Intelligent Design

[DerelictJunction]

Can the assumption that the complexity we see in the earliest life forms be shown to arise by natural means objectively?

How much complexity do we see in the earliest life forms?

 

[Oncedeceived]

Once, "the lady doth protest too much, methinks."

Hitch, no one has a free ride on the requirement of proof.

 

[Loudmouth]

Hitch, no one has a free ride on the requirement of proof.

Except you, of course.

 

[Oncedeceived]

How much complexity do we see in the earliest life forms?

We see complex features that are very much like we see today. Complex eyes and even complex brains. The molecular machines already in place and creatures that have changed very little in 505 million years.

 

[Oncedeceived]

Except you, of course.

Ok. Provide examples of claims that I have made that I have not supported.

 

[DerelictJunction]

We see complex features that are very much like we see today. Complex eyes and even complex brains. The molecular machines already in place and creatures that have changed very little in 505 million years.

1. I sincerely doubt that any biologists or paleontologists suggest that the first life forms were multicellular with eyes and complex brains.
2. What do you think was going on in the 3 billion years prior to that, since the first evidence of life is in rocks dated between 3.5 and 4 billion years ago?

 

[HitchSlap]

Hitch, no one has a free ride on the requirement of proof.

Oh, the irony.

 

[Davian]

Ok. Provide examples of claims that I have made that I have not supported.

"design at the molecular level is actual"
"fine tuning is actual"
"Equally true however is that we can't know if something could be true and not true at the same time without God."
"All intelligent life forms on earth come from other intelligent life forms."
"The earth is fixed and immovable in its orbit."
"Logic like reason is an attribute of intelligence which originates with God."

Fortunately I keep my posts tagged for just such an occasion.

 

[lost999]

1.) utility
2.) location
3.) individual shape
4.) common shape
5.) sub-function
6.) invention
7.) copied or studied by man
8) not brought into existence by random occurrence
9.) complexity
10.) assembly

 

[Oncedeceived]

1. I sincerely doubt that any biologists or paleontologists suggest that the first life forms were multicellular with eyes and complex brains.
2. What do you think was going on in the 3 billion years prior to that, since the first evidence of life is in rocks dated between 3.5 and 4 billion years ago?

When I said earliest life forms I meant those in the late precambrian and Cambrian timelines. The Cynabacteria while being complex in their own right are followed by those life forms that have the complexity I was referring to.

Up until the time of the late precambrian and Cambrian only "simple" life forms. At the earliest moment when life is present in the fossil evidence, it has a large amount of complexity already.

 

[Oncedeceived]

Oh, the irony.

I could go back and present my claims and the evidence I use to support them if you wish.

 

[Oncedeceived]

"design at the molecular level is actual"
"fine tuning is actual"
"Equally true however is that we can't know if something could be true and not true at the same time without God."
"All intelligent life forms on earth come from other intelligent life forms."
"The earth is fixed and immovable in its orbit."
"Logic like reason is an attribute of intelligence which originates with God."

Fortunately I keep my posts tagged for just such an occasion.

Quote mine much?

Without the posts in which these quotes originated I can hardly comment on them.

 

[Davian]

Quote mine much?

Did you or did you not ask for examples?

Without the posts in which these quotes originated I can hardly comment on them.

You had your chance in the respective thread, where I pointed that they were unevidenced assertions. Inevitably, your comments will boil down to:

Once: <unevidenced claim>
Davian: That is an unevidenced claim
Once: Are you claiming the opposite? Show your evidence for this!

It is blatant attempt to shift the burden of evidence, and intellectually dishonest.

 

[Davian]

1.) utility
2.) location
3.) individual shape
4.) common shape
5.) sub-function
6.) invention
7.) copied or studied by man
8) not brought into existence by random occurrence
9.) complexity
10.) assembly

What units would you use to measure each of those, respectively?

 

[lost999]

What units would you use to measure each of those, respectively?

Operationalization.

 

[Davian]

Operationalization.

Operationalization - "In research design, especially in psychology, social sciences, life sciences, and physics operationalization is a process of defining the measurement of a phenomenon that is not directly measurable, though its existence is indicated by other phenomena. It is the process of defining a fuzzy concept so as to make the theoretical concept clearly distinguishable or measurable, and to understand it in terms of empirical observations." wiki

Go on then, define the measurement of "design" for the purposes of the OP.

 

[lost999]

Operationalization - "In research design, especially in psychology, social sciences, life sciences, and physics operationalization is a process of defining the measurement of a phenomenon that is not directly measurable, though its existence is indicated by other phenomena. It is the process of defining a fuzzy concept so as to make the theoretical concept clearly distinguishable or measurable, and to understand it in terms of empirical observations." wiki

Go on then, define the measurement of "design" for the purposes of the OP.

Will do.

Question: why post the definition when I already know what these terms mean? Or, did you do it for yourself? From reading your previous posts it doesn't seem like you are trained in research methods.

Just curious....

 

[Davian]

Will do.

Question: why post the definition when I already know what these terms mean? Or, did you do it for yourself?

How am I to know what you know? I often see posters here simply throwing everything they can find at the wall to see what sticks. It helps to have an agreed-upon definition of the words discussed handy before it all slides into the ditch.

From reading your previous posts it doesn't seem like you are trained in research methods.

Just curious....

I am just a n00b with some questions. And popcorn.

Yourself?

 

[quatona]

(Yeah. I know. It's been done to death. I just wanted to focus on one aspect.)

To the ID proponents - How do you tell the difference between things designed and things not designed?

According to ID proponents *everything* is designed. Which renders the very distinction that it´s based upon obsolete and epistemologically void.

 

[Davian]

According to ID proponents *everything* is designed. Which renders the very distinction that it´s based upon obsolete and epistemologically void.

Great. Now, lost999 will realize he is on a snipe hunt.