the self replicating watch argument

[dad]

You were the one that suggested that "bear" was a name for one of the kinds Noah took on the ark, and that more than one bear species descended from that one pair.

Maybe. Or maybe there were a few kinds of bears. Who knows? Science is really hooped.

That indicates to me that there should be a clean break between bear-kind and not-bear-kind.

You have no fossils for bears in the former nature. How in the world would you know what they were like. You have taken some fossils from creatures that did live at the same time as bears, and then tried to construct some imaginary succession line from them!! Ridiculous when we think about it.

But you seem to agree with science that "bear" is just an arbitrary term, that there is no clear break. What species are in the bear kind? The term seems to be meaningless if you cannot answer.

The bible does not deal in species that are animals adapted from kinds. It deals only in the kinds. It does not say how many lion or bear kinds there were. What is meaningless is the attempts of clue challenged science to construct an accurate picture or where life came from. WE really should toss out all such foolish efforts as a ridiculous waste of time joke.

 

[xianghua]

From the summary of that article:

Turtles, not birds, have been found to be the closest relatives of crocodiles and alligators, according to an analysis of the largest available collection of reptile genes. The study's conclusions contradict decades of research based on anatomical and fossil studies

In other words, comparative genetics corrected for mistakes made during comparative anatomy studies.

Also, the paper being discussed here, is from 1999. So some 20 years old. Hardly news.

so pitabread claim about 14 characteristics as evidence against my cars tree is incorrect too since even 24 genes arent enough to make the correct tree, or that morphological tree contradict the genetic one.

 

[xianghua]

Because it bears the hallmarks of manufacturing.

like the flagellum?

 

[xianghua]

Because it bears the hallmarks of manufacturing.

--

 

[DogmaHunter]

so pitabread claim about 14 characteristics as evidence against my cars tree is incorrect too since even 24 genes arent enough to make the correct tree, or that morphological tree contradict the genetic one.

Your cars aren't genetic based biological organsisms.
Your cars tree is invalid by default.

 

[DogmaHunter]

like the flagellum?

the flagellum doesn't have any signs of manufacturing, no.

 

[xianghua]

--

 

[xianghua]

Some evidence indicates turtles split first, some indicates crocodiles, and some indicates dinos.

thanks. the same with my cars example. some traits fit with tree A and some with tree B.

 

[xianghua]

Can't be done. The existence of God is what as known in science as an unfalsifiable proposition. That means it can't be disproven by science.

you mean like evolution?

 

[Speedwell]

you mean like evolution?

No, evolution is falsifiable, even though you try to pretend it isn't, and make up false examples.

 

[Not me]

many of you may heared about the watch argument by william paley (if a watch need a designer because it cant evolve naturally then also nature need one, because its more complex and have a design traits like a watch (the flagellum motor for instance is a real spinning motor found in bacteria-image below). the argument against it is that a regular watch can replicate itself with variations over time, and thus it cant evolve naturally when nature can evolve because it has those traits. but paley is also talking about a self replicating watch and claiming that even if we will find such a self replicating watch (or a robot) that made from organic components its still be an evidence for design and not a for a natural process (because as far as we know a watch with springs and a motion system and so on need a designer). thus, paley watch a rgument is still valid to this day. check also this argument:My favorite argument for the existence of God

Difference between Prokaryotic flagella and Eukaryotic flagella ~ Biology Exams 4 U

Hi, hope all things are well with you and your relationship with Christ is abounding it all things. I am aware of the "watch argument" and also the Flagellum motor in the cell. Seeing how all these arguments only go as far as the human reasoning can take or not take them. And since God is not known by human reasoning, I feel this is what Paul was talking about when he said that "may your faith not stand in the wisdom of man, but the power of God". Which is accessed, by one's personal relationship with Christ. Which in itself, is the only way to have Christ formed in you, which in itself is what Christianity is. Much blessing to you, as we strive to know Christ in all reality and truth. Lord bless!

Much love in Christ, Not me.

 

[drjean]

.. site seems to be having issues with double posting... reported.

 

[drjean]

I am assuming (hopefully correct) that this is an argument for Creation Science and thus the naysayers are proponents of Darwinism?

There is a contradiction between Darwin's methodology and how he described it for public consumption. Darwin claimed that he proceeded “on true Baconian [inductive] principles and without any theory collected facts on a wholesale scale.” He also wrote, “How odd it is that anyone should not see that all observation must be for or against some view if it is to be of any service!”

I agree that evolution is not falsifiable because it is not a true theory!

Karl Popper found on the basis of Godel's Incompleteness theorems that All scientific theories must be falsifiable.

Irreducible complexity. DNA.

Darwin's Theory of Evolution - A Theory In Crisis
Darwin's Theory of Evolution is a theory in crisis in light of the tremendous advances we've made in molecular biology, biochemistry and genetics over the past fifty years. We now know that there are in fact tens of thousands of irreducibly complex systems on the cellular level. Specified complexity pervades the microscopic biological world. Molecular biologist Michael Denton wrote, "Although the tiniest bacterial cells are incredibly small, weighing less than 10-12 grams, each is in effect a veritable micro-miniaturized factory containing thousands of exquisitely designed pieces of intricate molecular machinery, made up altogether of one hundred thousand million atoms, far more complicated than any machinery built by man and absolutely without parallel in the non-living world." [5]

And we don't need a microscope to observe irreducible complexity. The eye, the ear and the heart are all examples of irreducible complexity, though they were not recognized as such in Darwin's day. Nevertheless, Darwin confessed, "To suppose that the eye with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree." [6]

Darwin's Theory Of Evolution

Darwinian evolution's champion Richard Dawkins logically proves intelligent design. Richard Dawkins proves intelligent design by confirming the premises of the DNA argument for intelligent design as formulated by Stephen C. Meyer, thereby showing in spite of himself how to arrive at the conclusion of intelligent design using elementary logic and facts of science. Argument: 1. Genes (a central component of life) are digital information*. 2. To the best of OUR KNOWLEDGE, digital information is always a product of intelligence. 3. Therefore, to the best of our knowledge, genes (a central component of life) are a product of intelligence.

This is the greatest discovery in the history of paleontology, Indisputably. Dinosaur soft tissue and dinosaur DNA. The atheistic science world wants you to know nothing about , they wish it weren't true, they don't want it to be true, when they hear it they put it out of their mind. Their problem is, it's proven and factual. Also, we are finding carbon-14 in these samples proving their true age to be well under 57,000 years. You will hear from the scoffers ... it's a hoax, it's contaminated, fraud ... bla bla bla. Please check out the evidence for your self. Another little piece of data that has been swept under the rug is that the Neanderthal DNA has been sequenced. Its closer to man then a chimp is to a chimp within the same species of chimps. Neanderthals' are 100% human. DNA doesn't lie!

I am always curious as to WHY people cannot accept Design. Why the vitriol against this and the enthusiastic embracement to come from slime.

Genes are digital information. Science agrees that digital information is a product of intelligence.

 

[Speedwell]

I am always curious as to WHY people cannot accept Design. Why the vitriol against this and the enthusiastic embracement to come from slime.

Because it is a hoax based on a logical fallacy, created by radical Dominionists at the Discovery Institute as propaganda for their totalitarian political agenda. No Christian who sincerely believes in God's authorship of the universe should have anything to do with it.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

Creation was magic as far as poor little science goes.

There we have it. Creation was magic.

 

[VirOptimus]

I am assuming (hopefully correct) that this is an argument for Creation Science and thus the naysayers are proponents of Darwinism?

I agree that evolution is not falsifiable because it is not a true theory!


Irreducible complexity. DNA.

Darwin's Theory Of Evolution

I am always curious as to WHY people cannot accept Design. Why the vitriol against this and the enthusiastic embracement to come from slime.

Genes are digital information. Science agrees that digital information is a product of intelligence.

No, this is all ignorant of science. ID and creation is just religion, they have no basis on facts and are not science.

The ToE is science and is falsifable although I dont think it ever will be as its incredibly robust and well supported by data and facts.

 

[drjean]

Darwin's myth of evolution falls apart and those who clinged to it are lost without a reason to live? God is the one who gives hope. God is the Creationist.

One has to have more faith to believe in evolution---especially now with VERY modern science having debunked it--than to believe in a Designer who creates miracles in the lives of believers today. Forget about how we got here, for instance, we still have proof that HE exists and is the Supreme Being. Believers know this, and non-believers do also for God says so:

Romans 1:9 Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them.

Isaiah 40:21
Do you not know? Have you not heard? Has it not been declared to you from the beginning? Have you not understood from the foundations of the earth?

Acts 17:24
The God who made the world and everything in it is the Lord of heaven and earth and does not live in temples made by human hands.

There is nothing in the Bible, God's Word that has ever been disproven. What is found today, such as in areas of geography, astronomy, biology, etc has proven what is found in the Bible. Not even creationism has been disproven except through fraud and myths such as is found in the "data" formulated to support Darwinism. One needs faith in God to have eternal life with God. All mankind will have eternal life (1st law of thermodynamics, which law God created and used in His forming of matter). One chooses whether he will meet God on God's good side or his own evil side.

I gave proof that even Darwin himself said that if there was found to be irreducible complexity---just one--- that his idea of how it all began would be false. Modern (2016?) science of the genome (DNA) has shown this. Yet that is unbelievable? Therein lies the magic. It's called magical thinking.

 

[VirOptimus]

Darwin's myth of evolution falls apart and those who clinged to it are lost without a reason to live? God is the one who gives hope. God is the Creationist.

One has to have more faith to believe in evolution---especially now with VERY modern science having debunked it--than to believe in a Designer who creates miracles in the lives of believers today. Forget about how we got here, for instance, we still have proof that HE exists and is the Supreme Being. Believers know this, and non-believers do also for God says so:

Romans 1:9 Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them.

Isaiah 40:21
Do you not know? Have you not heard? Has it not been declared to you from the beginning? Have you not understood from the foundations of the earth?

Acts 17:24
The God who made the world and everything in it is the Lord of heaven and earth and does not live in temples made by human hands.

There is nothing in the Bible, God's Word that has ever been disproven. What is found today, such as in areas of geography, astronomy, biology, etc has proven what is found in the Bible. Not even creationism has been disproven except through fraud and myths such as is found in the "data" formulated to support Darwinism. One needs faith in God to have eternal life with God. All mankind will have eternal life (1st law of thermodynamics, which law God created and used in His forming of matter). One chooses whether he will meet God on God's good side or his own evil side.

I gave proof that even Darwin himself said that if there was found to be irreducible complexity---just one--- that his idea of how it all began would be false. Modern (2016?) science of the genome (DNA) has shown this. Yet that is unbelievable? Therein lies the magic. It's called magical thinking.

If you want to preach there are other appropriate parts of the forums. This is the science part, and nothing you post is science.

 

[pitabread]

Genes are digital information. Science agrees that digital information is a product of intelligence.

Genes are organic compounds. Whether one considers them "digital" or not is highly dependent on how one applies the definition of digital and even if it does apply.

Furthermore, even if one applies that definition of "digital" to genes or the genome, it doesn't immediately mean that the source is intelligent.

 

[Speedwell]

Darwin's myth of evolution falls apart and those who clinged to it are lost without a reason to live? God is the one who gives hope. God is the Creationist.

One has to have more faith to believe in evolution---especially now with VERY modern science having debunked it--than to believe in a Designer who creates miracles in the lives of believers today. Forget about how we got here, for instance, we still have proof that HE exists and is the Supreme Being. Believers know this, and non-believers do also for God says so:

Romans 1:9 Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them.

Isaiah 40:21
Do you not know? Have you not heard? Has it not been declared to you from the beginning? Have you not understood from the foundations of the earth?

Acts 17:24
The God who made the world and everything in it is the Lord of heaven and earth and does not live in temples made by human hands.

There is nothing in the Bible, God's Word that has ever been disproven. What is found today, such as in areas of geography, astronomy, biology, etc has proven what is found in the Bible. Not even creationism has been disproven except through fraud and myths such as is found in the "data" formulated to support Darwinism. One needs faith in God to have eternal life with God. All mankind will have eternal life (1st law of thermodynamics, which law God created and used in His forming of matter). One chooses whether he will meet God on God's good side or his own evil side.

I gave proof that even Darwin himself said that if there was found to be irreducible complexity---just one--- that his idea of how it all began would be false. Modern (2016?) science of the genome (DNA) has shown this. Yet that is unbelievable? Therein lies the magic. It's called magical thinking.

Just so you're up front about your position--it's about your interpretation of scripture, not about theism versus atheism.