Programming of Life - Intelligent Design

[Radrook]

It isn't irrational to conclude that a program needs a programmer. What is irrational is to conclude that it doesn't.

 

[bhsmte]

It isn't irrational to conclude that a program needs a programmer. What is irrational is to conclude that it doesn't.

Let us know when you can demonstrate this programmer.

 

[Radrook]

Actually, the evidence in nature which clearly indicates a programmer is so clear that we are told that people who deny seeing it have absolutely no excuse,.

Romans 1:20 NIV
For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities--his eternal power and divine nature--have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.

 

[Speedwell]

I don't buy into the story that information appears out of nowhere and then mindlessly begins to program itself to do brilliant things. To me that is fairytale stuff.

"Information" doesn't do anything. It is merely a descriptive metric, just like the Fibonacci sequence is descriptive of the nautilus' curves, but does not cause them.

 

[Radrook]

"Information" doesn't do anything. It is merely a descriptive metric, just like the Fibonacci sequence is descriptive of the nautilus' curves, but does not cause them.

I never claimed that information by itself does anything.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

I don't buy into the story that information appears out of nowhere and then mindlessly begins to program itself to do brilliant things. To me that is fairytale stuff.

That particular story is fairy tale stuff. I recommend non-fiction for this subject.

 

[KCfromNC]

Actually, the evidence in nature which clearly indicates a programmer is so clear that we are told that people who deny seeing it have absolutely no excuse,.

Romans 1:20 NIV

I thought ID supporters we trying to pretend they didn't want to talk about the details of who the designer is. Why are you bringing a particular religion into it?

 

[Radrook]

I thought ID supporters we trying to pretend they didn't want to talk about the details of who the designer is. Why are you bringing a particular religion into it?

True! No pretention, the ID position doesn't introduce any religion into the subject.

 

[Speedwell]

I never claimed that information by itself does anything.

No, you made a false statement about what others claim.

"I don't buy into the story that information appears out of nowhere and then mindlessly begins to program itself to do brilliant things."

Nobody is telling that story.

 

[bhsmte]

Actually, the evidence in nature which clearly indicates a programmer is so clear that we are told that people who deny seeing it have absolutely no excuse,.

Romans 1:20 NIV
For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities--his eternal power and divine nature--have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.

Please demonstrate this clear evidence and how it directly ties to a specific programmer.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

I don't buy into the story that information appears out of nowhere and then mindlessly begins to program itself to do brilliant things. To me that is fairytale stuff.

Neil deGrass Tyson once famously said "The great thing about science, is that it is accurate - no matter if you believe in it or not"

It certainly applies to your quote here (ignoring the obvious strawman, off course)

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Let us know when you can demonstrate this programmer.

...or that there is any program to begin with, for that matter.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Actually, the evidence in nature which clearly indicates a programmer is so clear that we are told that people who deny seeing it have absolutely no excuse,.

Romans 1:20 NIV
For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities--his eternal power and divine nature--have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.

Didn't you claim ID was a scientific idea and not a religious one?

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

True! No pretention, the ID position doesn't introduce any religion into the subject.

Yet, you post a bible verse as if it were an argument in support of this position.

 

[Radrook]

Yet, you post a bible verse as if it were an argument in support of this position.

I was probably replying indirectly to those who keep bringing in the religious aspect despite my requests that it be excluded.

 

[Larniavc]

The problem is that you disqualify nature as being capable of indicating intelligent design.

Not so. The issue is that you are unable to substantiate the assertion that intelligent design exists and is detectable.

You simply refuse to support your assertion that ID exists and is detectable.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

I was probably replying indirectly to those who keep bringing in the religious aspect despite my requests that it be excluded.

I'm not buying it.

 

[Radrook]

Not so. The issue is that you are unable to substantiate the assertion that intelligent design exists and is detectable.

You simply refuse to support your assertion that ID exists and is detectable.

The video substantiates and supports it with evidence galore. Your refusal to acknowledge it doesn't refute it or invalidate it in the least. Not by a long shot and not in your wildest dreams.

 

[bhsmte]

I was probably replying indirectly to those who keep bringing in the religious aspect despite my requests that it be excluded.

If you are excluding religion, are you ever going to present science?

 

[bhsmte]

The video substantiates and supports it with evidence galore. Your refusal to acknowledge it doesn't refute it or invalidate it in the least. Not by a long shot and not in your wildest dreams.

Another blanket statement. What specific evidence in the video substantiates and supports it?