Posts: 67079
Threads: 140
Joined: June 28, 2011
Reputation:
162
RE: DNA Proves Existence of a Designer
December 2, 2018 at 1:22 am
That you didn't read.
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
Posts: 1585
Threads: 8
Joined: November 27, 2018
Reputation:
6
RE: DNA Proves Existence of a Designer
December 2, 2018 at 2:48 am
I read this towards the end to get what we're you're at now with this (I'm not ready through 1000+ pages).
"Irreducible Complexity" has been around for awhile. I remember reading Behe's book when it first hit the shelves. There's some good insight in it in regard to systems and how they work together. However, you're not going to win an argument using it, because it has been around for awhile, so there are layers of arguments that attempt to prove it's not necessary, even if we can't observe them to say "yay" or "nay."
Of course monkeys can pull fully developed eyeballs out of their buttocks and shove them into their skull. And there you have it. A spontaneous process of evolutionary wonder.
Now information theory on the other hand is a little bit more difficult. Time + Mutations = Chicken, Elephants, Giraffes, Lemurs, and Goats. Why not?
But then you have to deal with the nature of mutations. This is problematic because you need positive mutations that unlock or expand into new genetic information. Of course mutations cause things like deformities and cancer. So assuming it's possible you need more time, and even if the mutation creates something new, it has to be useful, and it has to be introduced into the reproductive system of the parent(s). Why? Well if a fly develops a third wing, it won't be able to fly properly, and it will be more likely to be picked off by a predator. Additionally it has to be passed along through the reproductive system so the offspring can carry the same trait. If you manage to get the new species you have to cross your fingers that it isn't sterile. And so on, and so on, and so on...
And this is just the beginning of why it's a waste of time to argue. In a human life, there is not enough time to gather enough information to prove or disprove said processes and demonstrate it as a feasible explanation.
Posts: 2741
Threads: 2
Joined: May 4, 2018
Reputation:
3
RE: DNA Proves Existence of a Designer
December 2, 2018 at 3:23 am
(This post was last modified: December 2, 2018 at 3:30 am by CDF47.)
(December 2, 2018 at 1:22 am)Gae Bolga Wrote: That you didn't read.
There was no need to read it. I referenced it for the definition.
(December 2, 2018 at 2:48 am)T0 Th3 M4X Wrote: I read this towards the end to get what we're you're at now with this (I'm not ready through 1000+ pages).
"Irreducible Complexity" has been around for awhile. I remember reading Behe's book when it first hit the shelves. There's some good insight in it in regard to systems and how they work together. However, you're not going to win an argument using it, because it has been around for awhile, so there are layers of arguments that attempt to prove it's not necessary, even if we can't observe them to say "yay" or "nay."
Of course monkeys can pull fully developed eyeballs out of their buttocks and shove them into their skull. And there you have it. A spontaneous process of evolutionary wonder.
Now information theory on the other hand is a little bit more difficult. Time + Mutations = Chicken, Elephants, Giraffes, Lemurs, and Goats. Why not?
But then you have to deal with the nature of mutations. This is problematic because you need positive mutations that unlock or expand into new genetic information. Of course mutations cause things like deformities and cancer. So assuming it's possible you need more time, and even if the mutation creates something new, it has to be useful, and it has to be introduced into the reproductive system of the parent(s). Why? Well if a fly develops a third wing, it won't be able to fly properly, and it will be more likely to be picked off by a predator. Additionally it has to be passed along through the reproductive system so the offspring can carry the same trait. If you manage to get the new species you have to cross your fingers that it isn't sterile. And so on, and so on, and so on...
And this is just the beginning of why it's a waste of time to argue. In a human life, there is not enough time to gather enough information to prove or disprove said processes and demonstrate it as a feasible explanation.
Welcome to the discussion. Some interesting information.
I wonder why Ev was banned. I hope for not posting those videos. She stopped after a warning was given.
Posts: 2737
Threads: 4
Joined: September 21, 2018
Reputation:
33
RE: DNA Proves Existence of a Designer
December 2, 2018 at 4:55 am
(This post was last modified: December 2, 2018 at 4:59 am by Deesse23.)
(December 1, 2018 at 11:18 pm)CDF47 Wrote: The machines in living systems are irreducibly complex where if one component of the system fails the entire system fails or is degraded.
forget it, i was about to answer the troll, but its useless. He is not here to honestly interact. He is here to preach.
Cetero censeo religionem delendam esse
Posts: 11697
Threads: 117
Joined: November 5, 2016
Reputation:
43
RE: DNA Proves Existence of a Designer
December 2, 2018 at 5:04 am
Quote:The machines in living systems are irreducibly complex where if one component of the system fails the entire system fails or is degraded.
Seek strength, not to be greater than my brother, but to fight my greatest enemy -- myself.
Inuit Proverb
Posts: 2741
Threads: 2
Joined: May 4, 2018
Reputation:
3
RE: DNA Proves Existence of a Designer
December 2, 2018 at 5:09 am
(This post was last modified: December 2, 2018 at 5:14 am by CDF47.)
(December 2, 2018 at 5:04 am)Amarok Wrote: Quote:The machines in living systems are irreducibly complex where if one component of the system fails the entire system fails or is degraded.
Why is that funny?
(December 2, 2018 at 4:55 am)Deesse23 Wrote: (December 1, 2018 at 11:18 pm)CDF47 Wrote: The machines in living systems are irreducibly complex where if one component of the system fails the entire system fails or is degraded.
forget it, i was about to answer the troll, but its useless. He is not here to honestly interact. He is here to preach.
That is the definition of irreducibly complex, although they don't state degraded. That was my understanding of their definition prior to reading the Behe definition from the article I posted.
Posts: 2737
Threads: 4
Joined: September 21, 2018
Reputation:
33
RE: DNA Proves Existence of a Designer
December 2, 2018 at 5:36 am
Cetero censeo religionem delendam esse
Posts: 2741
Threads: 2
Joined: May 4, 2018
Reputation:
3
RE: DNA Proves Existence of a Designer
December 2, 2018 at 5:49 am
(This post was last modified: December 2, 2018 at 6:22 am by CDF47.)
(December 2, 2018 at 5:36 am)Deesse23 Wrote: (December 2, 2018 at 5:09 am)CDF47 Wrote: Why is that funny?
That is the definition of irreducibly complex, although they don't state degraded. That was my understanding of their definition prior to reading the Behe definition from the article I posted.
Are you here to preach or not?
Why don't you like the definition of irreducibly complex? Basically if a molecular machine has a single component fail then the system fails. Molecular machines are complex machines that function in the cell (they are made of proteins). I just wonder, what if redundancy is built in for a component. I also wonder if there are any components that fail that would just degrade the system. Like if a passenger door handle breaks on a car the system has not failed, it is just degraded.
Posts: 2737
Threads: 4
Joined: September 21, 2018
Reputation:
33
RE: DNA Proves Existence of a Designer
December 2, 2018 at 6:08 am
(This post was last modified: December 2, 2018 at 6:18 am by Deesse23.)
(December 2, 2018 at 5:49 am)CDF47 Wrote: (December 2, 2018 at 5:36 am)Deesse23 Wrote: Are you here to preach or not?
Why don't you like the definition of irreducibly complex. Basically if a molecular machine has a single component fail then the system fails. Molecular machines are complex machines that function in the cell (they are made of proteins). I just wonder, what if redundancy is built in for a component. I also wonder if there are any components that fail that would just degrade the system. Like if a passenger door handle breaks on a car the system has not failed, it is just degraded.
Why are you evading my question?
Complex systems dont consist of components, but of subsystems by the way.
If your designers´systems fail due to single component fails, you should sack him and ask for a new designer, or pray to a different one.
Cetero censeo religionem delendam esse
Posts: 2741
Threads: 2
Joined: May 4, 2018
Reputation:
3
RE: DNA Proves Existence of a Designer
December 2, 2018 at 6:25 am
(This post was last modified: December 2, 2018 at 6:37 am by CDF47.)
(December 2, 2018 at 6:08 am)Deesse23 Wrote: (December 2, 2018 at 5:49 am)CDF47 Wrote: Why don't you like the definition of irreducibly complex. Basically if a molecular machine has a single component fail then the system fails. Molecular machines are complex machines that function in the cell (they are made of proteins). I just wonder, what if redundancy is built in for a component. I also wonder if there are any components that fail that would just degrade the system. Like if a passenger door handle breaks on a car the system has not failed, it is just degraded.
Why are you evading my question?
Complex systems dont consist of components, but of subsystems by the way.
If your designers´systems fail due to single component fails, you should sack him and ask for a new designer, or pray to a different one.
Systems are made of subsystems and components. A component in a molecular machine like I was referring to, for example, is a stator in a bacterial flagellum motor. This is a component of the system.
Also, maybe the redundancy isn't necessary for these molecular machines in the designer's eyes although there is redundancy found everywhere in nature. For instance, the human body plan. Look at all the redundancy built in.
|
