The flaws in Intelligent design

[Jollybear]

It doesn't they are separate events. Evolution theory explains the progression of life through selection and adaptation. Abiogenesis is explained by the interaction of energy and matter in the development of more complex organic compounds as demonstrated in the scientific literature.

So matter and energy interacting is going to create information for life?

Yea, i dont BUY it.

But hey, let me give ya big hug

 

[Dan From Smithville]

I gave you the quotes from collins stating he said evidence, design and fine tuning! Whats the matter with you?

Yeah. I saw you quote his personal opinions. Everyone has some of those. It is not evidence that God exists. It is evidence that he believes.

I could ask you the same thing. Cognitive dissonance. Ignorance of the subject matter. Extreme bias. Denial. Those all come to mind when I am trying to make sense of what you post.

All you have done is appeal to authority and you chose a personal opinion rather than a scientific opinion to support your claim. His personal opinion is not science fact.

 

[Bear Wild]

The codons in DNA are evidence.

Codons are literally a code.

Huburt yokey, a scientist, who is NOT a ID advocate, admits that the code in DNA is NOT medephor, but is LITERAL.

Yes they are the evidence that genetic material guides the formation of proteins and that genetic material is influence by natural selection as in the theory of evolution. The original formation of the codons and their effect on organic compounds is the study of abiogenesis which has its own scientific support. DNA is not a metaphor if that what you are trying to say. It is an organic substrate formed by energy and matter. No metaphor required. Certainly no evidence for ID. There is both chaos and organization in the universe that is present without any intelligent designer.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I gave you the quotes from collins stating he said evidence, design and fine tuning! Whats the matter with you?

But no one can show any "design" and fine tuning was refuted a long long time ago. Fine tuning is simply a variation on an argument from ignorance. Neither qualify as evidence.

 

[Jollybear]

Have you read his work? You keep using him as a source, but have you really read any of his work? Are you just repeating what some biased website told you?

Explain how the nucleotides are a code? Do you think that means the little magnetized particles on hard drives are code too?

I read his quotes. The verbatum quotes from yokey

 

[Subduction Zone]

So collins has two oposite opinions? Lol

Or perhaps you misunderstood what he said.

Do you know how to quote and link? It is a technique that is a must for debating.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I read his quotes. The verbatum quotes from yokey

Please provide a link to the source.

 

[Bear Wild]

So matter and energy interacting is going to create information for life?

Yea, i dont BUY it.

But hey, let me give ya big hug

We are matter and energy why does that surprise you.

 

[Jollybear]

Yes they are the evidence that genetic material guides the formation of proteins and that genetic material is influence by natural selection as in the theory of evolution. The original formation of the codons and their effect on organic compounds is the study of abiogenesis which has its own scientific support. DNA is not a metaphor if that what you are trying to say. It is an organic substrate formed by energy and matter. No metaphor required. Certainly no evidence for ID. There is both chaos and organization in the universe that is present without any intelligent designer.

Ok, so you agree that there is LITERALLY a code in DNA?

 

[Subduction Zone]

No, none of that conjecture about origins of DNA and life is evidence that natural forces did it. Thats just "naturalism of the gaps" and it relies astronomically upon chance.

Please be careful in the terms that you use. When you say "conjecture" you put the burden of proof upon yourself to prove conjecture. You don't get to claim it and expect anyone to take you seriously if you can't support your claims.

The conclusions, not conjecture, about how DNA arose are based upon scientific evidence. A concept that we should discuss too.

 

[Jollybear]

We are matter and energy why does that surprise you.

Wer more then just matter and energy. Wer concious, intelligent, emotional, complex beings.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

It doesn't they are separate events. Evolution theory explains the progression of life through selection and adaptation. Abiogenesis is explained by the interaction of energy and matter in the development of more complex organic compounds as demonstrated in the scientific literature.

The continued efforts to conflate the two concepts is a favorite tactic among creationists. Trying to marry a biological phenomenon that is so heavily supported with one that remains undiscovered in science must seem like a great way to win an argument when you have no evidence and do not understand the science.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Wer more then just matter and energy. Wer concious, intelligent, emotional, complex beings.

Yes. Made out of matter and using energy. None of those things you mention preclude matter and energy and, in fact, require them.

 

[Jollybear]

Have you read his work? You keep using him as a source, but have you really read any of his work? Are you just repeating what some biased website told you?

Explain how the nucleotides are a code? Do you think that means the little magnetized particles on hard drives are code too?

Ill give you a hug too.

 

[Bear Wild]

Ok, so you agree that there is LITERALLY a code in DNA?

There is the translation of the sequence of nucleotides to form proteins yes. Code is a human centric term. The translation is a natural process and became successful in reproducing itself - a complex natural pattern just as there are many patterns in nature.

 

[Jollybear]

Please be careful in the terms that you use. When you say "conjecture" you put the burden of proof upon yourself to prove conjecture. You don't get to claim it and expect anyone to take you seriously if you can't support your claims.

The conclusions, not conjecture, about how DNA arose are based upon scientific evidence. A concept that we should discuss too.

 

[Bear Wild]

Wer more then just matter and energy. Wer concious, intelligent, emotional, complex beings.

Yes we and other animal are and why not include plants. This development is explained in evolutionary theory without the need for and ID. It took time but our consciousness, intelligence and emotion just as it was for crows, apes. elephants and other creatures on earth were selected for because the increased the likelihood for that genetic pattern to be reproduced. All natural no artificial ID added.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Please be careful in the terms that you use. When you say "conjecture" you put the burden of proof upon yourself to prove conjecture. You don't get to claim it and expect anyone to take you seriously if you can't support your claims.

The conclusions, not conjecture, about how DNA arose are based upon scientific evidence. A concept that we should discuss too.

Do you remember all the arguments, debates and discussions we had with creationists on the old Topix forum. Do you remember how often the creationists would lose the arguments and declare victory. It was pigeon chess.

It amazes me how that has not changed, despite a change in venue. I know it should not, but even in the face of recognizing that you can lead a horse to water, but you cannot make it drink, I still am in awe at how many thirsty horses there are and how strongly they refuse to drink.

I suppose I was expecting a better class of creationist here and have been disappointed to find that they are the same here as anywhere I have been in the past.

 

[Bear Wild]

Yes Evolution is all natural with no artificial ID added.

 

[Jollybear]

There is the translation of the sequence of nucleotides to form proteins yes. Code is a human centric term. The translation is a natural process and became successful in reproducing itself - a complex natural pattern just as there are many patterns in nature.

Well ill be dammed. You agree the DNA code is literally a code.

Hey dan, you hear that from fox? He said YES to my question about the code being literal.

You gonna get him for that?

You know fox, dan thinks DNA code is mediphor.

I got an idea, how about me and you gang up on him about that? Lol