best argument against evolution? (the self replicating robot)

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

no. in other words- again we see why we cant falsified evolution in any case. and this is also falsified the claim about nested hierarchy.

The thing is xianghua, you need to make an argument - simply asserting your opinion is, well, meh.

 

[SkyWriting]

It's not exactly "evidence" for design in this imagined scenario because we would KNOW the "robot" had been designed.

Also, the 'robot' in this instance would obviously be made in imitation of something else (small organisms). That an imitation of something is "designed" doesn't mean the original was. If I make a replica of a boulder, that doesn't mean the original boulder was designed.

But a bolder that replicates itself would suggest design.

 

[archer75]

But a bolder that replicates itself would suggest design.

This has already been discussed on the thread. But again, I do not see why the fact of a self-replicating whatever suggests "intelligent design".

 

[xianghua]

This has already been discussed on the thread. But again, I do not see why the fact of a self-replicating whatever suggests "intelligent design".

you dont think that a system that is able to replicate a robot will be evidence for design?

 

[archer75]

you dont think that a system that is able to replicate a robot will be evidence for design?

Could you ask this again and define what you mean by all the terms? There have been various things on this thread and I want to be sure to answer what you're really asking.

 

[xianghua]

Could you ask this again and define what you mean by all the terms? There have been various things on this thread and I want to be sure to answer what you're really asking.

lets say that we will find a speciel system that can replicate a robot. do you think that such a system is evidence for design or for a natural process?

 

[archer75]

lets say that we will find a speciel system that can replicate a robot. do you think that such a system is evidence for design or for a natural process?

I'm sorry, I don't really know what you mean by a "special system." Also, what is the robot like? What kind of robot are we talking about?

 

[Loudmouth]

this is not what the paper says:

"Rates of innovation at feather regulatory elements exhibit an extended period of innovation with peaks in the ancestors of amniotes and archosaurs. We estimate that 86% of such regulatory elements and 100% of the nonkeratin feather gene set were present prior to the origin of Dinosauria"

I don't see how that supports your assertion that the common ancestor of all amniotes had feathers.

 

[Loudmouth]

no. in other words- again we see why we cant falsified evolution in any case. and this is also falsified the claim about nested hierarchy.

How is it falsified?

I don't see an analysis of the DNA sequence, which you would need to do.

I also don't see any evidence that the amniote common ancestor had feathers.

 

[Loudmouth]

you dont think that a system that is able to replicate a robot will be evidence for design?

If millions of species robots evolved over billions of years from a single simple robot, would that be design or evolution?

 

[SkyWriting]

This has already been discussed on the thread. But again, I do not see why the fact of a self-replicating whatever suggests "intelligent design".

Why would anything replicate?
Because it is stupid?
And how would that help?

 

[Speedwell]

Why would anything replicate?
Because it is stupid?
And how would that help?

Your parents replicated. Was that stupid?

 

[SkyWriting]

Your parents replicated. Was that stupid?

It shows signs of intelligence, genius.
I appreciate the point.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

It shows signs of intelligence, genius.
I appreciate the point.

Intelligence of what? Shows it, how?

 

[Speedwell]

Intelligence of what? Shows it, how?

Just a funny response to my comment.

 

[xianghua]

I'm sorry, I don't really know what you mean by a "special system." Also, what is the robot like? What kind of robot are we talking about?

a robot that made from organic components for instance.

 

[xianghua]

How is it falsified?

you said that mammal dont have genes for feathers developmant. so we have seen that its not true. you also said that a mammal with feathers will falsified evolution. so we have seen that its not true either. even if we will find a mammal with feathers we can claim for convergent evolution or feathers loss.

 

[Speedwell]

you dont think that a system that is able to replicate a robot will be evidence for design?

No.

a robot that made from organic components for instance.

Actually, that's a question for you to answer, since you are the ID proponent. If I designed and built an organic robot capable of reproducing and evolving, that robot would clearly be designed. Now, if I turned it loose on an uninhabited planet and over millennia thousands of other robot species evolved from it by random variation and selection and populated the planet, would you consider those robots to have been designed? Leave the question of evidence for the time being.

 

[archer75]

a robot that made from organic components for instance.

How is a robot made from organic components different from a living organism?

 

[Speedwell]

How is a robot made from organic components different from a living organism?

Excellent question! Watch this thread.