(M.H-35)"Standard" Argument for Irreducible Complexity

[pittguy579]

edited to add: study the history of science and technology in different societies. You'll realize how lucky we have been. Many societies have been on the brink of similar technological breakthrough as we had. Only we had the pure luck in Europe have those breakthroughs in a time that resources were plenty and the right societal conditions had arisen. But that is a whole different topic.

It is not lucky. Humans have always had the ability to do this unless you are saying we evolved over the last 2000 years

And again, it tells us little. Yes, we have a higher intelligence, but we are worse swimmers. Comparing the two characteristics is like comparing apples and oranges. The aerodynamics of fish and marine mammals are extremely advanced, and there is no measure of comparison to say that one is more advanced as the other. Just as there is no way to say whether apples are more advanced than orang

No it's not. We have the ability to build machines that are much better swimmers than any animal. Animals can't do such things
Hence, we are more advanced

Can any dolphin fly to the moon?

 

[Baggins]

No, but better at EVERY SINGLE OTHER MEASURE THAN YOU CAN THINK OF

Are submarines better at having offspring?

Are they better at forward somersaults, or just exciting the water at all?

Are they better at quick changes of direction?

are they better at looking cute at sea world?

They could be. We could put nets and the like and troll through the deep and catch hundreds of times more fish than a single dolphin can

That's not hunting though really is it

But at least I am not stupid

I wouldn't be so sure, you certainly don't come over as a genius

The only absurdities come from you and others that are trying to say humans aren't the most advanced creatures overll

But surely that depends on the criteria, and intelligence just seems a bit arbitrary to me

Tryin to say humans aren't the most advanced creatures is absurd and obviously you weren't educated in logic

No I wasn't, but at least I was educated

 

[Baggins]

LOL I am going to ask some of my engineering friends to come on this board
They will get a kick out of it

Passing over the claim that you have friends, are any of the engineers you know cleverer than you, we might get some sense out of them.

They might be able to explain why you seem to think that intelligence is the only criteria on which it is possible to rank animals.

 

[Baggins]

Can any dolphin fly to the moon?

depends how big the rocket you strap to him is same as a man

 

[pittguy579]

Are submarines better at having offspring?

No, but well maintained, they can live longer than dolphins and we can make more if we want

Are they better at forward somersaults, or just exciting the water at all?

Probably not, but that is not a measure of efficiency
And submarines can exit the water. They can float on top

That's not hunting though really is it

Catching fish is catching fish

I wouldn't be so sure, you certainly don't come over as a genius

Well I am and that is a fact

But surely that depends on the criteria, and intelligence just seems a bit arbitrary to me

Well fine, if you feel that way. But it allows us to to do things no other animal can do.

No I wasn't, but at least I was educated

Not very well

 

[pittguy579]

depends how big the rocket you strap to him is same as a man

Could he fly to the moon on his own?
Can he jump that high out of the water?
Oh wait he can't..

So the answer is no

 

[pittguy579]

Again, does it equal dolphins in agility, energy-efficience and aerodynamics? You're just hung up on that it's bigger and stronger. But that does not mean it's more advanced. Otherwise engineers wouldn't be studying the creatures in depth because they want to figure out how to achieve those same characteristics.

It is just not bigger. It can do more "work" than a dolphin could ever hope to achieve or even a pack of dolphins could hope to achieve

You yourself stated that those characteristics do not make something more advanced. Why are you backpedaling on that now?

I am not backpedaling. It is clear we can build machines that can do more" work" than a dolphin could ever hope to do

 

[Tomk80]

It is not lucky. Humans have always had the ability to do this unless you are saying we evolved over the last 2000 years

There actually is a lot of luck involved in getting the right circumstances for those developments in place at the exact time. Why do you think it's only in the past 200 years that we have made such enormous progress? The greeks already had primitive steam engines, but the culture at that time wasn't in the right state to allow for it's further development. Took 2000 years to get there again.

No it's not. We have the ability to build machines that are much better swimmers than any animal. Animals can't do such things
Hence, we are more advanced

Can any dolphin fly to the moon?

Yes it is. It all depends on the environment. In the wrong environment, we're nowhere with our technological advancements. Then other creatures will dominate. What is more advanced? The aerodynamic structure of the shark suit of a swimmer? Or a computer? How can you really compare the two? Same with humans and other creatures. Intelligence is nice and advanced. But it's not automatically the most advanced thing around, and comparing it with other advanced structures isn't really possible.

 

[Baggins]

Could he fly to the moon on his own?
Can he jump that high out of the water?
Oh wait he can't..

A man can't fly to the moon on his own either.

What's your point?

 

[Tomk80]

It is just not bigger. It can do more "work" than a dolphin could ever hope to achieve or even a pack of dolphins could hope to achieve



I am not backpedaling. It is clear we can build machines that can do more" work" than a dolphin could ever hope to do

And again you're equating brute force with advancement. They are not the same.

 

[pittguy579]

A man can't fly to the moon on his own either.

What's your point?

Yes we can. We can build what we need to build to get there
A dolphin can't

 

[pittguy579]

And again you're equating brute force with advancement. They are not the same.

It is more than that. But this is pointless
If you don't think humans are the most advanced creatures in terms of capabilities, be my guest, but anyone with any intelligence knows better.

 

[Baggins]

No, but well maintained, they can live longer than dolphins and we can make more if we want



Probably not, but that is not a measure of efficiency
And submarines can exit the water. They can float on top

So that's 2 things dolphins are better at now.

I think this is the first time you have admitted error on this thread, possibly the first time in your existence

praise the lord, there is hope

Catching fish is catching fish

And hunting is hunting, i.e. catching a specific fish on purpose

Not very well

well

Curse my lectures at Edinburgh and UCL

 

[Baggins]

Yes we can. We can build what we need to build to get there
A dolphin can't

perhaps dolphins have the intelligence to realise how pointless it is going to the moon

 

[Baggins]

It is more than that. But this is pointless
If you don't think humans are the most advanced creatures in terms of capabilities, be my guest, but anyone with any intelligence knows better.

List the capabilities that humans are most advanced in

I'll start you off

Intelligence

have you got any others, or is this the only capability that counts for you?

I'll stop messing with you it's a bit unfair.

But you should know that you are wrong, you can't rank just rank organisms on the basis of intelligence, it is a pointless exercise.

This comes to a shock to many who haven't studied biological sciences, they think it is self evident that humans are at the top of the tree and all life lies below them, but in biological terms we aren't very special. We're not fast, we can't sense acutely, we can't have vast amounts of progeny, our habitat is reasonably varied but we aren't the most ubiquitous life.

All we are is clever.

If you want to make that the sole criteria for judgement fine, but it is a bit silly, like saying a Humvee is the best car in the world because it is the biggest, and someone else says but what about top speed, or fuel efficiency or luxury or acceleration, and you going " no, size is the only criteria on which we can judge cars "

I'm hoping that the last analogy might work for you as it is about machines, but I'm guessing it won't, I don't think people like you admit error.

 

[pittguy579]

o that's 2 things dolphins are better at now.

I think this is the first time you have admitted error on this thread, possibly the first time in your existence

No error, just at pointless tasks and not the tasks we are talking about i.e. power and efficiency,diving, carrying power, etc

And hunting is hunting, i.e. catching a specific fish on purpose

It's more efficient to catch multiple fish on purpose i.e fishing
So yes, dolphins may be more efficient hunters, but men with their intelligence can hundreds of times more fish than a dolphin could ever hope to bring it. And the end game is getting fish

 

[pittguy579]

List the capabilities that humans are most advanced in

I'll start you off

Intelligence

have you got any others, or is this the only capability that counts for you

Really it is the only thing that matters because it is the most malleable. We can use intelligence to go anywhere and do anything.
We can fly farther, faster than any bird or even out of the atmosphere
We can swim farther, faster than any fish
We have the power to hunt/kill any animal
We can build machines that can carry thousands of times more weight than any land animal and farther and faster to boot
We can build machines that are faster than any land animal
We are capable of quantum leaps in technology and can solve almost any problem
We can more efficient in more areas than any other creature
Sure a dolphin can swim better than us, but we can build machines that enable us to travel better in the water
Sure a bird can fly, but we can build machines that enable us to fly faster and farther than any bird can
We can adapt to the most environments and do more things with our intelligence.

 

[pittguy579]

perhaps dolphins have the intelligence to realise how pointless it is going to the moon

They don't

 

[Split Rock]

Wouldn't you agree as an engineer that efficiency is a good indicator of superiority? Which is more efficient at moving through the water.. a dolphin or a submarine?

Who can swim faster and farther without refueling?

I asked about efficiency. Which is more efficient? I cannot believe an engineer does not understand what efficiency is. The answer, as I am sure you are aware but are avoiding, is: A dolphin.

Which can move through the water continually for twenty five years without ever leaving the water? A dolphin.

Which never has to leave the ocean to refuel or get resupplied? A dolphin.


Why can't you see that the criteria you are using is subjective? If it is you opinion that intelligence and technical skill are the best indicators of superiority, that is fine. Many would agree. Why is it that you cannot at least acknowledge that there are other criteria that can be used instead? Why are other criteria, "stupid?"

The funny thing is that Creationsist like to claim that they are the ones who are "Open-Minded!"

 

[pittguy579]

I asked about efficiency. Which is more efficient? I cannot believe an engineer does not understand what efficiency is. The answer, as I am sure you are aware but are avoiding, is: A dolphin.

Efficiency all depends on workload
A submarine is more efficient and more capable in a vast number of ways. Which would be more efficient at carrying hundreds of thousands of pounds, diving for extended periods, and cruising without refuelingEfficiency is relative to the task you are giving it
Try launching nuclear missiles from the back of a dolphin. It would not be very efficient

Which can move through the water continually for twenty five years without ever leaving the water? A dolphin.

So can a submarine. I bet a nuclear submarine can go farther on a single tank of gas (food) than dolphin can. Dolphin would probably wear out or starve to death by the time it went 1000 miles if it didn't refuel

Which never has to leave the ocean to refuel or get resupplied? A dolphin.

A submarine can refuel in mid ocean-just bring more uranium

Why can't you see that the criteria you are using is subjective? If it is you opinion that intelligence and technical skill are the best indicators of superiority, that is fine. Many would agree. Why is it that you cannot at least acknowledge that there are other criteria that can be used instead? Why are other criteria, "stupid?"

Sure, there are other criteria, but intelligence trumps all because it enables us to adapt and be superior in any evironment and do things other creatures cannot even fathom.