How can you justify the sheer complexity that evolution would have to evolve?

[mikkel_the_dane]

There are different types of Nihilism See post #216

Yeah, I do believe in knowledge, I just understand it differently than you.

 

[shunyadragon]

No, your experince of reality is not the same as reality in the objective sense as independent of your experience of it.
That is the limit of knowledge in one sense.
We can the add the belief in cause and effect and you then have to solve the problem of the evil demon by Descartes. Or in a modern sense a Boltzmann Brain universe variation.

See post #216.

 

[shunyadragon]

Yeah, I do believe in knowledge, I just understand it differently than you.

The existential Nihilist does believe in knowledge, but is skeptical or rejects human access to the knowledge in the objective sense,

It is an anti-science view as previously defined.

 

[Subduction Zone]

How can you justify the sheer complexity that evolution would have to evolve?​

The second law of thermodynamics says that the entropy of the universe has to increase. Entropy is the natural drive for all types of change in nature, including life. Life is uniquely designed to tap into entropy, and enhance the second law, by first lowering entropy into ordered states, thereby created an enhance potential zone for entropic change. This entropy enhancing mechanism is connected to the interaction of water and organics, via the water and oil effect. If we randomize water and oil, by shaking, and let them settle, order will appear from the chaos.

For example, freshly synthesized protein are at maximum entropy; open, unfolded and wiggling like worms. However, since the organic side groups will cause surface tension in the water, the water will pack these protein to optimize its own free energy, with the orderly packing and folding lowering the entropy of the enzyme to a minimal state. This causes the protein to go against the 2nd law, and thereby creates a zone of entropic potential, that is expressed as catalytic change, for example. This protein activity increases the entropy around itself, while the water keeps the protein in a perpetual state of entropic potential; water and oil effect.

In terms of the DNA, the DNA double helix is also a lowered entropic state, due to water and the water and oil effect. The water forces the DNA to bury the bases and sugars so these have less impact on the bulk water. The double helix is the answer. If we dissolved DNA into an organic solvent like an alcohol, this solvent allows the DNA to remain less ordered, by dissolving or freeing up the bases and sugars; into higher entropy. This is not very bioactive, since the potential for change is not the same. It is already doing fine with respect to solvent entropy.

An important source of enhanced entropic potential in life is connected to ion pumping and the exchange of sodium and potassium ions. Each cation has a different impact on water. The sodium is kosmotropic or creates more order in water that water creates for itself. While potassium is chaotropic and creates more chaos or disorder in water than water creates for itself. With sodium accumulating outside the cell, the outside water has an entropic potential; too ordered. The entropy increase is connected to the attraction of food materials to the outside cell surface to help create more aqueous complexity. The potassium ions inside enhances the disorder of water. This loosens up the water induced organic structures, while also adding potential for enhanced change, even on the DNA. As ion pumping got stronger and stronger change was inevitable and quickened, driven by metabolic energy expenditure lowering ionic entropy.

In terms of the human body, the brain uses about 90% of its metabolic energy ion pumping and exchanging, to creates these two potentials inside and outside the neurons. These are the highest entropic ionic potentials of the body. This has an impact on increasing complexity in the brain to the highest level of the body, that we call learning potential and then forward integration into synapses; platforms for higher thinking. This is the platform for consciousness.

The current model of evolution sort of says the same thing, but uses a random dice and cards approach. Entropy is not exactly random, since it has to increase via states. Energy, is conserved, and energy can shift between forms of energy and accommodate random. Entropy is an ordering principle and is a state function. Entropy absorbs energy and moves forward or increases in steps, like stable platforms for further change. An enzyme has a specific job it does well, but is not subject to in situ random change. Like photons there are entropic quantum states instead of continuous functions, thereby eliminating the assumed randomness inside the gaps. This may not be obvious, when the entire cell is the dynamic state, but changes on the DNA are predictable, if you know the original state and the next quantum step; new species.

There is a logic to the biological system of change we call evolution, but this logic is being blurred by the black box assumptions of statistics, that tries to eliminate the light; reason, needed to see. Statistics is a tool and too many are afraid to lose this tool, since their logic has atrophied in favor of the coin toss and lottery tickets.

The debate between Creation and Evolution is really one between order versus chaos. Evolving order can be induce via the steps of entropic states. This make evolution more in line with a natural ordering principle; 2nd law. The second law should be redefined as the 1st law, since energy is conserved, but entropic has to increase, in time, in steps, and leads change as energy/enthalpy lowers; metabolism. My approach looks different than Creation or Evolution, since I used the order assumption of Creation, and the Science assumptions of water, ions and entropy to create evolving ordered states; a bridge between.

TLDR, but I can see that this is an argument about the Second Law of Thermodynamics. I can refute this by saying that you used a flawed version of the Second Law. The actual second law, especially when one is not dealing with an isolated system is that it is about how in any complex reaction the energy available for work will decrease. Evolution increases the rate at which this occurs so it is supported by the Second Law.

 

[Kenny]

My view of the historicity of the Bible including the Gospels without provenance is based on the independent historical, literary and archaeological evidence.

Your original statement is more correct concerning your knowledge of the background of the Bible,

Apparently you like living in an alternative universe. I support your right to do just that.

 

[F1fan]

Apparently you like living in an alternative universe. I support your right to do just that.

It's called reality. The alternative is yours given your rejection of facts and science. You prefer an obsolete tradition of belief.

 

[Sargonski]

When you show ignorence and aggression what do you expect?

Goodbye

Let us not project our failings onto others Sister Christina -- then run from the playground with ball in hand .. calling names as you go

 

[Revoltingest]

Well, useful is also useful to somebody as far as I can tell.

You sure do like to talk about it.
But then you dismiss it.

Truth is not determined by usefulness. It's why science isn't about pursuing truth. It's about determining functionality.

"Truth" is over-rated.
Other than many things in mathematics, there is no "truth"
regarding the real world. There are only opinions.
But useful opinions can be relied upon, eg,
orbital mechanics, biology, rheology.
Non-useful opinions are utterly untrustworthy, eg,
God's existence, scripture, creationism.

 

[Mock Turtle]

I can't do a thing about AI whatever it turns into or gets used for. So why do you care if I'm naive or not?

The media loves to scare us with issues that we can't do anything about. So I tend to ignore them. You can fret over them if you want, but I don't think I'm the one being naive, here,

Well however one views AI, it will become a large factor in the future and hence best to understand the implications so as not to get it wrong. In the 1960s, computers were underestimated as to the spread and need for such, and I'm sure you are aware that the computing power in the average smartphone now just dwarfs computing of that era and what was used to enable the Apollo 11 mission to succeed.

Your smartphone is millions of times more powerful that all of NASA's combined computing in 1969

You would be wrong in saying an iPhone could be used to guide 120,000,000 Apollo era spacecraft to the moon, all the same time.

www.zmescience.com

Such that it is likely we are in a similar position with regards AI now.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

The existential Nihilist does believe in knowledge, but is skeptical or rejects human access to the knowledge in the objective sense,

It is an anti-science view as previously defined.

Well, I then have a different version of obejctive but that is the great nihilist Kant, which is irrelevant since he is long dead as per your objective rule for the relevance of philosophy.
It has to be modern and global, but not older or newer than modern and it has to be global, because you say so, but that is not something you do, because it is objective.

 

[Sargonski]

Well, yes, in a sense for the formal notion of proof. But even that has a limit.

hmmm .. not sure we are talkind defacto "Proof" here as much as evidence . The proposition is that that Evolution is helped along by God (Magic) and the alternate proposition "I don't believe in Magic" (don't believe the hand of God had anything to do with it).

To address any of this one must have a functional and agreed upon definition of what would constitute "Magic" = What powers are required for something to be a God

Only once the power of this God to do magic is defined .. can any sense at all be made out of the above propositions. For example -- using an ancient definition of a God .. "The Sun" for example a God of Nature and / or the power of a God over the forces of nature .. an important distinction.

To the first part --- obviously the Sun is a power that has great influence over our lives .. a power which shaped the evolutionary process .. a power without which .. evolution could not have occurred .. and we have the evidence which proves this is true .. and we can not say that this force does not eminate from the Godhead .

For me .. I need more for something to be called magic .. the power of a God must include the ability to manipulate a force or forces of nature to a certain degree through force of will ... Such God-Like Power I call magic.

More formal -- A Godly Power would be the ability to manipulate matter and energy through force of will - External to its body. Note that you have this power .. but it is limited only to your Body .. you can will your pinky to move . .and magically it does .. but you can not will the chair across the room to move .. but if you could .. it would be "Magic" - and a Godly power.

Now - we can address the question -- Do you believe in God / "Magic" .. and is there a hand of this God in evolution .. .. took it from the normal path .. and if this is so .. would we be able to detect it.

The complexity of evolution -- in of itself -- is in no way evidence for or proof of an invisible hand of the Magical variety .. it is a function of the actions of different forces .. a number of which we do not yet understand for one .. and no for other reasons - such as some of the forces are pushing evolution in a certain direction .. which causes violations to the random probability equation..

That said .. analysis of the actions of these forces with respect to Evolution speaks to an invisible hand according to some .. and thus we see some Magic in Evolution ..

and as to "Those of little faith" .. would it be all that surprising .. should some alien species start visiting the earth on a more regular basis .. one who had really advanced technology .. such that through force of will they could make the chair move... and not knowing that they were using technology you would believe this creature had Godly Powers .. but second .. it can be argued that the the use of technology should not detract from the Godly classification to begin with .

Having an agreed upon definition is requisite to making any sense out of the topic.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

hmmm .. not sure we are talkind defacto "Proof" here as much as evidence . The proposition is that that Evolution is helped along by God (Magic) and the alternate proposition "I don't believe in Magic" (don't believe the hand of God had anything to do with it).

To address any of this one must have a functional and agreed upon definition of what would constitute "Magic" = What powers are required for something to be a God

Only once the power of this God to do magic is defined .. can any sense at all be made out of the above propositions. For example -- using an ancient definition of a God .. "The Sun" for example a God of Nature and / or the power of a God over the forces of nature .. an important distinction.

To the first part --- obviously the Sun is a power that has great influence over our lives .. a power which shaped the evolutionary process .. a power without which .. evolution could not have occurred .. and we have the evidence which proves this is true .. and we can not say that this force does not eminate from the Godhead .

For me .. I need more for something to be called magic .. the power of a God must include the ability to manipulate a force or forces of nature to a certain degree through force of will ... Such God-Like Power I call magic.

More formal -- A Godly Power would be the ability to manipulate matter and energy through force of will - External to its body. Note that you have this power .. but it is limited only to your Body .. you can will your pinky to move . .and magically it does .. but you can not will the chair across the room to move .. but if you could .. it would be "Magic" - and a Godly power.

Now - we can address the question -- Do you believe in God / "Magic" .. and is there a hand of this God in evolution .. .. took it from the normal path .. and if this is so .. would we be able to detect it.

The complexity of evolution -- in of itself -- is in no way evidence for or proof of an invisible hand of the Magical variety .. it is a function of the actions of different forces .. a number of which we do not yet understand for one .. and no for other reasons - such as some of the forces are pushing evolution in a certain direction .. which causes violations to the random probability equation..

That said .. analysis of the actions of these forces with respect to Evolution speaks to an invisible hand according to some .. and thus we see some Magic in Evolution ..

and as to "Those of little faith" .. would it be all that surprising .. should some alien species start visiting the earth on a more regular basis .. one who had really advanced technology .. such that through force of will they could make the chair move... and not knowing that they were using technology you would believe this creature had Godly Powers .. but second .. it can be argued that the the use of technology should not detract from the Godly classification to begin with .

Having an agreed upon definition is requisite to making any sense out of the topic.

That is all fair and well, but a defintion of a word doesn't make the referent of the word a fact. Hence we are only looking at the connection of how the words work as words.
So we need to test the words against in effect objective reality and that is epistemology and metaphysics/ontology as much as it is logic.
But that is more than just the defintions of words.

 

[shunyadragon]

but of course you believe in magic ... you just don't realize it , perhaps never encountering it. Think of your primative ancestors encountering aliens with superior abilities and technology -- they saw magic with their own eyes .. or what they believed was magic.

Were you to have an interaction with an equivalently advanced entity -- you would believe in magic .. because you had seen it with own eyes.. and when it comes down to it ... technology "IS" a form of magic .. and it is not evolution or magic.. Evolution is the Magic ... har har har ..

The proof of God is Evolution if you define "Magic" and define "GOD" properly ..

Magic may be used sort of an odd context and creates a distraction over many posts, Amore interesting discussionis how Magic is understood in different contexts defined properly.

Let's consider Magic as described in the Bible

Nihilism - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Baker's Evangelical Dictionary of Biblical Theology - Magic​

Magic [N] [E]
The Old Testament. Magic — the attempt to exploit supernatural powers by formulaic recitations to achieve goals that were otherwise unrealizable was seen in a negative light in the Old Testament ( Leviticus 19:26 Leviticus 19:31 ; 20:6 ; 1 Sam 28:9 ; Isa 8:19 ; 44:25 ; 57:3 ; Jer 27:9 ; Ezek 22:28 ; Micah 5:12 ; Nahum 3:4 ; Mal 3:5 ) and was banned under penalty of death ( Exod 22:18 ; Lev 20:27 ; Deut 18:10-11 ). However, many Canaanite magical practices were later widespread in the divided monarchy: Jezebel practiced sorcery ( 2 Kings 9:22 ); Manasseh encouraged divination ( 2 Kings 21:6 ; 2 Chron 33:6 ); Hebrew seers and diviners practiced the magic arts ( Micah 3:7 ); and Isaiah condemned women who wore charms ( Isa 3:18-23 ). The multiplicity of terminology used in the bans testifies that magic was a pervasive problem in the Israelite world. However, many of the banned terms (primarily in Deut 18:10-11 ) have defied easy explanation, including child sacrifice (possibly used for divinatory purposes Deut 18:10 ; 2 Kings 21:6 ), types of divination ( Num 23:23 ; Deut 18:10-11 ; 1 Sam 15:23 ; 2 Kings 17:17 ; Micah 3:6 ), sorceries ( Exod 22:18 ; Deut 18:11 ; Jer 27:9 ; Micah 5:12 ; Mal 3:5 ), and necromancy ( 1 Sam 28 ).
Magic was considered an aspect of pagan wisdom; magicians were counted as wise men ( Psalm 58:5 ; Dan 1:20 ; 2:13 ) and officials of foreign governments ( Gen 41:6 ; Exod 7:11 ; Dan 2:2 ). Different from pagan sources, the Old Testament writers did not see a connection between magic and the gods. Foreign magicians in Scripture did not invoke help of their gods for magical formulas, but often called upon self-operating forces that were independent of the gods ( Isa 47:13 ; the monotheistic Israelites did not accept the existence of the foreign gods ). Moreover, the biblical writers seemed to attribute a reality to magical power that it did not ascribe to the gods. Magic was considered human rebellion that unlocked divine secrets, making humanity equal with God.


More on the OT and In the NT next . . .

​

 

[Sargonski]

Redefine conveniently to your convenience, of course as Humpty Dumpty says, words mean exactly what I say they mean.

not Re-Define .. we first need a term to be defined .. so that we can re-define it. putting kart before horse..

 

[Pogo]

hmmm .. not sure we are talkind defacto "Proof" here as much as evidence . The proposition is that that Evolution is helped along by God (Magic) and the alternate proposition "I don't believe in Magic" (don't believe the hand of God had anything to do with it).

To address any of this one must have a functional and agreed upon definition of what would constitute "Magic" = What powers are required for something to be a God

Only once the power of this God to do magic is defined .. can any sense at all be made out of the above propositions. For example -- using an ancient definition of a God .. "The Sun" for example a God of Nature and / or the power of a God over the forces of nature .. an important distinction.

To the first part --- obviously the Sun is a power that has great influence over our lives .. a power which shaped the evolutionary process .. a power without which .. evolution could not have occurred .. and we have the evidence which proves this is true .. and we can not say that this force does not eminate from the Godhead .

For me .. I need more for something to be called magic .. the power of a God must include the ability to manipulate a force or forces of nature to a certain degree through force of will ... Such God-Like Power I call magic.

More formal -- A Godly Power would be the ability to manipulate matter and energy through force of will - External to its body. Note that you have this power .. but it is limited only to your Body .. you can will your pinky to move . .and magically it does .. but you can not will the chair across the room to move .. but if you could .. it would be "Magic" - and a Godly power.

Now - we can address the question -- Do you believe in God / "Magic" .. and is there a hand of this God in evolution .. .. took it from the normal path .. and if this is so .. would we be able to detect it.

The complexity of evolution -- in of itself -- is in no way evidence for or proof of an invisible hand of the Magical variety .. it is a function of the actions of different forces .. a number of which we do not yet understand for one .. and no for other reasons - such as some of the forces are pushing evolution in a certain direction .. which causes violations to the random probability equation..

That said .. analysis of the actions of these forces with respect to Evolution speaks to an invisible hand according to some .. and thus we see some Magic in Evolution ..

and as to "Those of little faith" .. would it be all that surprising .. should some alien species start visiting the earth on a more regular basis .. one who had really advanced technology .. such that through force of will they could make the chair move... and not knowing that they were using technology you would believe this creature had Godly Powers .. but second .. it can be argued that the the use of technology should not detract from the Godly classification to begin with .

Having an agreed upon definition is requisite to making any sense out of the topic.

You tell us, what is the difference between a god that can do whatever you think it can do and a magician that can do things I don't understand ?

 

[shunyadragon]

not Re-Define .. we first need a term to be defined .. so that we can re-define it. putting kart before horse..

The skeptics here that say either Natural or Magic as the cause of life or evolution are apparently going with this definition.

Magic - the power of apparently influencing the course of events by using mysterious or supernatural forces.

There is also the likely more than a bit of sarcasm accusing the Creation description could only come about by magic, because it is so mythical and unbelievable. The argument is sheer lack of science and dominance of mythology of the Biblical account it cannot be justify with today's knowledge of the world.

It is best to get back to the subject of the thread and stop splitting frog hairs over the definition of "Magic"

How can you justify the sheer complexity that evolution would have to evolve?​

 

[Sargonski]

Magic may be used sort of an odd context and creates a distraction over many posts, Amore interesting discussionis how Magic is understood in different contexts defined properly.

Let's consider Magic as described in the Bible

Nihilism - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Baker's Evangelical Dictionary of Biblical Theology - Magic​

Magic [N] [E]
The Old Testament. Magic — the attempt to exploit supernatural powers by formulaic recitations to achieve goals that were otherwise unrealizable was seen in a negative light in the Old Testament ( Leviticus 19:26 Leviticus 19:31 ; 20:6 ; 1 Sam 28:9 ; Isa 8:19 ; 44:25 ; 57:3 ; Jer 27:9 ; Ezek 22:28 ; Micah 5:12 ; Nahum 3:4 ; Mal 3:5 ) and was banned under penalty of death ( Exod 22:18 ; Lev 20:27 ; Deut 18:10-11 ). However, many Canaanite magical practices were later widespread in the divided monarchy: Jezebel practiced sorcery ( 2 Kings 9:22 ); Manasseh encouraged divination ( 2 Kings 21:6 ; 2 Chron 33:6 ); Hebrew seers and diviners practiced the magic arts ( Micah 3:7 ); and Isaiah condemned women who wore charms ( Isa 3:18-23 ). The multiplicity of terminology used in the bans testifies that magic was a pervasive problem in the Israelite world. However, many of the banned terms (primarily in Deut 18:10-11 ) have defied easy explanation, including child sacrifice (possibly used for divinatory purposes Deut 18:10 ; 2 Kings 21:6 ), types of divination ( Num 23:23 ; Deut 18:10-11 ; 1 Sam 15:23 ; 2 Kings 17:17 ; Micah 3:6 ), sorceries ( Exod 22:18 ; Deut 18:11 ; Jer 27:9 ; Micah 5:12 ; Mal 3:5 ), and necromancy ( 1 Sam 28 ).
Magic was considered an aspect of pagan wisdom; magicians were counted as wise men ( Psalm 58:5 ; Dan 1:20 ; 2:13 ) and officials of foreign governments ( Gen 41:6 ; Exod 7:11 ; Dan 2:2 ). Different from pagan sources, the Old Testament writers did not see a connection between magic and the gods. Foreign magicians in Scripture did not invoke help of their gods for magical formulas, but often called upon self-operating forces that were independent of the gods ( Isa 47:13 ; the monotheistic Israelites did not accept the existence of the foreign gods ). Moreover, the biblical writers seemed to attribute a reality to magical power that it did not ascribe to the gods. Magic was considered human rebellion that unlocked divine secrets, making humanity equal with God.


More on the OT and In the NT next . . .

​

Interesting .. I gave some possible definitions in post 232 .. how this would match with biblical definition is a large discussion .. but to address the topic coherently .. some kind of definition must be agreed upon.

 

[Sargonski]

The skeptics here that say either Natural or Magic as the cause of life or evolution are apparently going with this definition.

Magic - the power of apparently influencing the course of events by using mysterious or supernatural forces.

There is also the likely more than a bit of sarcasm accusing the Creation description could only come about by magic, because it is so mythical and unbelievable.

It is best to get back to the subject of the thread and stop splitting frog hairs over the definition of "Magic"

you missed completely the fact that the Subject of the thread can not be coherently discussed without (not splitting hairs .. in strawman fallacy bliss) having A Definition .. of some sort .. which you did manage to give so kudos for that much .. summarized as "Apparent ability to mess with the forces of nature and beyond .. through force of will" the Will being the Supernatural Power

and we are not talking about Creation .. but evolution .. whether we can detect the hand of a God in evolution .. were it there .. and whether or not you believe that beings might well exist with such "Apparent" powers .. say the power to move a chair .. through force of will .. and/or perhaps humans might one day develop technology that focuses brain waves .. giving one the ability to move that chair... through force of will .

 

[shunyadragon]

Interesting .. I gave some possible definitions in post 232 .. how this would match with biblical definition is a large discussion .. but to address the topic coherently .. some kind of definition must be agreed upon.

Providing the Biblical description would simple be on the extreme mythical consideration of Biblical Creation.
Probably not totally agreed on, but better dropped as no relevance to the topic.

See post #237

 

[shunyadragon]

you missed completely the fact that the Subject of the thread can not be coherently discussed without (not splitting hairs .. in strawman fallacy bliss) having A Definition .. of some sort .. which you did manage to give so kudos for that much .. summarized as "Apparent ability to mess with the forces of nature and beyond .. through force of will" the Will being the Supernatural Power

and we are not talking about Creation .. but evolution .. whether we can detect the hand of a God in evolution .. were it there .. and whether or not you believe that beings might well exist with such "Apparent" powers .. say the power to move a chair .. through force of will .. and/or perhaps humans might one day develop technology that focuses brain waves .. giving one the ability to move that chair... through force of will .

Whenever a Creationist @wordy80 starts a thread like this it is from a fundamentalist Christian perspective challenging natural evolution. You cannot consider either view separately, The skeptics challenging "Natural or Magic" are directly challenging the Creationist perspective in Christianity and also Islam by the way, rely on the Pentateuch Creation account without science as "Magic."

The point of the thread is simply a proposal by @wordy80 of the impossibility of a natural history of life, because of a bogus argument against natural complexity.

I do not believe I missed the point of the problem of dealing with the word "Magic." It has no constructive purpose in the discussion.

As far God Creating by Natural Methods. This is simply the belief of Theistic Evolution without any consideration whether life could come about naturally or not without God. In this view God Created by Natural methods that science and determine took place naturally. I am scientist and the nature of life and and our physical existence is well explained, without the non-scientific smoke screen arguments concerning complexity.