How do you detect "design"?

[YoursTrue]

You tried to explain what ATP-synthase was as an example of what good writing looks like after complaining that my explanations were too wordy (and were plagiarized). I explained to you why the words in your example were inadequate.

One can Google the term and get a broad sense of what is being considered and discussed, but that is not the same as understanding it. It's a very complex and difficult subject. You thought that the actions of ATP-synthase were like breathing. That's not even ballpark.

No, that's not what the thread is about. The term hadn't been mentioned until I did so recently. The thread is about detecting (intentional) design. Irreducible complexity (IC) entered the discussion followed by ATP-synthase presumably as an example of IC. Most recently, the thread has been in part about your complaints regarding my writing style, so you decided to show me how it should be done by writing a comment that was brief but relatively content-free apart from errors.

How do you think that's going for you so far?

From my perspective you ARE the "liars," and the critical thinkers are here to correct your errors as I did earlier. Promoting creationism isn't an honest activity, nor are its adherents interested in truth. It's a notoriously deceitful activity: Pious fraud

That's interesting. It's probably not a threat, but what is it then? Advice? If so, I've already indicated to you that I'm not in the market for life advice, and if I were, it would be from somebody I wanted to emulate - somebody who had something I wanted but lacked. Do you think you fit that description?

So--critically thinking of course on your side-- how do you feel about the Doomsday Clock which predicts disaster for the human race is closer than ever? How do you feel about crime? Do you think scientific exploration and critical thinking will solve those problems? Perhaps you don't feel these problems have any bearing on science, or rather that science and "critical thinking" have no bearing on -- mankind's outcome.

 

[Eli G]

Repeating until you believe it doesn't work for everyone.

People are tired of lies for political purposes. The lie that the evolution of species is a fact has already been refuted millions of times online.

This other lie is even more obvious... like @Brian2 said:

There are no explanations of how it evolved, there are only educated guesses of a potential pathway which is just presumed to be an explanation of how it did evolve.
Proposing a pathway does not show this pathway to be correct.
Even if this proposed pathway is correct, that does not show that it isn't designed.



Sounds like proposing a hypothesis and other scientists trying to falsify it. Isn't that how it goes, and if it is not falsified then it is correct.
In another hypothesis a scientists is actually saying "Duh, I don't know how this thing could have happened any other way than the way I am proposing." Then other scientists try to falsify it. That is not called an aguement from ignorance even though it is.
Your bias towards scientists who are believers is showing.

You are deceiving yourselves and no one else.

 

[leroy]

And I gave you a pair of QRs for you to determine design and you could not even guess. Your method is worthless which is what we are trying to explain to you.

Again according to my method if any of those QRs opens a website I would conclude that the letters that you inserted where carefully picked and intended (designed)
.....................that has been explained to you maaaaaaaaaaaaany times

So please ether refute or grant this statement

 

[leroy]

So you can't explain your point so you run away.

This is not how to take over the earth.

not correcting something that has been corrected 10+ times is not running away

 

[leroy]

so not designed as far as you can tell with your method?

Correct………typing random letters = non design

 

[YoursTrue]

To go far back in the supposed history of RNA and DNA is quite the thing.

 

[shunyadragon]

So--critically thinking of course on your side-- how do you feel about the Doomsday Clock which predicts disaster for the human race is closer than ever? How do you feel about crime? Do you think scientific exploration and critical thinking will solve those problems? Perhaps you don't feel these problems have any bearing on science, or rather that science and "critical thinking" have no bearing on -- mankind's outcome.

Basically the Doomsday clock is not science, and they keep changing it.

Science is a tool box for human use and does not in and of itself solve problems. Humans make problems and are responsible for solving problems, Though humans are not doing well to take responsibility fo solving our problems.

Not remotely the subject of the thread. It would help to start a thread on this topic instead of wandering off on a tangent.

Critical thinking: Critical thinking - Wikipedia

Critical thinking is the analysis of available facts, evidence, observations, and arguments in order to form a judgement by the application of rational, skeptical, and unbiased analyses and evaluation.

Basically for the standard for critical thinking is questioning everything critically and be willing to change wha there is now information. The foundation of science is built on critical thinking where new facts and evidence influences a constantly changing body of knowledge through Methodological Naturalism

 

[YoursTrue]

Basically the Doomsday clock is not science, and they keep changing it.

Science is a tool box for human use and does not in and of itself solve problems. Humans make problems and are responsible for solving problems, Though humans are not doing well to take responsibility fo solving our problems.

Not remotely the subject of the thread. It would help to start a thread on this topic instead of wandering off on a tangent.

Well let's see, would unintelligent design be a better phrase?

 

[YoursTrue]

Basically the Doomsday clock is not science, and they keep changing it.

Science is a tool box for human use and does not in and of itself solve problems. Humans make problems and are responsible for solving problems, Though humans are not doing well to take responsibility fo solving our problems.

Not remotely the subject of the thread. It would help to start a thread on this topic instead of wandering off on a tangent.

Glad we agree at least that humans are not doing such a good job at solving mankind's problems.

 

[YoursTrue]

Basically the Doomsday clock is not science, and they keep changing it.

Science is a tool box for human use and does not in and of itself solve problems. Humans make problems and are responsible for solving problems, Though humans are not doing well to take responsibility fo solving our problems.

Not remotely the subject of the thread. It would help to start a thread on this topic instead of wandering off on a tangent.

It is remotely the subject since these types of discussions like intelligent design or non intelligent structure because design implies a designer or a random factor, are not integral to help mankind.

 

[shunyadragon]

Well let's see, would unintelligent design be a better phrase?

No, The Physical nature of our existence is neutral to the destiny and abuse of the world by humans.

The concept of unintelligent design would be product of incompetent engineers, which nonetheless too common.

 

[shunyadragon]

It is remotely the subject since these types of discussions like intelligent design or non intelligent structure because design implies a designer or a random factor, are not integral to help mankind.

Humanity is responsible for their own actions good and bad as individuals or groups,

Intelligent Design is a religious proposition that Nature must have a designer, ie God or maybe aliens, for Nature o be as it is rejecting an objective natural explanation of Nature. This would have no influence on the nature of our physical existence or the incompetent selfish human actions that would cause our demise in the Dooms Day. The Basic Sciences that describe the nature of our physical existence is neutral to human abuse of the world.

Unintelligent Design would be just the work of incompetent engineers.

 

[Pogo]

Mmmmh, what?

We have already explained this to you, this is just the latest claim from the Discotute to get donations. As you have already seen, there is a great deal of understanding already as to the origin of ATP and you should also understand that your understanding of the function and origin of ATP is not only irrelevant to the discussion but just plain wrong. You only embarrass Christianity by continuing with your denial of reality.

 

[shunyadragon]

Repeating until you believe it doesn't work for everyone.

Of course it would help those stoically transigent in remaining intentionally ignorant based on an ancient tribal agenda without science.

People are tired of lies for political purposes. The lie that the evolution of species is a fact has already been refuted millions of times online.

If this would be the case Donald T Rump would not be so popular,

This other lie is even more obvious... like @Brian2 said:

Turkeys of a feather flock together

You are deceiving yourselves and no one else.

No coherent response with only name calling and abuse is your Modus Operandi.

 

[YoursTrue]

Humanity is responsible for their own actions good and bad as individuals or groups,

Intelligent Design is a religious proposition that Nature must have a designer, ie God or maybe aliens, for Nature o be as it is rejecting an objective natural explanation of Nature. This would have no influence on the nature of our physical existence or the incompetent selfish human actions that would cause our demise in the Dooms Day. The Basic Sciences that describe the nature of our physical existence is neutral to human abuse of the world.

Unintelligent Design would be just the work of incompetent engineers.

I do not refer to Discovery Institute for answers. The situation, however, with DNA or RNA is that it is very complex and from what I have researched scientists really do not know how it all began.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

Repeating until you believe it doesn't work for everyone.

Yes, I know. It works pretty well in church and on conservative indoctrination media, however. And it's the basis for much successful advertising.

The lie that the evolution of species is a fact has already been refuted millions of times online.

Never successfully.

Which do you think that there are more of in the West - creationists or people accepting the theory of evolution? That is, which one is considered the lie by more people. Which claim has been successfully refuted more often?

some other posters here also do not post long posts

Yes, I know, and you're one of them. Here are three unabridged posts from you on this thread:

"To go far back in the supposed history of RNA and DNA is quite the thing."
"Well let's see, would unintelligent design be a better phrase?"
"Glad we agree at least that humans are not doing such a good job at solving mankind's problems"

The problem with posting like this rather than in paragraphs is that post like these add nothing.

how do you feel about the Doomsday Clock which predicts disaster for the human race is closer than ever?

Interesting but not very useful. How does one use that estimate?

How do you feel about crime?

I'm against it. How about you?

 

[McBell]

I do not refer to Discovery Institute for answers. The situation, however, with DNA or RNA is that it is very complex and from what I have researched scientists really do not know how it all began.

Post #881

 

[YoursTrue]

Humanity is responsible for their own actions good and bad as individuals or groups,

Intelligent Design is a religious proposition that Nature must have a designer, ie God or maybe aliens, for Nature o be as it is rejecting an objective natural explanation of Nature. This would have no influence on the nature of our physical existence or the incompetent selfish human actions that would cause our demise in the Dooms Day. The Basic Sciences that describe the nature of our physical existence is neutral to human abuse of the world.

Unintelligent Design would be just the work of incompetent engineers.

In reference to humanity being responsible for its own outcome, would you say evolutionists' believe that aggressive behavior passed on such traits in their genes?

 

[YoursTrue]

Yes, I know. It works pretty well in church and on conservative indoctrination media, however. And it's the basis for much successful advertising.

Never successfully.

Which do you think that there are more of in the West - creationists or people accepting the theory of evolution? That is, which one is considered the lie by more people. Which claim has been successfully refuted more often?

Yes, I know, and you're one of them. Here are three unabridged posts from you on this thread:

"To go far back in the supposed history of RNA and DNA is quite the thing."
"Well let's see, would unintelligent design be a better phrase?"
"Glad we agree at least that humans are not doing such a good job at solving mankind's problems"

The problem with posting like this rather than in paragraphs is that post like these add nothing.

Interesting but not very useful. How does one use that estimate?

I'm against it. How about you?

I guess first we'd have to define what crime is. Which brings me back to evolutionary theory. But then again--what do you think humans think the word crime means and how is it applied?

 

[F1fan]

Well let's see, would unintelligent design be a better phrase?

Only to explain cancer in children. But there’s not even evidence for an incompetent God, let alone a loving God that still created cancers in children.

I noticed you never could explain it.