(October 12, 2012 at 12:33 am)Darkstar Wrote:

(October 12, 2012 at 12:06 am)Akincana Krishna dasa Wrote: But even assuming that that's true, the "dumb, mechanical process" of nature regularly creates things, like biological organisms, in such a way that it has thus-far baffled modern science. Modern science can't create a flower. So why can't you respect that the processes that did create the flowers is a lot smarter than modern science?

Two problems: 1. Nature doesn't regularly create biological organiams unless you mean reproduction, but they aren't created from scratch. It took nature over a billion years just to produce a single-celled organism. Give us a little more time, you'll see...

Given the powers of the so called "intelligent designer", I could do a stupendously better job that what is before us, but I do not have these powers. Even without these powers, we have discovered how things work and we have made the first step by creating, from scratch, self replicating molecules.

(October 13, 2012 at 5:21 am)Akincana Krishna dasa Wrote: What does it mean for something to "appear" designed? To avoid the expense of a meaningless, unending debate, I will concede - it means nothing.

A rare and special moment on any forums. Kudos to you sir.

(October 13, 2012 at 5:21 am)Akincana Krishna dasa Wrote: So now that it means nothing, go and make me one flower. You must have better designing ability than nothing, right?

I've got a whole garden of them. Anything in particular you were looking for? Grew them myself, I did. Heck there are even people who develop new forms of flowers. One of these days someone is going to create the first true blue rose through genetic engineering. (I'll have mixed feelings but still want to see it and possibly grow it.)

But you probably wouldn't count that. I wonder if we get to use any 'stuff' at all in making a flower or if we have to blink it all into existence just like a god would.

(October 13, 2012 at 11:34 am)whateverist Wrote: I've got a whole garden of them. Anything in particular you were looking for? Grew them myself, I did. Heck there are even people who develop new forms of flowers. One of these days someone is going to create the first true blue rose through genetic engineering. (I'll have mixed feelings but still want to see it and possibly grow it.)

But you probably wouldn't count that. I wonder if we get to use any 'stuff' at all in making a flower or if we have to blink it all into existence just like a god would.

Well, if could blink flowers into existence, hells yeah, that would be impressive.

But's lets offer raw materials: My standard would be to make a living flower in a lab with anything you needed off the table of elements.

Whoa...whoa...whoa...why would I even make a flower to begin with? You think a flower is some kind of monumental design achievement? It's a fucking mess.....spotty in operation, requires the cooperation of at least two other parties to function...it''s essential but hanging in the wind, it's biologically expensive.......and if it fails (which happens more frequently than success btw) to function the line dies No thanks, I wouldn't have made flowers. Simpler self-replicating systems would be far more competent...and since I'm some mighty cosmic designer I can do away with any of the advantages that flowers had to begin with by designing this simple self replicator to be fucking impervious to all hazard (removing the need for broadcast genetics and competition). Of course....I'm describing magic beyond the abilities of whatever designer you might invoke as a creator of this world....clearly.....but hey, isn't that the entirety of the objections to ID in the first place?

This, more than anything else is what irks me about ID. Biological systems are only "amazing" or "well designed" when you don't propose top down development by a knowledgeable party. That this stuff works at all is amazing, with nothing guiding it's operation. But if we care to propose some guiding force it all becomes one big pile of organic trash. I wouldn't trust any designer of this world to fix my fucking toaster (another example of something which was beyond this designers abilities...toasters) let alone the micro and macro-management of life itself. Gross incompetence has already been displayed in this regard.

Non-functional leg bones in a whale? That's not unintelligent, that's...that's just the Mystery of God™!

(October 13, 2012 at 2:49 pm)Darkstar Wrote: Non-functional leg bones in a whale? That's not unintelligent, that's...that's just the Mystery of God™!

You know those to be leg bones how? Did you ask the whale, I understand they have a language. A beautiful one at that.

Denial isn't a river in Egypt honey!

(October 13, 2012 at 4:13 pm)Godschild Wrote: You know those to be leg bones how? Did you ask the whale, I understand they have a language. A beautiful one at that.

Reminds me of this:

(October 13, 2012 at 4:13 pm)Godschild Wrote:

(October 13, 2012 at 2:49 pm)Darkstar Wrote: Non-functional leg bones in a whale? That's not unintelligent, that's...that's just the Mystery of God™!

You know those to be leg bones how? Did you ask the whale, I understand they have a language. A beautiful one at that.

Good point. Those could be vestigal wing bones from when all whales were still starlings. Or maybe its his boner bone. Why don't you ask god for us and ask him directly, what he had in mind with that bit? Or do you think he'll be mad at you for opening up his critters and studying its bones?

(October 13, 2012 at 4:13 pm)Godschild Wrote: You know those to be leg bones how? Did you ask the whale, I understand they have a language. A beautiful one at that.

This makes me think you think the whales are not only aware of this superfluous bone but actually are quite fond of it for some reason.