see the evidence!


Having taught college genetics for about 6 years, yes, yes I am. Not sure what that has to do with enzymes or bacteria being fluid or the Spirit realm.​

 

[SkepticThinker]

And... there is plenty of empirical evidence for Bible truth.

What is "Bible truth?"

 

[Jose Fly]

As is so often the case, it is almost more entertaining and informative to see what creationists ignore or dodge in their replies than what they do reply to.

You're probably familiar with the old lawyer's saying....the questions you avoid say more about you than the ones you answer.

 

[Workman]

You examine the face of sky and earth, but the one who is before you, you have not recognized, and you do not know how to test this opportunity.

 

[tas8831]

If I'm "predictably vacuous", I must infer:

* You are simply an attention-getting, rude person
* Like attracts like, so you are vacuous
* You fear creation will upset scientific academia, a hardly credible threat!
* Etc.
* Anything else I missed?

So, you are looking for an out.

I don't blame you - you cannot handle my replies nor present that which you hinted at were available.

That is what you missed.

And this:

As is so often the case, it is almost more entertaining and informative to see what creationists ignore or dodge in their replies than what they do reply to.
Not as unfair - and dishonest - of you to bring up abiogenesis when discussing evolution, especially when you refuse to offer evidence of the mechanism by which silicates were turned into a man with no intermediates and no known means by which to do so.

You believe in an ancient middle eastern tribal deity poofing the universe into existence all at once from nothing and then forming a man from the dust of the ground (silicates) all at once via magic - after He had created all the other animals and such.

But thanks for telling me what I believe in an effort to avoid admitting your laughable errors.

It was most informative to see what you dodged or failed to reply to. Here is my original post - what you ignored/dodged is in red:

Amazing stuff - I was unaware that bacteria are now considered fluids and that their movements require neurological and multiple systems also moving/catalyzing - even at a level devoid of life! Amazing insights!

But I note that did not explain why none of the papers (at least one of them from which you must have gleaned your appendix information) even contained the word "enzyme" even as they described the function of the appendix.

I would also like to learn more about this movement and catalysis - what is moving and what needs to be catalyzed for fluid bacteria to re-colonize the gut after a bout of diarrhea. I am especially intrigued about this prior-to-life level that you speak of - is that the spirit realm? Can't wait to see the evidence!


Having taught college genetics for about 6 years, yes, yes I am. Not sure what that has to do with enzymes or bacteria being fluid or the Spirit realm.
​

Your hubris prevents you from being able to see your limits, and to cover them up, you feign indignation.

I see it a lot on forums like this. Shame so few creationists exhibit that 'Christian humility' we used to hear so much about. All I see are a bunch of under-informed braggarts.

 

[ecco]

Is it simple? I guess it is: EvolutionDidItBecauseItWorksAndExists.

And... there is plenty of empirical evidence for Bible truth.

All the investigation done by scientists over the past 150 years confirms that evolution is the explanation for the existence of humans.
All the investigation done by scientists over the past 150 years confirms that The Flood never happened.


Biblical researchers have determined that the Gospels could not be first-hand accounts.
Biblical researchers are questioning the authenticity of Jesus.
Biblical researchers, theologians and lay theists are concluding that Genesis is all allegory.


You are on the losing side of the battle. Scientists and religious scholars all disagree with you.

 

[BilliardsBall]

That's not what I said. Here it is again:

It's really quite simple: if a similar formation of an organ would provide an advantage in multiple environments for different populations, evolution may naturally result in similar formations in those populations. Do you know exactly HOW similar those proto-cecal appendixes really are?

Also, I asked you a question. When are you going to answer it?

I don't remember you asking me a question, you are welcome to repeat it, but I'll ask yo

All the investigation done by scientists over the past 150 years confirms that evolution is the explanation for the existence of humans.
All the investigation done by scientists over the past 150 years confirms that The Flood never happened.


Biblical researchers have determined that the Gospels could not be first-hand accounts.
Biblical researchers are questioning the authenticity of Jesus.
Biblical researchers, theologians and lay theists are concluding that Genesis is all allegory.


You are on the losing side of the battle. Scientists and religious scholars all disagree with you.

I was just past Machpelah, in Israel, where Abraham, star of Genesis, is buried. Who told you the entire book of Genesis is allegory?

And what is the benefit to you personally of disdaining the Bible, disregarding it? Why the sour puss on the eternal life Christ offers as a free gift (IMHO)?

 

[ImmortalFlame]

I don't remember you asking me a question, you are welcome to repeat it, but I'll ask yo

The question is literally in the very post I just repeated:

Do you know exactly HOW similar those proto-cecal appendixes really are?

 

[tas8831]

Why does BB continue to ignore? The answer is obvious.

Non-sequitur. Followers of this higher power seem to be able to merely assert that, upon having done something wrong and asking for forgiveness, to always get it and move on the the next iteration. Seems like a 'get out of jail free card' situation rather than an umbrella of righteousness and humility - for where is the deterrent if you know that no matter what you do or say, you will be 'forgiven' just by asking, especially if you are doing the bad thing 'for the cause'?


And still do.
I disagree, but OK..

if it was a necessity, why do we see figures like this in your paper of choice:

Note that most look like mere extensions of the cecum, not some brand newly-evolved structure. Or this:

Note that MOST mammals DON'T HAVE ONE.
So your claim of necessity seems , at best, unwarranted.

the definition of vestige
Biology . a degenerate or imperfectly developed organ or structure that has little or no utility, but that in an earlier stage of the individual or in preceding evolutionary forms of the organism performed a useful function.

Not the best definition, but enough there to answer your WHY?

Now if you could answer MY why questions:

Why do creationists do this? WHY 'no harmful mutations'?

Is it your learned and open-minded position that the existence of a harmful mutation anywhere in the gene(s) associated with the appendix nullify the beneficial mutations?

If so, please explain - with references - how this was determined.

Also let us know how many beneficial mutations (with, of course, no bad ones) were required to get a bit of cecum to expand into an appendix, and how this was determined.

After all, if you cannot provide your numbers and JUSTIFY them, why take you seriously?


Please explain the anatomy of the appendix and the cecum, and explain what structures must have also been altered to get the appendix.

Is it your understanding that, say, the cecum also has to be mutated in order to allow the appendix to be present?

Please establish that there must be a 'system' to "release" bacteria from the appendix - which you have indicated are now a liquid.​

Like Ken Ham, I submit that you will never change your mind no matter what.


So now you have added biology and anatomy to your statistics expertise?

So let me see... You were required to have a couple of science classes as an undergrad for your general education requirements. And so you took gen bio and maybe some lower-level anatomy course to fulfill this requirement (or you had some anatomy in your intro bio courses). And you think this means that you understand evolution and biology, despite several of us finding glaring holes in the same.

Can I make math arguments that I can ignore your critiques of? After all, I took statistics (got an A in the class, tied for the highest grade!) in undergrad. Also took Trig and a bunch of stuff I have been trying to forget.

OK Dad. Right after you answer our questions for once.


Better yet, you tell me how taphonomy works and why you think there should be fossils of, apparently, every intermediate. And then me all about how mutations affect phenotype. After all - declarations about how many mutations are needed and when necessitates such an understanding.
BE LOGICAL.

And there we are...

 

[ecco]

I was just past Machpelah, in Israel, where Abraham, star of Genesis, is buried.

Allegedly buried...

Cave of the Patriarchs - Wikipedia

According to the Abrahamic religions, the cave and adjoining field were purchased by Abraham as a burial plot.According to the Abrahamic religions, the cave and adjoining field were purchased by Abraham as a burial plot.
​

The only "evidence" for this is stories in religious scripture.

Who told you the entire book of Genesis is allegory?

Most Christians believe much of Genesis is allegory, very few take it all literally.
Also...

Genesis - Oxford Biblical Studies Online

The stories within Genesis were transmitted orally over many generations, and some of them bear close resemblance to the myths of their Near Eastern neighbours, as is the case with the Flood (Gen. 6 to 9). Eventually they were committed to writing, and the various narratives were worked over by editors.​

Genesis creation narrative - Wikipedia

The Genesis creation narrative is the creation myth of both Judaism and Christianity.
...
Borrowing themes from Mesopotamian mythology, but adapting them to the Israelitepeople's belief in one God,​

http://www.neverofftopic.com/re-top...derstanding-genesis-a-biblical-scholars-view/

At least as early as the Second Century there were some Christian thinkers who argued that the opening chapters of Genesis were never intended to be taken as a chronological account of how God created the world. This was long before the rise of modern science, so they were not trying to make the Bible agree with science. They saw things in the text of these chapters themselves which led them to understand them in a non-literalistic way.​

And what is the benefit to you personally of disdaining the Bible, disregarding it? Why the sour puss on the eternal life Christ offers as a free gift (IMHO)?

My personal benefit is that I do not rely on superstition to guide my life and my values.
My personal benefit is that have no childish phantasies about eternal life.
There are a lot more, but I don't want to bore you.

 

[tas8831]

Enzymes/nervous input needed to release bacteria from the appendix? Or was that all made up?

 

[BilliardsBall]

The question is literally in the very post I just repeated:

Do you know exactly HOW similar those proto-cecal appendixes really are?

No, I do not know exactly. They appear rather similar.

 

[BilliardsBall]

​

Allegedly buried...

Cave of the Patriarchs - Wikipedia

According to the Abrahamic religions, the cave and adjoining field were purchased by Abraham as a burial plot.According to the Abrahamic religions, the cave and adjoining field were purchased by Abraham as a burial plot.
​

The only "evidence" for this is stories in religious scripture.


Most Christians believe much of Genesis is allegory, very few take it all literally.
Also...

Genesis - Oxford Biblical Studies Online

The stories within Genesis were transmitted orally over many generations, and some of them bear close resemblance to the myths of their Near Eastern neighbours, as is the case with the Flood (Gen. 6 to 9). Eventually they were committed to writing, and the various narratives were worked over by editors.​

Genesis creation narrative - Wikipedia

The Genesis creation narrative is the creation myth of both Judaism and Christianity.
...
Borrowing themes from Mesopotamian mythology, but adapting them to the Israelitepeople's belief in one God,​

http://www.neverofftopic.com/re-top...derstanding-genesis-a-biblical-scholars-view/

At least as early as the Second Century there were some Christian thinkers who argued that the opening chapters of Genesis were never intended to be taken as a chronological account of how God created the world. This was long before the rise of modern science, so they were not trying to make the Bible agree with science. They saw things in the text of these chapters themselves which led them to understand them in a non-literalistic way.​

My personal benefit is that I do not rely on superstition to guide my life and my values.
My personal benefit is that have no childish phantasies about eternal life.
There are a lot more, but I don't want to bore you.

No, that's fine, you've already bored me.

I believe in God because I do not base my life on ad populum arguments, like those you've presented, "But most people, but most theologians..."

 

[ImmortalFlame]

No, I do not know exactly. They appear rather similar.

So, it's not a case of the exact same organism evolving several times, it's a case of "rather similar" organs evolving several times.

Funnily enough, here is a scientific paper on the matter that outlines exactly how similar these organs are, where they have evolved, and - crucially - points out that what constitutes an "appendix" is fairly broad:

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/j.1420-9101.2009.01809.x

 

[ImmortalFlame]

No, that's fine, you've already bored me.

I believe in God because I do not base my life on ad populum arguments, like those you've presented, "But most people, but most theologians..."

Oh really? Because I've seen you use those types of arguments many times in many threads:
The Creationist's Argument and its Greatest Weakness
The Creationist's Argument and its Greatest Weakness
The Creationist's Argument and its Greatest Weakness
The Creationist's Argument and its Greatest Weakness
Zero Probability of Evolution. Atheism wrong?
Zero Probability of Evolution. Atheism wrong?
New Evidence Found To Show Humans Came From Fish

 

[tas8831]

No, I do not know exactly. They appear rather similar.

So you did not see the figures in the paper you referred to. The one I posted here.

 

[ecco]

No, that's fine, you've already bored me.

I believe in God because I do not base my life on ad populum arguments, like those you've presented, "But most people, but most theologians..."

Of course you don't. You also don't base your life and beliefs on science.

So where does that leave in? In a little tiny corner all by yourself with your own little tiny ideas.

 

[BilliardsBall]

So, it's not a case of the exact same organism evolving several times, it's a case of "rather similar" organs evolving several times.

Funnily enough, here is a scientific paper on the matter that outlines exactly how similar these organs are, where they have evolved, and - crucially - points out that what constitutes an "appendix" is fairly broad:

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/j.1420-9101.2009.01809.x

How did they evolve, would you say, in lay terms. Because I've never seen an article explaining how any one organ or system "evolved"--while the species it evolved in remained alive through generations--where the forensic evidence is for partial formation, etc.

A real, full organ, not a proto-organ, please.

Thanks!

 

[BilliardsBall]

So you did not see the figures in the paper you referred to. The one I posted here.

I did look at the figures, which are somewhat similar, somewhat different, leaving only the incredible, mysterious all-explanatory power of "evolution always does it". I remain unconvinced as to how mutation, selection, etc. without the added evolutiondidit magic, does it. Please explain.

 

[BilliardsBall]

Of course you don't. You also don't base your life and beliefs on science.

So where does that leave in? In a little tiny corner all by yourself with your own little tiny ideas.

Respectfully, you've made a sophomoric objection. I most certainly base my life and most of beliefs on science, reliable testimony, forensic evidence, while adhering to concepts of metaphysics (justice, love, logic) and disagreeing with some aspects of modern scientific theory.

You are living now in a tiny corner of my Earth (the meek will inherit it). I have decided to allow you to stay here for a while longer, rent free. Enjoy!