How We Detect Design

[[serious]]

Well thank you so much for your imput serious, I am educated "enough" to know the principles and conditions on earth and the earliest life forms that are held in the fossil record. I am not as sure as you are that he wasn't implying a life from non-life scenario. If not fine.

First off, I'm concerned that you may have interpreted my statement as a commentary about the education level of people other than loudmouth. I have no basis for gauging the educational grounding of most forum members in the sciences. I can make certain inferences based on the level of discussion in the moment, but that is all. For example, if someone cites Harry Wong and drops terms like critical pedagogy, I'd probably assume they have had some training in education. If someone is using terms such as protista as a kingdom of life, I can assume they have not had any formal training in biology (at least not recently) because that is a rather old term. However, it's also specific enough that I can assume they have an interest in the subject and at least a layman's understanding of the topic. If I'm talking to someone who isn't sure what internet browser they are using, I am fairly confident they neither have formal training in computer science or much interest in the topic.

I know my own education covered this topic, and from previous conversations, I seem to recall loudmouth has some formal training in the sciences that would almost certainly have covered this. I could be wrong though, as i certainly don't have everyone's educational levels on the forum memorized.

But if we are unsure about his meaning, let's ask him.

Loudmouth,
Is it your opinion that the very earliest life could possibly be a phototroph? Why or why not?

That should settle it pretty well.

 

[Loudmouth]

Excuse me for responding to a post meant for you SkyWriting but I just have to...this is a straw man. Burn it.

You don't like it because it destroys your entire argument. Humans really do come about through natural means, unlike the things you keep trying to compare them to. LEGO cities don't get together and have LEGO city children. Cars don't mate and produce baby cars. Life does.

 

[Smidlee]

Define "scientist".

Do you know men was doing science long before man invented the word "scientist"?

 

[bhsmte]

Do you know men was doing science long before man invented the word "scientist"?

Can you define the term or not?

 

[Loudmouth]

Loudmouth,
Is it your opinion that the very earliest life could possibly be a phototroph? Why or why not?

Doubtful. Much more likely to be a chemotroph. However, modern organisms could not exist without phototrophs which is the point I was making earlier. The Cambrian explosion was most likely a response to building up of oxygen in the atmosphere due to phototrophs.

 

[Smidlee]

Can you define the term or not?

In the most simple form it means human beings. It's human to try to find meaning and purpose in everything in the universe. Even man living in the jungle has this ability.

 

[Loudmouth]

Do you know men was doing science long before man invented the word "scientist"?

Do you? Perhaps you could cite their papers?

 

[DogmaHunter]

Well, changing the gas mixture and isolating an infinite number different mixtures is what science is good at.
Are you saying we don't have the needed materials?
Or that we don't have the investigative ability to show it happening now...or in the past?

I'm saying that we can't draw any conclusions based on ignorance.

We don't know.
We can never prove that it is impossible.
We can only some day find a mixture that works to prove that it is possible.
And until such time, the best we can say is that we don't know.

When you make the assertion that it is impossible then you are making a claim to knowledge. A claim you cannot support. You do not know. But with that claim, you pretend that you do. But you don't.

 

[bhsmte]

In the most simple form it means human beings. It's human to try to find meaning and purpose in everything in the universe. Even man living in the jungle has this ability.

Would this mean everyone has the same skill and knowledge to do science?

 

[Loudmouth]

Did you read the quote of Collins in Loudmouth posted? Collins clearly trying claim what God would or wouldn't do.

Do you believe that God would fool us by putting false evidence in the creation?

 

[Oncedeceived]

Smoke screen. ID can't explain the most basic observations in biology which includes the nested hierarchy. There is absolutely no reason why we should see a nested hierarchy if ID/creationism is true.

Right, I know what you are asserting. Please show why ID would not create life that falls into a nested Hierarchy?

Darwin explained it quite well. He wrote a whole chapter on what he meant by imperfect, and I even included a quote explaining what he meant. All you are showing is that you refuse to read the very material you criticize.

Yes, and did he not think that we would find these allusive transitional fossils in the future? Yes or no?

I already gave you a quote explaining that.

Did he not write that in the future we would find those fossils? Yes or no?

Design is the claim. Where is the evidence?

Design is the evidence.

 

[DogmaHunter]

They seem to ignore what scientist have discovered in the last 10 years and rely on Talkorigins too much.

"On the one hand it's extremely well organized, but on the other hand the sheer scale of all of this unfamiliar well-organized stuff that happens in there makes me feel that I've stumbled onto an alternate landscape of technology that's built by an engineer a million times smarter than me. The more that I search for principles beyond the ones we've already learned, the more I am overwhelmed with the feeling that this stuff was built by aliens."

So, does this speaker actually believe that aliens or gods created it?
Or does he rather accept the biological theory that it came about through the process known as biological evolution through natural selection?

And is that quote then not metaphoric, to make up for entertaining speech to listen to and make a point about the niftyness of nature?

If the latter, why do you try to use this guy to push an argument that he doesn't agree with at all?

Do you consider this intellectually honest?

 

[Oncedeceived]

Did you read the quote of Collins in Loudmouth posted? Collins clearly trying claim what God would or wouldn't do.
Politics , religion, science and money are all interconnected as their are the products of the human mind.

Not to mention that if he were to claim that evolution could not produce such features his position would be at risk. He is walking a tight rope.

 

[Smidlee]

Would this mean everyone has the same skill and knowledge to do science?

No.

So, does this speaker actually believe that aliens or gods created it?
Or does he rather accept the biological theory that it came about through the process known as biological evolution through natural selection?

Didn't I made that point clear already? He even explain why he hates what he see. The evidence is taking him to where he doesn't want to go. Again The stronger evidence against evolution comes from the evolutionist themselves.

 

[bhsmte]

No.

Then every person walking around, would not be qualified to say perform; biological research?

Would that be correct?

 

[Loudmouth]

Not to mention that if he were to claim that evolution could not produce such features his position would be at risk. He is walking a tight rope.

Baloney. Now you are just making stuff up so you can avoid reality.

 

[DogmaHunter]

y

thats a whole lot a nonsense. Evolution tells you how life may evolve once you have it it does nothing , zip , nada to tell you why life at it most fundamental level looks the way it does (dna)

come back when you read up

When you know how it works, you know in what kind of structures it will result.

Just like with gravity. If you know how it works, you know that you won't be finding square planets, but rather spherical/eliptical ones - especially after reaching a certain critical mass.

that retort is a flat out fudge that the evidence supports atheist on the issue of life. Watching an atheist try to pretend he's got squat by way of abiogenesis (the real issue) is great entertainment though

Intellectual honesty is "entertaining"?

Oh the irony...an atheist claiming a theist is in the minority. sometimes you just have to grab a bag of popcorn and enjoy the moment.

Theists are random people who believe things without proper justification.

The vast majority of scientists are trained experts in their fields.

Also: the majority of christians have no problems with evolution at all.

 

[Loudmouth]

Right, I know what you are asserting. Please show why ID would not create life that falls into a nested Hierarchy?

Shifting the burden of proof. Why would it?

Yes, and did he not think that we would find these allusive transitional fossils in the future? Yes or no?

I already supplied that answer.

Design is the evidence.

Design is the claim. WHERE IS THE EVIDENCE??????

 

[Smidlee]

Then every person walking around, would not be qualified to say perform; biological research?

Would that be correct?

Do you know there's more science than just biology right? Do you hold biologists as the voice of god of all science?

 

[bhsmte]

Baloney. Now you are just making stuff up so you can avoid reality.

Just as I thought, this thread should be in the new conspiracy section.

You know how it goes, if desperate, just claim the person that disagrees with you is not credible.