Is the fundamental gap between creationists and non-creationists...

[AV1611VET]

When it comes to the Earth and life on it, the Bible is the last place I'd go for any sort of history lesson.

I suppose you'd go to the ocean to learn about Christopher Columbus?

Why? Because it does not reflect what the Earth nor even what the Universe is actually showing us about itSelf.

Revelation 4:11 Thou art worthy, O Lord, to receive glory and honour and power: for thou hast created all things, and for thy pleasure they are and were created.

 

[AV1611VET]

Personally, I like AV's opinions and welcome them. They foster thought, discussion and lots and lots of wonder, and occasional humor.

Thank you for the compliment!

 

[VirOptimus]

Personally, I like AV's opinions and welcome them. They foster thought, discussion and lots and lots of wonder, and occasional humor.

Lots of humor.

 

[Frank Robert]

How has it been determined that the eye is too complex to evolve by Darwinian mechanisms?

The way I understand (layman's understanding) Behe's argument is

All the parts of the eye must be there or it can not serve its function. the odds are so great against evolution building the eye over time by modifying or cobbling together per-existing parts are so great that that the eye must designed.

Here is Behe's definition from the video.

 

[renniks]

When it comes to the Earth and life on it, the Bible is the last place I'd go for any sort of history lesson. Why? Because it does not reflect what the Earth nor even what the Universe is actually showing us about itSelf.

What the Earth constantly shows me is that it was designed to function. And designed by a master artist, to be beautiful.

 

[dlamberth]

I suppose you'd go to the ocean to learn about Christopher Columbus?

No, I wouldn't. It's pretty much the same one gets from the Biblical Creation story.
But the Earth on the other hand leaves behind evidence of it's changes over time.

Revelation 4:11 Thou art worthy, O Lord, to receive glory and honour and power: for thou hast created all things, and for thy pleasure they are and were created.

I live in a world where all of Creation sings the Glory of God. But that's just the Panentheism perspective in me that sees that sort of thing.

 

[dlamberth]

What the Earth constantly shows me is that it was designed to function. And designed by a master artist, to be beautiful.

Agreed, the Earth is very beautiful and amazingly One with how everything works together.
Does the Earth also show you it's long term age and change over time?

 

[SelfSim]

What the Earth constantly shows me is that it was designed to function. And designed by a master artist, to be beautiful.

The function and beauty you see are .. well .. what you see. They are in your own mind.

 

[dlamberth]

The function and beauty you see are .. well .. what you see. They are in your own mind.

Love, Harmony and Beauty are all things that happen when the Mind is in ones Heart.
I suspect your not going to understand the Mind/Heart perspective.

 

[essentialsaltes]

All the parts of the eye must be there or it can not serve its function. the odds are so great against evolution building the eye over time by modifying or cobbling together per-existing parts are so great that that the eye must designed.

This is not a very good argument. Not only does it just shrug and say 'the odds are too big', but in fact scientists have quite a well-developed picture of the evolution of the eye.

 

[renniks]

The function and beauty you see are .. well .. what you see. They are in your own mind.

Well if I see anything built by man that is beautiful and functional, I certainly would never assume it just came to be all by itself.

 

[renniks]

Agreed, the Earth is very beautiful and amazingly One with how everything works together.
Does the Earth also show you it's long term age and change over time?

I've seen some really rapid changes just in my lifetime, so not really.

 

[SelfSim]

Love, Harmony and Beauty are all things that happen when the Mind is in ones Heart.
I suspect your not going to understand the Mind/Heart perspective.

I understand that that's your mind's model of preference .. (I have no real problems with that other than it won't always lead to practicality, or clarity, in certain situations.)

 

[AV1611VET]

... but in fact scientists have quite a well-developed picture of the evolution of the eye.

After how many tries?

 

[Ponderous Curmudgeon]

Lots of humor.

Evidence of Poe's law is often very humorous as well as sad.

 

[dlamberth]

I understand that that's your mind's model of preference .. (I have no real problems with that other than it won't always lead to practicality, or clarity, in certain situations.)

Beauty isn't practical? Maybe, maybe not. But it does lead to being a Human Being. And it also can lead to exploring the mystery. It just depends upon what's practical to a person, or not. Being drawn to something that one sees beautiful might cause a person for further exploration. So for a person like myself watching the drone videos of the Icelandic volcano's eruption (did you see it) is a beautiful thing to see and at the same time gave me a lot of practical understanding of that particular event.

 

[SelfSim]

Beauty isn't practical? Maybe, maybe not. But it does lead to being a Human Being. And it also can lead to exploring the mystery. It just depends upon what's practical to a person, or not.

There comes a point where your own life may depend on your (and others) thinking objectively. Concerns for beauty go out the door pretty quickly in those situations, (IMO).

Being drawn to something that one sees beautiful might cause a person for further exploration. So for a person like myself watching the drone videos of the Icelandic volcano's eruption (did you see it) is a beautiful thing to see and at the same time gave me a lot of practical understanding of that particular event.

.. and pondering the wonder behind how humans are responsible for inventing drones and pondering how they function!
The motivations behind speculation, (in the hope of leading to discoveries), is the means by which we further our understanding.

 

[Astrid]

IC is not measured but rather inferred when the trait (such as the eye) is too complex to evolve by Darwinian mechanisms.

At about minute 6:15 to minute 11 Dan works with Dr. Behe to draw out an exact definition. I think that would be the closest you can get to how it is inferred.

In a reply Dan Cardinale made at Peaceful Science when asked for a summary after of the interview he said:

"Behe was very cordial, but…it’s been 25 years since Black Box, and “irreducible complexity” is, still, not a well-fleshed-out idea.

I believe I asked for a quantifiable standard for “this thing is designed” five or six times, but did not get one, and just as many times he used a phrase like “in my mind” or equivalent.

The takeaway, I think, is that this is a completely subjective, and therefore unfalsifiable idea. Not that this is revelatory. I’m just honestly surprised in spite of myself that there isn’t an answer to “but how do you quantify that distinction?”"​

if anyone ever detected ic they might be able
to define this dubious distinction.

 

[Ponderous Curmudgeon]

There comes a point where your own life may depend on your (and others) thinking objectively. Concerns for beauty go out the door pretty quickly in those situations, (IMO).
.. and pondering the wonder behind how humans are responsible for inventing drones and pondering how they function!
The motivations behind speculation, (in the hope of leading to discoveries), is the means by which we further our understanding.

And to bridge the gap there is the Beauty of simple mathematical equations derived from human pondering which allow me to simply approximate how to use leverage to raise a rock as opposed to just grunting. You might want to widen your concept of beauty.

 

[SelfSim]

And to bridge the gap there is the Beauty of simple mathematical equations derived from human pondering which allow me to simply approximate how to use leverage to raise a rock as opposed to just grunting. You might want to widen your concept of beauty.

Hmm .. maybe.
I think its the equations that make the practical difference there though .. not so much the way we regard them(?)
Either way, I can still acknowledge, in awe, the mind(s) which achieved all of that.
'Beauty' there, still took a human mind to conceive .. and is never separate from one.