irreducible complexity

IntelligentDesigner2 · Oct 22, 2005

You were probably sleeping when I replied to it. When you awoke it most assuredly was deleted. My account is following the rules of the forum, yet my ideas are supressed, my posts deleted, and then the replies to my posts stay and take what I say out of context.

KerrMetric · Oct 22, 2005

IntelligentDesigner2 said:
I did answer that, but it got deleted. I get banned a lot because my ideas do not conform to yours.

No you didn't answer. I monitored that thread closely. And this website if anything gives the creationists far more latitude than the non creationists from what I have seen.

IntelligentDesigner2 · Oct 22, 2005

vajradhara said:
New York City is irreducible complex, yet G!D didn't build it.

metta,

~v

God did not build NYC. Intelligent causation was ultimately behind the creation of the city--that is obvious. Intelligent Design never says who the designer was, much like finding the record of every single intelligent designer that was involved in the creation of the city would be maddening. Science is only concerned about intelligent causation as opposed to natural causation when dealing with the origins of any object, structure, etc.

IntelligentDesigner2 · Oct 22, 2005

KerrMetric said:
No you didn't answer. I monitored that thread closely. And this website if anything gives the creationists far more latitude than the non creationists from what I have seen.

You are getting off topic, please stay on topic with the thread. We wouldn't want any members hi-jacking the thread. Please ask something as it pertains to 'irreducible complexity'.

GoSeminoles! · Oct 22, 2005

IntelligentDesigner2 said:
You were probably sleeping when I replied to it. When you awoke it most assuredly was deleted. My account is following the rules of the forum, yet my ideas are supressed, my posts deleted, and then the replies to my posts stay and take what I say out of context.

I don't know the particulars of your situation vis-a-vi banning and whatnot, but to say your ideas are suppressed here is laughable. If dad, JohnCrawford, JohnR7 can present their pro-creation/pro-ID arguments unfettered, then so can you. This leads me to suspect there is something more to the story than you are letting on. This board moderators are most certainly NOT hostile to creationism and ID. Dispense with the martyr complex; it's so Discovery Institute.

KerrMetric · Oct 22, 2005

IntelligentDesigner2 said:
You are getting off topic, please stay on topic with the thread. We wouldn't want any members hi-jacking the thread. Please ask something as it pertains to 'irreducible complexity'.

Don't they automatically delete people who come back breaking a ban by the way?

And you never answered the bacterium question. It directly contradicts your idea that all genomic changes require an intelligent designer to bring about significant change.

IntelligentDesigner2 · Oct 22, 2005

RoboMastodon said:
Genetic algorithms

Genetic algorithms are the products of intelligent agency. Also, genetic algorithms cannot produce/change complex structures such as the ones in real biochemical systems. They are digital organisms that are totally separate from real organisms. You cannot demonstrate real traits being changed and comparatively test your results in real life. Your algorithms are only as good as the programmer who designed the algorithm and program--as well as the technical competency of our knowledge of the genetic code, so all they do is validate the presence of information using a language convention to compute the digital organisms which again, is never shown to reflect reality when it comes to biological organisms.

IntelligentDesigner2 · Oct 22, 2005

KerrMetric said:
Don't they automatically delete people who come back breaking a ban by the way?

Where in the rules does it say that?

And you never answered the bacterium question. It directly contradicts your idea that all genomic changes require an intelligent designer to bring about significant change.

If information is going to exist, which brings about complex structures, logic tells us that there is an intelligent cause, because we know the limits of natural causes. If you think that life is the product of purely natural causes, yet cannot demonstrate it--Information being produced, then your natural cause is just as metaphysical as an intelligent cause.

As a naturalist, please tell me what you would compare the DNA and mRNA molecules to. Are they unique in nature?

nvxplorer · Oct 22, 2005

IntelligentDesigner2 said:
You are getting off topic, please stay on topic with the thread. We wouldn't want any members hi-jacking the thread. Please ask something as it pertains to 'irreducible complexity'.

A member who gets banned on a daily basis, telling us how to conduct ourselves.

That is too rich. Hey Martha, come quickly. You aint gonna believe this.

IntelligentDesigner2 · Oct 22, 2005

GoSeminoles! said:
I don't know the particulars of your situation vis-a-vi banning and whatnot, but to say your ideas are suppressed here is laughable. If dad, JohnCrawford, JohnR7 can present their pro-creation/pro-ID arguments unfettered, then so can you. This leads me to suspect there is something more to the story than you are letting on. This board moderators are most certainly NOT hostile to creationism and ID. Dispense with the martyr complex; it's so Discovery Institute.

Please explain to me why threads for: IntelligentDesigner, were deleted. They flamed no one, they did not go off topic. Now I cannot even go on as IntelligentDesigner. So. Explain to me why this is. There was no warning of any kind given. Notice that this thread has some replies to: IntelligentDesigner, but there are no posts of such name on the thread.

IntelligentDesigner2 · Oct 22, 2005

nvxplorer said:
A member who gets banned on a daily basis, telling us how to conduct ourselves.

That is too rich. Hey Martha, come quickly. You aint gonna believe this.

Explain to me nvxplorer, why is this? Do you enjoy flaming others?

IntelligentDesigner2 · Oct 22, 2005

GoSeminoles! said:
I don't know the particulars of your situation vis-a-vi banning and whatnot, but to say your ideas are suppressed here is laughable. If dad, JohnCrawford, JohnR7 can present their pro-creation/pro-ID arguments unfettered, then so can you. This leads me to suspect there is something more to the story than you are letting on. This board moderators are most certainly NOT hostile to creationism and ID. Dispense with the martyr complex; it's so Discovery Institute.

Where are the threads from ------> TheIntelligentDesigner on this thread?

I would really love to know. What forum rules did that account break?

nvxplorer · Oct 22, 2005

IntelligentDesigner2 said:
Please explain to me why threads for: IntelligentDesigner, were deleted. They flamed no one, they did not go off topic. Now I cannot even go on as IntelligentDesigner. So. Explain to me why this is. There was no warning of any kind given. Notice that this thread has some replies to: IntelligentDesigner, but there are no posts of such name on the thread.

Why were you banned as TheRealSkeptic? That is the answer to your question. Once you have been banned, your activity using subsequent accounts is irrelevant. Whether the decision was fair or not, your repeated attempts to undermine the decisions of a private website owner speaks volumes as to your character.

IntelligentDesigner2 · Oct 22, 2005

KerrMetric said:
No you didn't answer. I monitored that thread closely. And this website if anything gives the creationists far more latitude than the non creationists from what I have seen.

Explain to me why there are posted replies from: TheIntelligentDesigner

Yet there are no posts by that name in the thread anymore.

IntelligentDesigner2 · Oct 22, 2005

nvxplorer said:
Why were you banned as TheRealSkeptic? That is the answer to your question. Once you have been banned, your activity using subsequent accounts is irrelevant. Whether the decision was fair or not, your repeated attempts to undermine the decisions of a private website owner speaks volumes as to your character.

TheRealSkeptic. Interesting. I was never given the opportunity to appeal any of the charges brought up against that account name. Also, you were the sole reason that the account got banned. You reported me dozens of times, all while flaming me in posts. Very interesting indeed. You reported me 6 out of 7 times. That speaks for your intolerance, and the bias on this forum in your favor.

KerrMetric · Oct 22, 2005

IntelligentDesigner2 said:
Explain to me why there are posted replies from: TheIntelligentDesigner

Yet there are no posts by that name in the thread anymore.

They were deleted when your account was banned I assume.

nvxplorer · Oct 22, 2005

IntelligentDesigner2 said:
Explain to me nvxplorer, why is this? Do you enjoy flaming others?

Youre a banned member! *bangs head against wall*

Why dont you petition the mods for reinstatement? That would be the honest approach, rather than creating these proxy accounts.

notto · Oct 22, 2005

IntelligentDesigner2 said:
If information is going to exist, which brings about complex structures, logic tells us that there is an intelligent cause, because we know the limits of natural causes. If you think that life is the product of purely natural causes, yet cannot demonstrate it--Information being produced, then your natural cause is just as metaphysical as an intelligent cause.

Assertions, nothing but assertions.

Your 'logic tells us' is a nice appeal to emotion, but outside of that, you still haven't come any closer to showing your assertions are true.

All I have to say is to answer your claims are (in order)
1) no it doesn't.
2) no it isn't.

You need to talk mechanisms yet you refuse to do so.

How many bannings will it take for you to realize nobody is buying what you are selling because it is all crust with no filling?

nvxplorer · Oct 22, 2005

IntelligentDesigner2 said:
TheRealSkeptic. Interesting. I was never given the opportunity to appeal any of the charges brought up against that account name. Also, you were the sole reason that the account got banned. You reported me dozens of times, all while flaming me in posts. Very interesting indeed. You reported me 6 out of 7 times. That speaks for your intolerance, and the bias on this forum in your favor.

Ive never reported a single post in the time Ive been here. Think before you assume.
(I reported you dozens of times or six out of seven? Which is it?)

IntelligentDesigner2 · Oct 22, 2005

I am now going to look up all of the forum rules about banning individual accounts. What I don't understand is, even if you are banned under one account for violating forum rules, then learn from your mistakes and reapply and follow the rules to a 'T', why should you be continually banned when you are clearly following rules. The reason I have been banned repeatedly is because my arguments are the same on every account, which means my ideas are traceable to one person. Why delete posts that follow the rules?

irreducible complexity

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Active Member

GoSeminoles!

Guest

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Active Member

Senior Contributor

Active Member

Active Member

Active Member

Senior Contributor

Active Member

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Senior Contributor

Legend

Senior Contributor

Active Member

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency