Common designer versus design standards?

[OldWiseGuy]

How so? There is only one theory of evolution and widespread agreement amongst evolutionists about it.

I believe there are lots of different opinions when they get to the details. Creationists don't bother with details, large or small.

 

[Speedwell]

I believe there is lots of different opinions when they get to the details. Creationists don't bother with details, large or small.

Can you be specific?

 

[Hank77]

Which is entirely besides the point of the OP*, which is that there is a common standard used by independent designers. The question is how would you distinguish between a singular designer and a group of designers applying a common standard.

Seeing that the OP is in the creation and evolution forum it would appear that is the point of the OP.
Seeing that evolution attempts to define how all creation came about and creation had a beginning, it seems to me going back to the beginning is a necessity.
Seeing that your designers are using a common standard then it's important to know where that common standard originated? If the common standard is incorrect then everything that attempts to build on it is also incorrect.

 

[Speedwell]

S
Seeing that evolution attempts to define how all creation came about and creation had a beginning, it seems to me going back to the beginning is a necessity.

Evolution is a theory of biology whose purpose is to explain the development and diversification of life since it began.

 

[ruthiesea]

Would you agree that there is more agreement among creationists than evolutionists?

Creationists try to prove; Scientists, I'm not sure what 'evolutionists' are, try to disprove.
Creationists agree on what is true; Scientists, no matter how much supporting evidence there is, always have some doubt.

 

[Hank77]

Evolution is a theory of biology whose purpose is to explain the development and diversification of life since it began.

Yes....and so please explain your different designers using a common standard. If the common standard is incorrect, what then?

 

[Speedwell]

Yes....and so please explain your different designers using a common standard. If the common standard is incorrect, what then?

I don't need to explain it. It is the ID proponents who deed to explain their conclusion of a single designer.

 

[Hank77]

Yes, some questions are to be avoided, at all costs.

The question is how would you distinguish between a singular designer and a group of designers applying a common standard.

The answer to this question you wouldn't be able to if using a common standard.
However, if the common standard was incorrect then all the designs using that standard would be incorrect, so it really doesn't matter if there was one designer or many designers. What matters is the common standard, where did that come from and is it correct?

Does any form of life exist that didn't come from something living? There is a code for all living things, who created the most simple form of this code? Where did it come from, this common standard?

 

[pitabread]

Seeing that evolution attempts to define how all creation came about

No it doesn't. Evolution (the Theory of) is strictly an explanation of the origin of biological diversity.

 

[JIMINZ]

Something I've never understood is the creationist/ID insistence that similarities = common design = common designer.

It seems like a giant leap from each point to the next, especially when we know in human design and manufacture that similarities do not always point to the same designer. This is especially evident when it comes to design standards; namely a common standard that is used by multiple, independent designers.

A perfect example are web sites. There are thousands of web designers around the world creating all manner of web pages we browse on a daily basis. Yet, if you peel back the layer and look at the underlying code, you'll see that a common language is used (HTML - Hypertext Markup Language).

For example, if I look at the code for this very web page I am typing on as we speak, I can see things like <script> tags, <body> tags, <div> tags, etc. If I jump to another site, say the BBC news or Reddit or YouTube, I'll see a lot of the same sort of code. There is a basic common thread running through all these different web sites.

Now does this means the exact same person built all these sites? Of course not. Rather it was independent designers all using a common standard.

My question to creationists/ID proponents is if there is an insistence that utilization of DNA points to a "common design" how do you know it's still not the result of independent designers adhering to a common standard? How would you ever tell that there is only one designer?

.
Because it's by FAITH, not by sight, or intellectual understanding.

You are attempting to prove God through Temporal means, and logic, when God is Spiritual, the Temporal understanding is not sufficient to explain the Spiritual, for the Spiritual is foolishness to the Temporal mind and reasoning.

The reason is, we not only see the same DNA with variations, we see the same (physical design) repeated over and over again.

There has always been only One Code Writer.

 

[pitabread]

The reason is, we not only see the same DNA with variations, we see the same (physical design) repeated over and over again.

So? That doesn't automatically mean a singular designer.

There has always been only One Code Writer.

And how would you differentiate between a single designer and multiple designers using a common standard? Similarities by themselves aren't going to cut it.

 

[AV1611VET]

How would you ever tell that there is only one designer?

It's called monotheism.

Deuteronomy 6:4 Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD:

 

[pitabread]

It's called monotheism.

 

[JIMINZ]

So? That doesn't automatically mean a singular designer.

And how would you differentiate between a single designer and multiple designers using a common standard? Similarities by themselves aren't going to cut it.

.
Your hypothesis is, there are other (Designers).
What are the names of these other designers?

1) Random?
2) Happenstance?
3) Perchance?

Then it is on you, to prove the existence of other designers using the same CODE, thus accounting for those similarities in design you speak of.

Then again, it is either Patent, or Copyright infringement, upon the Original Design, for another Designer by Law is not allowed to use the same Code, there must be other elements within the Code which have to be different, in order to demonstrate New Design, and thus differentiating from the Original.

God holds the Patents, and the Copyrights.

 

[pitabread]

.
Your hypothesis is, there are other (Designers).
What are the names of these other designers?

1) Random?
2) Happenstance?
3) Perchance?

Then it is on you, to prove the existence of other designers using the same CODE, thus accounting for those similarities in design you speak of.

I'm not trying to prove anything one way or the other. I'm asking how one would differentiate.

If you don't have an answer, that's fine. Just move along.

 

[pitabread]

The answer to this question you wouldn't be able to if using a common standard.

That's more or less what I figure. Although I imagine it's not going to stop anyone from claiming otherwise.

However, if the common standard was incorrect then all the designs using that standard would be incorrect, so it really doesn't matter if there was one designer or many designers.

I'm not sure what "if the common standard was incorrect" is supposed to mean.

What matters is the common standard, where did that come from and is it correct?

Dunno. I guess another question is could you tell the difference between a common standard from a single inventor versus a common standard created by a committee?

 

[JIMINZ]

And how would you differentiate between a single designer and multiple designers using a common standard? Similarities by themselves aren't going to cut it.

It isn't a matter of differentiating between a single designer and multiple designers using a common standard, mainly because it is your responsibility as the OP to prove there are Multiple Designers to begin with.

You have in essence created a Hypothetical, which you have failed to prove could exist.

I'm not trying to prove anything one way or the other. I'm asking how one would differentiate.

If you don't have an answer, that's fine. Just move along.

.
If your not trying to prove something then what is the point of this thread, it's a stupid question with no logical answer to it.

So one way or the other the answers don't matter do they?

Of course your trying to prove something, you just can't do it, and you don't want others shooting holes in your hypothesis.

If your belief has any validity as a question, then you should be able to show me, the mistakes in the questions I raised.

No I don't think I will move along, I gave you plenty of answers, you just don't like them.

 

[pitabread]

It isn't a matter of differentiating between a single designer and multiple designers using a common standard, mainly because it is your responsibility as the OP to prove there are Multiple Designers to begin with.

Again, I'm not trying to prove anything one way or another. I'm asking how one would differentiate between the two scenarios.

If your not trying to prove something then what is the point of this thread, it's a stupid question with no logical answer to it.

Then move on. Why waste any more time?

No I din't think I will move along, I gave you plenty of answers, you just don't like them.

Your only real attempt to answer the OP was this:

"The reason is, we not only see the same DNA with variations, we see the same (physical design) repeated over and over again.

There has always been only One Code Writer."
​

If that is your claim then how would you differentiate between a single designer using a singular code and/or repeated designs, versus multiple designers using a singular code and/or repeated designs?

If you can't differentiate, then that's the end of it.

 

[Hank77]

That's more or less what I figure. Although I imagine it's not going to stop anyone from claiming otherwise.

I'm not sure what "if the common standard was incorrect" is supposed to mean.

Dunno. I guess another question is could you tell the difference between a common standard from a single inventor versus a common standard created by a committee?

Hey, you have made a good point there. Father, Son, and Holy Spirit could be described as a committee of sorts, I suppose.

 

[JIMINZ]

'There has always been only One Code Writer."
If that is your claim then how would you differentiate between a single designer using a singular code and/or repeated designs, versus multiple designers using a singular code and/or repeated designs?

.
Point being, with only one Designer and one Code, there isn't any differentiation, by the mere fact there aren't any other Designers using any Code whatsoever.

If you can't differentiate, then that's the end of it.

Thanks for finally understanding.