The Fossil Record- As God Would Have Made It Through Time

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Just finished reading a lengthy article on the echolocation system of different bat species, that went into some amazing details. There is no way these systems evolved. Logic tells me they were designed. I reached that conclusion based on these incredible systems alone, no religion needed.

But that's not logical! You just saying "I don't think they evolved" while there are hundreds of studies and tonnes of evidence that echolocation did evolve is not being logical. And to even say that something was designed means that there must be a designer, which in your case is the Christian God, so your 'logical' conclusion is nothing more than a religious conclusion.

 

[PsychoSarah]

Logic tells me it is false. To me evolution is like a gigantic puzzle with trillions of pieces, and while science is able to fit many together the picture is incomplete.

So, you can't tell what the complete image of this puzzle is, just because every piece isn't put into place? https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-vi9dqRKi...AALxI/wwxR-Xq11uM/s1600/incomplete+puzzle.png

I'm assuming this is a reference to the fossil record, which is the only evidence related to evolution that could reasonably be considered incomplete and is liable to never be complete.

 

[xianghua]

...so that would be "God". Which isn't really an answer per se. It IS a religious belief, not science.

And very hard to justify by observation, as OWG would have us believe.

That's the point: ID is, for all intents and purposes, just religious belief. If we propose a designer we either then have to explain the origin of the designer or call it God. One way provides no real answer the other way is a statement of faith.

not realy. we can detect design in nature. that is a fact. for instance: do you agree that a robot with self replicating system and organic components is evidence for d esign or evolution? by the way just as a general note: english isnt my native so i may not understand some words here and there in general.

 

[Speedwell]

not realy. we can detect design in nature. that is a fact. for instance: do you agree that a robot with self replicating system and organic components is evidence for design or evolution? by the way just as a general note: english isnt my native so i may not understand some words here and there in general.

Understand this, then; look up the words in a dictionary if you need to: If it's not man-made you can't tell if it's designed or not.

 

[theQuincunx5]

String theory was an attempt to explain the unexplainable. Creation is unexplainable.

How do you know that "Creation is unexplainable"?

 

[doubtingmerle]

do you agree that a robot with self replicating system and organic components is evidence for d esign or evolution?

Ah back to nonsense questions about things that could not possibly exist. Here is a nonsense question for you. If a toilet had a human mind would it be a person?

 

[theQuincunx5]

not realy. we can detect design in nature.

I've seen your posts with the concept of self-reproducing Ford F150's and organic robots.

There's really little way that I can think of for you to differentiate between a creature that has evolved over millenia to fit in with its ecosystem given all the variables available to evolution and something that was "designed" to exist in its ecosystem.

that is a fact. for instance: do you agree that a robot with self replicating system and organic components is evidence for d esign or evolution?

I hate to break it to you but your posts on these increasingly over-constructed theoreticals don't do much to convince me of any of your points in regards to design.

by the way just as a general note: english isnt my native so i may not understand some words here and there in general.

No problem.

Can I ask you some questions about your proposed DESIGNER?

1. Who designed the designer you think designed life on earth?
2. Who designed the designer of the designer you think designed life on earth?
3. Who designed the designer of the designer of the designer you think designed life on earth?

(Do you see where I'm going with this?)

 

[theQuincunx5]

Ah back to nonsense questions about things that could not possibly exist. Here is a nonsense question for you. If a toilet had a human mind would it be a person?

Woah! That's going to keep me up at night. Mind. Blown!

 

[OldWiseGuy]

But that's not logical! You just saying "I don't think they evolved" while there are hundreds of studies and tonnes of evidence that echolocation did evolve is not being logical. And to even say that something was designed means that there must be a designer, which in your case is the Christian God, so your 'logical' conclusion is nothing more than a religious conclusion.

The conclusion that the echolocation system evolved was already reached before the subject was studied. That everything evolved no matter how improbable is the default position of science, from which it cannot budge lest the whole thing comes crashing down.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Can I ask you some questions about your proposed DESIGNER?

1. Who designed the designer you think designed life on earth?
2. Who designed the designer of the designer you think designed life on earth?
3. Who designed the designer of the designer of the designer you think designed life on earth?

(Do you see where I'm going with this?)

If I may,

"I'm afraid it's turtles all the way down, old chap."

 

[OldWiseGuy]

How do you know that "Creation is unexplainable"?

In order to explain creation we must be able to create that which we want to explain. For example, in order to explain the creation of a robin, we must create a robin. Same with evolution. We must be able to 'evolve' a robin. Otherwise we're just guessing.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

So, you can't tell what the complete image of this puzzle is, just because every piece isn't put into place? https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-vi9dqRKiXrc/VrNfRcuCWoI/AAAAAAAALxI/wwxR-Xq11uM/s1600/incomplete+puzzle.png

I'm assuming this is a reference to the fossil record, which is the only evidence related to evolution that could reasonably be considered incomplete and is liable to never be complete.

Not exactly the kind of puzzle I had in mind.

I'm referring to life as it exists today, not fossils. There is much that isn't yet known that (imo) is necessary to support the ToE.

Consider my ongoing argument about the RLN. Science admits that there are things unknown about the nervous system, yet they are absolutely certain the left RLN has no purpose in it's route around the aortic arch.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

The conclusion that the echolocation system evolved was already reached before the subject was studied. That everything evolved no matter how improbable is the default position of science, from which it cannot budge lest the whole thing comes crashing down.

You are stunningly wrong! Evolution is not the default position, it is simply the best supported theory!
It's comments like this that proves beyond a doubt that your critique of evolution is not a logical or intelligence problem on your end, it's simply a religious one.

 

[doubtingmerle]

If I may,

"I'm afraid it's turtles all the way down, old chap."

if you are standing on an infinite stack of turtles, isn't that foundation a bit unstable?

 

[doubtingmerle]

Science admits that there are things unknown about the nervous system, yet they are absolutely certain the left RLN has no purpose in it's route around the aortic arch.

Do you care to refer me to the scientific journal that states we know this with absolute certainty? The words "absolute certainty" would be quite odd in a scientific writing.

 

[xianghua]

Ah back to nonsense questions about things that could not possibly exist. Here is a nonsense question for you. If a toilet had a human mind would it be a person?

so you have no answer. thanks

 

[xianghua]

I've seen your posts with the concept of self-reproducing Ford F150's and organic robots.

do you think that a penguin isnt a kind fo such a walking robot? (in terms of materialistic perspective).

1. Who designed the designer you think designed life on earth?
2. Who designed the designer of the designer you think designed life on earth?
3. Who designed the designer of the designer of the designer you think designed life on earth?

(Do you see where I'm going with this?)

its very simple. if the designer is eternal he doesnt need a designer. so we dont need more designers.

 

[theQuincunx5]

its very simple. if the designer is eternal he doesnt need a designer. so we dont need more designers.

That sounds like special pleading.

But also it clearly outlines the designer as God. And that makes it a religious belief.

It appears you have taken a religious belief in God and then decided that the way life makes sense is through a religious lens.

That's fine.

Can you also see that it is very difficult to differentiate between a life form designed to live in its eco-system and a life form that has arisen through millennia of evolutionary changes which weeks out features that are maladaptive to the ecosystem leaving only that which can exist in the ecosystem?

If you cannot see that this is a rather difficult thing to differentiate you are steadfastly defending religious faith.

Again, that is not bad per se. It just isn't science.

 

[theQuincunx5]

In order to explain creation we must be able to create that which we want to explain.

Really? Why?

For example, in order to explain the creation of a robin, we must create a robin.

So in order for the forensic investigators in the police department to understand how a murder happened they must kill a person?

Same with evolution. We must be able to 'evolve' a robin. Otherwise we're just guessing.

Speaking as one who got their doctorate in geology I don't recall ever making an entire earth from scratch in order to understand things about the history of the earth.

Note: I'm not saying that experimental work to understand processes is completely unnecessary or bad, but it isn't a 100% hard and fast rule that we need that to understand how things work.

...again, speaking as one who has some experience in that type of science.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

so you have no answer. thanks

How can you expect anyone to reasonably answer a nonsense question like yours? Even after you have been told REPEATEDLY that it is nonsense and can't be answered.