the self replicating watch argument

[Ophiolite]

Talking about all believers in God here:
Anyone who thinks they can force God's hand
is ignorant of who is God and who is the servant.
We are to carry on until he arrives, not just until
we think the signs are right.

Carry on with willful destruction of the environment? How will you defend that if he does arrive?

 

[xianghua]

So if an object which exists only in your imagination can't evolve, then an object which exists in reality can't evolve either? Right.

if they have the same design traits why not? a ufo for instance is an imaginary object. but we know for sure that if we will find such an object we will conclude design.

 

[xianghua]

Except that the flagellum can evolve: Evolution of the bacterial flagellum

http://www.talkdesign.org/faqs/flagellum.html

not realy. they start with a protein export system. such a system is already a complex system that cant evolve stepwise. so their model is false just from the beginning.

Self replicating watches don't exist.

but a self replicating motor does exist. and both are evidence for design.

 

[Speedwell]

if they have the same design traits why not? a ufo for instance is an imaginary object. but we know for sure that if we will find such an object we will conclude design.

"Design traits" are not necessarily evidence of intelligent design.
In any case, UFOs, if they exist, may be natural phenomena or even living creatures. I am not going to conclude that they are designed because you imagine them to be spaceships with little green men in them.

 

[pitabread]

not realy. they start with a protein export system. such a system is already a complex system that cant evolve stepwise. so their model is false just from the beginning.

But that wasn't your claim. You claimed specifically that the bacterial flagellum couldn't evolve. If it's possible to evolve from another precursor system, then clearly the flagellum can evolve and your objection is irrelevant.

You also need to understand that this is how evolution works. It is a recursive process that builds on what is already in place. In the evolution of the flagellum there is no requirement that it be evolved completely from scratch in lieu of precursor biological components.

but a self replicating motor does exist. and both are evidence for design.

See above. If it's possible for the flagellum to evolve, then it clearly can't be evidence for design.

And since it appears possible to evolve, therefore it is not evidence for design.

 

[doubtingmerle]

It was in 2011 when the 9.0 earthquake hit Fukushima Nuclear plants the Lord gave me "beginning of the end."

Were you too close to the core?

 

[doubtingmerle]

if they have the same design traits why not? a ufo for instance is an imaginary object. but we know for sure that if we will find such an object we will conclude design.

is it a multicellular animal ufo, or a ufo made out of mechanical parts?

 

[pitabread]

a ufo for instance is an imaginary object.

UFO just means Unidentified Flying Object. It simply means something that is flying and we don't know what it is.

but we know for sure that if we will find such an object we will conclude design.

We don't.

If for example a UFO turns out to be something like a meteor, animal or other natural object then we wouldn't conclude it was artificially designed.

 

[pat34lee]

The paper in question isn't "how they are made", but rather how the flagellum could evolve.

Yes, a fictional account, because there is no way
to prove it happened in the past or that it could
ever happen today or in the future. It is no more
scientific than pokemon battling to evolve.

 

[pat34lee]

Carry on with willful destruction of the environment? How will you defend that if he does arrive?

Who is defending it? And who is in a position to
either stop it or allow it to carry on?

 

[pat34lee]

See above. If it's possible for the flagellum to evolve, then it clearly can't be evidence for design.

And since it appears possible to evolve, therefore it is not evidence for design.

Have you ever read fiction, mythology or fables?
Just because you can describe something doesn't
mean that it is real or even possible.

A Trekkie can tell you how a matter-antimatter
engine works, but the science is impossible, at
least for now, and may never be a reality.

 

[pitabread]

Yes, a fictional account, because there is no way
to prove it happened in the past or that it could
ever happen today or in the future.

Science doesn't deal with absolute proof.

The whole point is to determine if there is a plausible pathway by which the flagellum could evolve. It's also possible to formulate this into a proper hypothesis for testing.

It will never be possible to absolutely prove how the flagellum originally evolved, but that doesn't mean we can't use the available information at hand to construct and test plausible scenarios.

 

[doubtingmerle]

Who is defending it? And who is in a position to
either stop it or allow it to carry on?

Trump.

He could put us back in the paris climate accord.

 

[xianghua]

UFO just means Unidentified Flying Object. It simply means something that is flying and we don't know what it is.



We don't.

If for example a UFO turns out to be something like a meteor, animal or other natural object then we wouldn't conclude it was artificially designed.

so what about this one?:

you can conclude design or not?

(image from wiki)

 

[xianghua]

is it a multicellular animal ufo, or a ufo made out of mechanical parts?

say a a multicellular animal ufo and look like this:

 

[Speedwell]

say a a multicellular animal ufo and look like this:

Then we can't conclude design.

 

[Speedwell]

so what about this one?:

you can conclude design or not?

(image from wiki)

Not enough information in that picture to conclude design.

 

[xianghua]

But that wasn't your claim. You claimed specifically that the bacterial flagellum couldn't evolve. If it's possible to evolve from another precursor system, then clearly the flagellum can evolve and your objection is irrelevant.

no. i said that it cant evolve by small steps. and these arent small steps.

 

[Speedwell]

no. i said that it cant evolve by small steps. and these arent small steps.

The precursor system evolved in small steps, too.

 

[Bungle_Bear]

no. i said that it cant evolve by small steps. and these arent small steps.

Which step isn't small? Please cite the specific part of the process which you have a problem with giving an explanation of why you think it is a problem.