Scientific Evidence Supporting Intelligent Design

[painted wolf]

Every adaptation and mutation could have been not the result of tinkering but rather had a statistically greater likelihood to occur in the manner than it did and this would qualify as "Designed" (not necessarily intelligent, since a self-organizing cosmos need not be "intelligent" in the manner we understand the term to mean).

How do you reconcile this with the fact that natural selection is not random? (I'm not saying natural selection is purposeful btw... just that it's not chaotic.)
Mutations are random, but what mutations prove useful for an organism are not.

Is any non-random event 'designed' in your opinion?

Though I do tend to agree that Sandor has over-stepped himself in terms of the evidence available.

wa:do

 

[Nepenthe]

If Sandor606 is the person his homepage links to he has a B.A. in Poli' Sci' from the Cal State Northridge (a fine university where my mum got her Masters. ) and an M.A. in History from the University of Colorado. No biology background to speak of (though admittedly he's never actually claimed a biology degree- just knowledge of biology which has been shown to be false again and again...). And again, if he's the person on his homepage, he's published in a couple of political science journals.

But the more interesting thing to me is that he never answered my question in another thread as to whether he was a Urantian and/or a theosophist. And in the homepage he's clearly a Urantian. This is relevant in that Urantians rely on the anthropic principle to base their religious views, views which emphasize evolution as an intelligently controlled process. The Urantia Book says "mortal man is not an evolutionary accident" and that the origin of life was brought about by entities known as "will dignity", mysterious spiritual beings. The Urantia Book mentions species evolving in single mutations, or references to "suddenly appeared" quite a bit. Here's some of the Urantia book's views on evolution, life carriers and will dignity: The Urantia Book.

It's relevant because if he's a Urantian it puts his posts- such as using terms like "life plasm"- into context and explains why his understanding of evolution is so limited. I'd take the same stance against some Mormon's claims about New World archaeology or a fundamentalist's biblical literalism. No, you don't need a biology/zoology/anthropology degree to discuss evolution, but if your views of the subject are so misinformed and you make claims that have been debunked again and again, well then asking where these ridiculous opinions came from is relevant.

Of course all this is predicated on Sandor606 being a Urantian....

 

[Autodidact]

More importantly, has sandor been lying to us about his background? This would cast doubt on his general veracity. Otherwise I agree his educational background would not be relevant.

 

[sandor606]

If Sandor606 is the person his homepage links to he has a B.A. in Poli' Sci' from the Cal State Northridge (a fine university where my mum got her Masters. ) and an M.A. in History from the University of Colorado. No biology background to speak of (though admittedly he's never actually claimed a biology degree- just knowledge of biology which has been shown to be false again and again...). And again, if he's the person on his homepage, he's published in a couple of political science journals.

But the more interesting thing to me is that he never answered my question in another thread as to whether he was a Urantian and/or a theosophist. And in the homepage he's clearly a Urantian. This is relevant in that Urantians rely on the anthropic principle to base their religious views, views which emphasize evolution as an intelligently controlled process. The Urantia Book says "mortal man is not an evolutionary accident" and that the origin of life was brought about by entities known as "will dignity", mysterious spiritual beings. The Urantia Book mentions species evolving in single mutations, or references to "suddenly appeared" quite a bit. Here's some of the Urantia book's views on evolution, life carriers and will dignity: The Urantia Book.

It's relevant because if he's a Urantian it puts his posts- such as using terms like "life plasm"- into context and explains why his understanding of evolution is so limited. I'd take the same stance against some Mormon's claims about New World archaeology or a fundamentalist's biblical literalism. No, you don't need a biology/zoology/anthropology degree to discuss evolution, but if your views of the subject are so misinformed and you make claims that have been debunked again and again, well then asking where these ridiculous opinions came from is relevant.

Of course all this is predicated on Sandor606 being a Urantian....

Yes, I am that Sandor and thank you for being the one who brought this all to light.The untruth of my claim to have an undergraduate degree in Biology was meant to get people to question me, dig deeper into my background and, hopefully, have someone discover that I am connected with The Urantia Book (www.urantia.org) and why I believe what I believe.
It was in Biology 102 that I asked those questions and received the standard answers, the ones that were given here but which did not satisfy me. The differences between dinosaurs and birds are too many and too deep, I thought. Another question was: If birds evolved gradually from dinosaurs, where are the fossils of the intermediate species?
I found what I believed could be the answer in The Urantia Book in 1978:
"55,000,000 years ago the evolutionary march was marked by the sudden appearance of the first of the true birds, a small pigeonlike creature which was the ancestor of all bird life. This was the third type of flying creature to appear on earth, and it sprang directly from the reptilian group, not from the contemporary flying dinosaurs nor from the earlier types of toothed land birds. And so this becomes known as the age of birds as well as the declining age of reptiles." (p.691)

Whatever one may think of John A. Davison's personality, he is an authority in developmental biology. His Prescribed Evolutionary Hypothesis supports the following statement from The Urantia Book. I shared it with him (both privately and on EvC) and he agreed. He also agreed with the statement on the genesis of birds.
"The original life plasm of an evolutionary world must contain the full potential for all future developmental variations and for all subsequent evolutionary changes and modifications. The provision for such far-reaching projects of life metamorphosis may require the appearance of many apparently useless forms of animal and vegetable life. Such by-products of planetary evolution, foreseen or unforeseen, appear upon the stage of action only to disappear, but in and through all this long process there runs the thread of the wise and intelligent formulations of the original designers of the planetary life plan and species scheme."(p.398)

Everything I provided so far as evidence of ID is in agreement with what is in The Urantia Book.

 

[Autodidact]

So what you're saying is that you've lied to us and been caught? And now you want us to believe your explanation for why you lied, or anything else you have to say? Well you've got quite the uphill battle there.

 

[Autodidact]

We already have a thread about the therapod/bird transition, so I suggest you go there to discuss that issue. In fact we have found many transitional fossils in that progression, mostly in the last 20 years. You might want to update your knowledge, if any.

 

[painted wolf]

Well, that clears a lot up....

The untruth of my claim to have an undergraduate degree in Biology was meant to get people to question me, dig deeper into my background and, hopefully, have someone discover that I am connected with The Urantia Book (www.urantia.org) and why I believe what I believe.

I'm not surprised... but I am deeply disappointed.

Why do some people feel that lies are the only way to give their views merit? How can anyone take anything said from here seriously? Nothing said can be accepted as truth.

wa:do

 

[Alceste]

Nepenthe wins! I never even heard of these people before. I will take a page out of her book and do some proper snooping before making my guesses from now on.

 

[sandor606]

So what you're saying is that you've lied to us and been caught? And now you want us to believe your explanation for why you lied, or anything else you have to say? Well you've got quite the uphill battle there.

I gave false information so that I would be caught. If I had not wanted that I would have completely changed my identity. I have used sandor606 on all other forums and I am very easy to track on the internet. My purpose was, as I explained, to have someone else tie me to The Urantia Book. I wanted the cat out of the bag, as it were, but I did not wanted to do it myself. Believe it or not, it's the truth.

In the final analysis, however, what I did has no bearing and does not in the least invalidate what I posted in support of ID which deserves to be judged on its merits, even if I were a complete fraud as a person.

 

[sandor606]

Well, that clears a lot up....


I'm not surprised... but I am deeply disappointed.

Why do some people feel that lies are the only way to give their views merit? How can anyone take anything said from here seriously? Nothing said can be accepted as truth.

wa:do

Every "message" has the right to be judged on its own merits, not on the nature of the messenger. If what I did disappoints you so much that you reject the message because of the messenger, then your decision is certainly disappointing. By throwing away the baby with the bathwater, you are rejecting much truth. Use the info I provided on ID and judge it on its merits. That is all that matters.

 

[sandor606]

We already have a thread about the therapod/bird transition, so I suggest you go there to discuss that issue. In fact we have found many transitional fossils in that progression, mostly in the last 20 years. You might want to update your knowledge, if any.

I'll go the that thread and always wish to update my knowledge. I googled but I did not find a site that carried the info you provided. Could you help? I am open-minded and looking for answers to my questions.

 

[Alceste]

Don't be stupid, Sandor. Nobody is interested in your "message". Painted Wolf and Autodidact were trying to help you understand what science is and how evolution works - for your own benefit - not fishing for "messages" to evaluate. But seeing as you're only here to deliver your message, rather than to learn something, how do you suppose being exposed as a fraud and a liar reflects on the value of any message you might wish to deliver?

It is disappointing when a person so obviously in desperate need of assistance summarily rejects it when it is patiently offered by those who are in a position to help. Even more so when the person in question asked for assistance on false pretenses in order to open a window to proselytize the doctrines of some crackpot UFO cult.

 

[painted wolf]

The tactics of the messenger reflect on the message.
If you felt that the message needed lies to make it more believable then it shows that you feel the message is a weak one.

Truths offered on a plate of lies are poisoned.

wa:do

 

[Autodidact]

I gave false information so that I would be caught. If I had not wanted that I would have completely changed my identity. I have used sandor606 on all other forums and I am very easy to track on the internet. My purpose was, as I explained, to have someone else tie me to The Urantia Book. I wanted the cat out of the bag, as it were, but I did not wanted to do it myself. Believe it or not, it's the truth.

Your first problem is that since we know that you lie, why would we believe your extremely odd and unlikely explanation for why you lied? Since you've established yourself as a liar? The reason it's odd and unlikely is that if you want to talk to us about Urantia, you're welcome to do that. There's no need to wait for someone to play Sherlock Holmes.

In the final analysis, however, what I did has no bearing and does not in the least invalidate what I posted in support of ID which deserves to be judged on its merits, even if I were a complete fraud as a person.

Well it certainly casts doubt on any factual statement you made in support of that or anything else. This is consistent with your general disregard for accuracy, as falsely asserting that there are no precursors to birds, and so forth. These statements are factually incorrect.

As for judging ID on its merits, it has none, so we're done there.

 

[Autodidact]

Every "message" has the right to be judged on its own merits, not on the nature of the messenger. If what I did disappoints you so much that you reject the message because of the messenger, then your decision is certainly disappointing. By throwing away the baby with the bathwater, you are rejecting much truth. Use the info I provided on ID and judge it on its merits. That is all that matters.

I'm sure that like me (and unlike you) Painted Wolf has thoroughly studied ID well before she read your butchered presentation, and rejected it on its own lack of merit long ago, as is the case for most thinkers not blinded by religious bias, such as Judge Jones.

 

[Autodidact]

I'll go the that thread and always wish to update my knowledge. I googled but I did not find a site that carried the info you provided. Could you help? I am open-minded and looking for answers to my questions.

There's no point in you asserting anything, even that you Googled something, as I don't believe you. Again, you would have to be completely incompetent at internet research not to find the following:

The Origin and Early Evolution of Birds | GeologyRocks
Origin and Evolution of Birds
Origin of birds - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
New "Mini" Dinosaur a Step in Bird Evolution Path

Just to get you started. I don't provide primary sources, as I doubt that you could understand them.

 

[sandor606]

There's no point in you asserting anything, even that you Googled something, as I don't believe you. Again, you would have to be completely incompetent at internet research not to find the following:

The Origin and Early Evolution of Birds | GeologyRocks
Origin and Evolution of Birds
Origin of birds - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
New "Mini" Dinosaur a Step in Bird Evolution Path

Just to get you started. I don't provide primary sources, as I doubt that you could understand them.

I am familiar with the dinosaur argument. I thought I would get something else. The dynosaur hypothesis did not convince me then and does not convince me now. It also does not convince some experts such as Michael Denton. I find his argument more convincing and credible.

 

[camanintx]

I already ansered the question as to why the constants of physics are the way they are. Read my posts or Google for the answer.

Saying "they were designed" does not explain how they came about or what range of possible values they could have taken. Try again.

 

[painted wolf]

I am familiar with the dinosaur argument. I thought I would get something else. The dynosaur hypothesis did not convince me then and does not convince me now. It also does not convince some experts such as Michael Denton. I find his argument more convincing and credible.

Since Denton isn't a paleontologist I don't find his arguments any more convincing than I would the opinion of a Dentist on treating Lymphoma.

wa:do

 

[Jose Fly]

Oh boy....I guess I missed a couple of good days, eh?

So Sandor is a liar, and is now trying to get everyone to follow him down another series of rabbit trails, even though he's already clearly shown that he's not asking his questions in good faith and will not pay too much attention to the answers.

IOW, we have before us yet another dishonest creationist who is completely unable to discuss science in an honest manner.

Kind of makes me wonder where all these good, honest creationists are that people keep telling me about.