• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

  • CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.

Training Trees Game

essentialsaltes

Fact-Based Lifeform
Oct 17, 2011
49,246
51,560
Los Angeles Area
✟1,146,971.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Legal Union (Other)
NOVA has put together a little game - click Play Game, and then Mission 1 Training Trees.

Not much game there, but the interface is kinda slick when you get used to it, and I think some people could learn something. If you tune out when the phrase "nested hierarchy" is mentioned, I invite you to look into this game.
 

justlookinla

Regular Member
Mar 31, 2014
11,767
199
✟43,175.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
NOVA has put together a little game - click Play Game, and then Mission 1 Training Trees.

Not much game there, but the interface is kinda slick when you get used to it, and I think some people could learn something. If you tune out when the phrase "nested hierarchy" is mentioned, I invite you to look into this game.

Let me guess. The 'game' doesn't have a designer, but is rather the result of a random/chance, mindless, meaningless, purposeless and goalless effort?
 
Upvote 0

pgp_protector

Noted strange person
Dec 17, 2003
51,930
17,847
58
Earth For Now
Visit site
✟500,758.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Widowed
Politics
US-Others
Let me guess. The 'game' doesn't have a designer, but is rather the result of a random/chance, mindless, meaningless, purposeless and goalless effort?

I'd guess by your question you didn't read the simple info on the link, it would of answered your question
"DEVELOPED BY THE LIFE ON EARTH PROJECT"
 
Upvote 0

Strathos

No one important
Dec 11, 2012
12,663
6,534
God's Earth
✟278,316.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Democrat
Let me guess. The 'game' doesn't have a designer, but is rather the result of a random/chance, mindless, meaningless, purposeless and goalless effort?

So because meteorologists use computer simulations to simulate the weather, that means each individual weather event is intelligently designed?
 
Upvote 0

justlookinla

Regular Member
Mar 31, 2014
11,767
199
✟43,175.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
And they were designed in a manner to replicate natural processes.

If you like, you can think of the universe itself as the ultimate simulation and God as the ultimate designer.

Yes, I agree. Design is a basic presence in all of creation.
 
Upvote 0

Willtor

Not just any Willtor... The Mighty Willtor
Apr 23, 2005
9,713
1,429
45
Cambridge
Visit site
✟47,287.00
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Life forms with common building blocks.

This is a good guess, but not quite. A nested hierarchy is a conceptual structure that has a lot of disparate applications. In fact, in general, they have nothing to do with life forms. Only in the biological application are "life forms" relevant. "Common building blocks" might be a partial answer, but it isn't enough that things have common building blocks in order to fit into a nested hierarchy.

If you think of a book that someone wrote, back when manuscripts were copied by hand, and if the book was popular, you can typically fit the history of the book into a nested hierarchy. Consider that the book goes to two copiers who each make a couple of modifications (accidentally or deliberately). Then, each copy goes off to two more copiers who make their own modifications. Even if the oldest three copies get destroyed, you can reconstruct (with high confidence) what the original looked like from the remaining four, and even what the other two looked like.

The process for doing this involves arranging the four copies in a nested hierarchy. You cluster them by similarity and recognize that there were two intermediate copies and one "grandfather" manuscript. This arrangement is called a "nested hierarchy." It's a tree-like structure with clear ancestors and descendants wherein if there are two ancestors of a node, one of the ancestors must necessarily be an ancestor of the other ancestor.

Again, it isn't enough that there be common building blocks. You couldn't do this with different books, even though they are from the same language and use many of the same words.
 
Upvote 0

justlookinla

Regular Member
Mar 31, 2014
11,767
199
✟43,175.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
This is a good guess, but not quite. A nested hierarchy is a conceptual structure that has a lot of disparate applications. In fact, in general, they have nothing to do with life forms. Only in the biological application are "life forms" relevant. "Common building blocks" might be a partial answer, but it isn't enough that things have common building blocks in order to fit into a nested hierarchy.

If you think of a book that someone wrote, back when manuscripts were copied by hand, and if the book was popular, you can typically fit the history of the book into a nested hierarchy. Consider that the book goes to two copiers who each make a couple of modifications (accidentally or deliberately). Then, each copy goes off to two more copiers who make their own modifications. Even if the oldest three copies get destroyed, you can reconstruct (with high confidence) what the original looked like from the remaining four, and even what the other two looked like.

The process for doing this involves arranging the four copies in a nested hierarchy. You cluster them by similarity and recognize that there were two intermediate copies and one "grandfather" manuscript. This arrangement is called a "nested hierarchy." It's a tree-like structure with clear ancestors and descendants wherein if there are two ancestors of a node, one of the ancestors must necessarily be an ancestor of the other ancestor.

Again, it isn't enough that there be common building blocks. You couldn't do this with different books, even though they are from the same language and use many of the same words.

You couldn't have have nested hierarchy without common building blocks.
 
Upvote 0

Subduction Zone

Regular Member
Dec 17, 2012
32,629
12,069
✟230,471.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
You couldn't have have nested hierarchy without common building blocks.

Yes, but it is much much more than common building blocks. And the results quite often show a lack of intelligent design. But it does show the results of "good enough". An improvement that causes evolution to advance does not have to be anywhere near perfect, in fact it rarely is. It is simply good enough for life to advance. Therefore we can see such craziness as the path that certain nerves follow or even advances that seem negative in other environments.
 
Upvote 0

justlookinla

Regular Member
Mar 31, 2014
11,767
199
✟43,175.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Yes, but it is much much more than common building blocks. And the results quite often show a lack of intelligent design.

Other results show results of intelligent design?

But it does show the results of "good enough". An improvement that causes evolution to advance does not have to be anywhere near perfect, in fact it rarely is. It is simply good enough for life to advance. Therefore we can see such craziness as the path that certain nerves follow or even advances that seem negative in other environments.

It's all according to the designer.
 
Upvote 0

Subduction Zone

Regular Member
Dec 17, 2012
32,629
12,069
✟230,471.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Other results show results of intelligent design?

No results in life show evidence of intelligent design.


It's all according to the designer.


So you are saying that your God is incredibly incompetent? That seems like blasphemy to me.
 
Upvote 0

justlookinla

Regular Member
Mar 31, 2014
11,767
199
✟43,175.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
No results in life show evidence of intelligent design.

You said "and the results quite often show a lack of intelligent design". What are those indicators which quite often show a lack of intelligent design?

So you are saying that your God is incredibly incompetent? That seems like blasphemy to me.

Not at all. So far, nobody's been able to compete with Him in creation.
 
Upvote 0

Subduction Zone

Regular Member
Dec 17, 2012
32,629
12,069
✟230,471.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
You said "and the results quite often show a lack of intelligent design". What are those indicators which quite often show a lack of intelligent design?

Here is one:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cO1a1Ek-HD0


Not at all. So far, nobody's been able to compete with Him in creation.

With who? There is no reliable evidence for a deity that anyone has posted here yet. If you want to claim that a god had a hand in creation it is up to you to show some evidence of this. Empty claims and conjectures mean nothing. I can help you on the subject of evidence, if you would like some.
 
Upvote 0

justlookinla

Regular Member
Mar 31, 2014
11,767
199
✟43,175.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married

Would you mind actually putting it in your own words?

With who? There is no reliable evidence for a deity that anyone has posted here yet. If you want to claim that a god had a hand in creation it is up to you to show some evidence of this.

I have. See the tactile sensory unit threads.

Empty claims and conjectures mean nothing. I can help you on the subject of evidence, if you would like some.

Nobody on the forum has seen this evidence of yours.
 
Upvote 0

Subduction Zone

Regular Member
Dec 17, 2012
32,629
12,069
✟230,471.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Would you mind actually putting it in your own words?

The laryngeal nerve of the giraffe takes a huge and totally unnecessary detour. It only makes sense from an evolutionary perspective.


I have. See the tactile sensory unit threads.

No, you failed terribly in that thread. I saw it.


Nobody on the forum has seen this evidence of yours.

Actually they have. You have shown many times that you don't understand what evidence is so even when it is posted you don't see it. Again, I can help you with that.

By the way, I gave you some evidence in my prior post and explained it to you in this one. So you can't make that claim anymore. You may not understand the evidence but to say that I have not posted any would be a falsehood.
 
Upvote 0

justlookinla

Regular Member
Mar 31, 2014
11,767
199
✟43,175.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
The laryngeal nerve of the giraffe takes a huge and totally unnecessary detour. It only makes sense from an evolutionary perspective.
LOL. You believe you can design a giraffe? LOL.

No, you failed terribly in that thread. I saw it.

We certainly established design in the thread....and in the one subsequent to it.

Actually they have. You have shown many times that you don't understand what evidence is so even when it is posted you don't see it. Again, I can help you with that.

By the way, I gave you some evidence in my prior post and explained it to you in this one. So you can't make that claim anymore. You may not understand the evidence but to say that I have not posted any would be a falsehood.

Evidence for what?
 
Upvote 0