Evolution and the myth of "scientific consensus"

bhsmte said:

Well Howie goes against everything I learned in graduate school level human physiology, because proper function of the body, is 100% dependent on the rules of chemistry, taking over.

Click to expand...

What part do you disagree with him with?
"But, like in any game, to follow the rules means that you must first take control. If you're playing baseball you can't hit the ball just anywhere or run the bases any which way. By taking control you must try to keep the ball in fair territory and run the bases correctly. So too, your body must be able to take control of many different chemicals and functions."

Smidlee said:

"Everything in the world is made up of matter. All matter consists of many different types of atoms chemically bonded to form different types of molecules. All matter mustfollow the rules of physics and chemistry. Just like our planet where two-thirds is covered by water and one-third by land, our body is roughly two-thirds water and one-third other matter. But, unlike most of the earth, our "water and dust" is organized for life. The body is made up of trillions of cells each of which contains trillions and trillions of atoms and molecules. Since our cells are made up of atoms and molecules, this means that they too must obey the laws of nature."

"But, like in any game, to follow the rules means that you must first take control. If you're playing baseball you can't hit the ball just anywhere or run the bases any which way. By taking control you must try to keep the ball in fair territory and run the bases correctly. So too, your body must be able to take control of many different chemicals and functions."

Click to expand...

You just got through saying when the body is subject to the rules of physics and chemistry, it dies, this states they obey those laws???

So how does your body take control of these many different chemicals and functions? Do you do this consciously?

bhsmte said:

You just got through saying when the body is subject to the rules of physics and chemistry, it dies, this states they obey those laws???

So how does your body take control of these many different chemicals and functions? Do you do this consciously?

Click to expand...

He continues to explain this in later post if you are interested.

Smidlee said:

He continues to explain this in later post if you are interested.

Click to expand...

Why don't you explain it, in your own words.

How does your body take control of the rules of physics and chemistry?

Smidlee said:

"Everything in the world is made up of matter. All matter consists of many different types of atoms chemically bonded to form different types of molecules. All matter mustfollow the rules of physics and chemistry. Just like our planet where two-thirds is covered by water and one-third by land, our body is roughly two-thirds water and one-third other matter. But, unlike most of the earth, our "water and dust" is organized for life. The body is made up of trillions of cells each of which contains trillions and trillions of atoms and molecules. Since our cells are made up of atoms and molecules, this means that they too must obey the laws of nature."

"But, like in any game, to follow the rules means that you must first take control. If you're playing baseball you can't hit the ball just anywhere or run the bases any which way. By taking control you must try to keep the ball in fair territory and run the bases correctly. So too, your body must be able to take control of many different chemicals and functions."

Click to expand...

Please explain how the supposed engineered machines in your cells were created by your conscious control of DNA, RNA, and proteins. I would love to hear this explanation.

bhsmte said:

Why don't you explain it, in your own words.

How does your body take control of the rules of physics and chemistry?

Click to expand...

I couldn't do a better job explain it than he does:

"To be able to control something this way requires having at least three different parts all working together in perfect harmony. The first thing you need is a sensor to detect what needs to be controlled. If you have no way of being aware of what needs to be controlled, how can you control it? The sensor is like the reconnaissance team that an army sends out to check on the whereabouts and activities of its enemy. Without this sensory information the army would be in the dark and would have no way of taking control of the situation.

The second thing you need is an integrator which interprets the information from the sensors, compares it to a standard, makes decisions about what needs to be done, and then sends out orders. If you don't understand the information from the sensors, don't have any idea about what is required, and can't make decisions about what should be done or send out orders, then what use are your sensors? The integrator is like army headquarters where the information from the reconnaissance team is analyzed, compared to the strategic plan, decisions are made about what needs to be done, and orders are sent out. Without this work of integration at HQ, there would be no coordinated action in the field and, again, no way of taking control of the situation.

The third thing you need is an effector which receives the orders from the integrator and does something. If you have a sensor to detect what needs to be controlled and an integrator to know what needs to be done and sends out orders, but not an effector to take those orders and do something, then what's the use of having the first two? The effector is like the soldiers who, at the orders received from headquarters, go and do what needs to be done. Without soldiers to take effective action, the battle is lost."

http://www.evolutionnews.org/2015/04/what_the_body_m095051.html

Oncedeceived said:

What paradox?

Click to expand...

The one that, I, as a reader of Dawkins book, have been satisfied with.

Smidlee said:

I couldn't do a better job explain it than he does:

"To be able to control something this way requires having at least three different parts all working together in perfect harmony. The first thing you need is a sensor to detect what needs to be controlled. If you have no way of being aware of what needs to be controlled, how can you control it? The sensor is like the reconnaissance team that an army sends out to check on the whereabouts and activities of its enemy. Without this sensory information the army would be in the dark and would have no way of taking control of the situation.

The second thing you need is an integrator which interprets the information from the sensors, compares it to a standard, makes decisions about what needs to be done, and then sends out orders. If you don't understand the information from the sensors, don't have any idea about what is required, and can't make decisions about what should be done or send out orders, then what use are your sensors? The integrator is like army headquarters where the information from the reconnaissance team is analyzed, compared to the strategic plan, decisions are made about what needs to be done, and orders are sent out. Without this work of integration at HQ, there would be no coordinated action in the field and, again, no way of taking control of the situation.

The third thing you need is an effector which receives the orders from the integrator and does something. If you have a sensor to detect what needs to be controlled and an integrator to know what needs to be done and sends out orders, but not an effector to take those orders and do something, then what's the use of having the first two? The effector is like the soldiers who, at the orders received from headquarters, go and do what needs to be done. Without soldiers to take effective action, the battle is lost."

http://www.evolutionnews.org/2015/04/what_the_body_m095051.html

Click to expand...

Doesn't address how one "controls" the rules of chemistry and physics.

You previously posted, that if the body is controlled by the rules of chemistry and biology, it dies. Then you posted something, that said something different.

Bottom line, the body is dependent on the rules of physics and chemistry to remain alive.

Loudmouth said:

Please explain how the supposed engineered machines in your cells were created by your conscious control of DNA, RNA, and proteins. I would love to hear this explanation.

Click to expand...

This should be good.

bhsmte said:

Doesn't address how one "controls" the rules of chemistry and physics.

You previously posted, that if the body is controlled by the rules of chemistry and biology, it dies. Then you posted something, that said something different.

Bottom line, the body is dependent on the rules of physics and chemistry to remain alive.

Click to expand...

He makes ten times more sense than any evolutionary biologist ever has.
"Now that you know what is required to take control (sensor, integrator, effector), we'll consider in a general way what the body uses to take control of its chemical contents and physiological function. But remember that not only are each of these systems more complex than keeping enough gas, oil or anti-freeze in your car -- if any one of them were to be absent or were to malfunction, then death would take place, just like with a car. Finally, remember that evolutionary biologists expect us to believe that this all came about through chance and the laws of nature alone."

Smidlee said:

What part do you disagree with him with?
"But, like in any game, to follow the rules means that you must first take control. If you're playing baseball you can't hit the ball just anywhere or run the bases any which way. By taking control you must try to keep the ball in fair territory and run the bases correctly. So too, your body must be able to take control of many different chemicals and functions."

Click to expand...

Do you have to "take control" in order to make a beta-actin protein subunit?

Smidlee said:

He makes ten times more sense than any evolutionary biologist ever has.
"Now that you know what is required to take control (sensor, integrator, effector), we'll consider in a general way what the body uses to take control of its chemical contents and physiological function. But remember that not only are each of these systems more complex than keeping enough gas, oil or anti-freeze in your car -- if any one of them were to be absent or were to malfunction, then death would take place, just like with a car. Finally, remember that evolutionary biologists expect us to believe that this all came about through chance and the laws of nature alone."

Click to expand...

Hey, if you like what the dude says, then hold onto him.

bhsmte said:

Hey, if you like what the dude says, then hold onto him.

Click to expand...

Yes I usually like something that makes sense.

Smidlee said:

Yes I usually like something that makes sense.

Click to expand...

Then please tell me how it "makes sense" that you have to "take control" in order to produce a ribosome inside of your cells. How much of your day to sit around thinking, "Make ribosomes . . . Make ribosomes . . Make ribosomes . . ."

Here is a better idea. Why don't you show us how to take control and consciously stop the production of ribosomes in your body.

Loudmouth said:

Only the ignorant fill in the gaps in our knowledge with magic. "I don't know" is not magic. It never has been.

Click to expand...

Evolution-believing scientists do it all the time. Ask them where the matter came from to create the Big Bang and they say "a singularity" (a fancy word for magic). Ask them how life got started - they don't know. Oh yes, they have fancy theories, but they are riddled with problems. If man, with all his intelligence, can't even make the most basic of life forms, then why should we be expected to believe that chemicals could do it all on their own, and I don't care how many billions of years you care to allow for the process - it ain't gonna happen.

Loudmouth said:

It is science, not magic.

Click to expand...

You may think so, I don't. It's nothing but smoke and shadows with a load of speculation and techno-speak thrown in for good measure.

Loudmouth said:

Dark matter detected here:

Click to expand...

Really? LOL

Loudmouth said:

Detection of dark energy here:

Click to expand...

To say that 96% of the universe is composed of this magical dark stuff is almost as ludicrous as to say that everything came from nothing and life arose spontaneously all on its own.

Loudmouth said:

Dark energy is no different than the detection of gravity. We "observe" gravity by the effect it has on bodies of mass. For dark energy, we observe it by observing how it accelerates the expansion of the universe.

Click to expand...

But there is a major difference - we can test the effects of gravity, so we can prove its effects without a shadow of a doubt. The effect you quote in your example is just an assumption. I could just as easily say that God is the unseen force behind the controlling of the universe and in fact, the explanation is right there in the Bible, "Job 9:8 He alone stretches out the heavens..." Oxford English Dictionary - To Stretch (vb) To make sth longer, wider or looser, for example by pulling it...

Loudmouth said:

Where is your evidence that life was designed by an intelligence. If there is no evidence for it, why should we believe it?

Click to expand...

Open your heart to Jesus and you will be able to see it. Until you do, you will not be able to see it for God has hidden it from you.
John 9:39 Jesus said, "For judgment I have come into this world, so that the blind will see and those who see will become blind."
John 9:40 Some Pharisees who were with him heard him say this and asked, "What? Are we blind too?"
John 9:41 Jesus said, "If you were blind, you would not be guilty of sin; but now that you claim you can see, your guilt remains.

HitchSlap said:

The one that, I, as a reader of Dawkins book, have been satisfied with.

Click to expand...

What is that?

Oncedeceived said:

What is that?

Click to expand...

The Dawkins quote you posted.

Loudmouth said:

Where have you shown us that the appearance of design is a scientific observation? Where is the scientific methodology, unit of measure, and statistical tests?

Click to expand...

Do you think Richard Dawkins is not using scientific methods to determine that life looks designed for a purpose, how about Francis Crick? If not seen by scientific observation what kind of observation did they use?

Oncedeceived said:

What is that?

Click to expand...

What about it?
What satisfies you?

Smidlee said:

Yes I usually like something that makes sense.

Click to expand...

Then by all means, you stick with that.