(March 27, 2013 at 7:23 am)ciko83 Wrote: prove me wrong if you can.

I get the feeling that proving you wrong isn't the issue.

(March 27, 2013 at 8:08 am)ciko83 Wrote: bravo, you have shown to everybody now why atheists cant answer this difficult question.

No, only that you, apparently, can't understand the answers you're given.

Quote:you have not answered me my questions man?? you put link wich try to debunk inteligent deisgn, but i have not see any evidence from evoluitonist how this could evolve.

Uh, yes I did? It's all there, did you even read my post? The flagellum evolved from a different body part, the type 3 secretory system, most likely. It's all there, in black and white. Including in the evidence I cited.

Quote:How could non-thining nature create natural engine with 40 parts joined on correct places? how could nature put these parts like puzzles on correct places, logically inteklectual being iis that who think like that?

What is the evolutionary mechanism wich gives instructions to different parts of the natural engine so they connect on correct places so the engine could work properlly?

The short answer is that there isn't an intelligence guiding it, because organic development is nothing like a construction job. Do you think that your hand was put together piecemeal, first with just bare bones and nerves, and then musculature and skin layered over it separately? No, of course not; it all developed together during your gestational period. It's the same everywhere, dude; it's not a process of "this part goes here, and this part fits onto it there..." but rather an ongoing, fluid development based on the genetic blueprint of the organism in question.

How can I support this claim? Well, non-uniformity: occasionally you get examples of organisms where that development process failed, in the form of mutations. To use your own examples, not every sperm is created equal; some people do have non-motile sperm, for instance. If there was an intelligent designer at work, wouldn't you expect that all these little "machines" would come together the same every time? Why does your god spend so much time putting together these machines in defective ways, if that were the case?

Quote:answer me with your own words, dont put link mambo jumbo from evolutionst

So, answer you myself, even though we've already established I'm a writer and not a scientist, and despite the fact that I have citations from people much more well versed in the subject at hand? Answer myself, rather than give you the results from the people who've actually studied these things?

That's one hell of a disrespect for science you have, dude. Especially from one claiming some better answer.

Quote:i have seen documentary about that, taht is the biggest joke i ever seen.
they used mouse trap to disprove irreducibly complexity, they removed one part of the mouse trap and mouse trap had another function like, like decoration

Mmm, actually you're wrong. Dead wrong. It's all in the documentation I provided; there's specific mention of the bacterial flagellum in there, and the very functional, very interesting body part that could be made from the flagellum parts even if one removed more than half of the parts in question. All very good evidence for evolution, while at the same time being very bad for irreducible complexity.

Quote:my question to them are, who had rotating propellers before bacteria and spermcells?

You do understand that this has nothing to do with either evolution or irreducible complexity, and is in fact a contradictory question with regards to both concepts, right?

(March 27, 2013 at 8:14 am)paulpablo Wrote: Have you heard of evolution? And the court case in America in which all the evidence for irreducible complexity was dismissed?
Even so why would god make a creature what is capable of crushing another smaller creature to death? Why give cats the brain processes which make them enjoy torturing other animals for hours? For every animal that's "created" with camouflage or mimicry or venom this makes another animal will go without a meal, or die from poison. Or what about parasites and worms that blind people in Africa small pox HIV and so on?

Quote:Like intelligent design, the concept it seeks to support, irreducible complexity has failed to gain any notable acceptance within the scientific community. One science writer called it a "full-blown intellectual surrender strategy."

"As expert testimony revealed, the qualification on what is meant by "irreducible complexity" renders it meaningless as a criticism of evolution. . In fact, the theory of evolution proffers adaptation as a well-recognized, well-documented explanation for how systems with multiple parts could have evolved through natural means."

But if you do have evidence for irreducible complexity and why evolution is wrong then it's a shame you couldn't attend the court case or present your findings, you should try and get in touch with biologists and nature experts and make sure you present them with your findings you're pretty much wasting your time on here.







And as for hamzas argument about who created the creator he just destroys his own argument and does it in a funny way to make people laugh, which is a common theme with him.
He says infinite regression is illogical, which is exactly the point.
If you say we are here, so logically something created us, you can't just then stop using that exact same logic all of a sudden that says things are here because they were created, you have to then say who created that creator if that's the logic you're using.

---

Quote:my question to them are, who had rotating propellers before bacteria and spermcells?

My question is what life forms were there before bacterium?

working engine, left, not work engine, used by virus


so atheist claim that natural engine can be reducible. but you are comparing apple and bananas, taht is not the point.

who had rotating propellers before bacteria and spermcells?

you cant say since viruses have not rotating propellers that is why it is reducible complex beacuse it was meant to be that it should not rotate and that it had another purpose. these atheistic evolutionst claim does not disprove inteligent design in flagellum.

it is like knife, eighter it benefit or harm

you can cut vegetables in kitchen(rotating propellers) -->benefit
you can kill people with it when you defend your life(not rotating, in virus)--->benefit in harm, just like virus.

it is not good for the victim but is good for you and the virus. do you understand what i mean.

you cant say, knife can have another function, that is it why it is reducible.

Quote:Even so why would god make a creature what is capable of crushing another smaller creature to death?

what would happen in the world if there was no death and we grown in numbers every day, life would be impossible, a living hell on earth.

Quote:Why give cats the brain processes which make them enjoy torturing other animals for hours?

what????

Quote: For every animal that's "created" with camouflage or mimicry or venom this makes another animal will go without a meal, or die from poison.

you dont understand the wisdom behind it.

some animals can eat it beacuse their cooumflage cant help them, while other animals can recognize them and dont eat them, so if all would eat them there would not be enough food for the first gruop who eat them.

Quote:Or what about parasites and worms that blind people in Africa small pox HIV and so on?

what about it???

---

(March 27, 2013 at 8:24 am)Tonus Wrote:

(March 27, 2013 at 7:23 am)ciko83 Wrote: prove me wrong if you can.

I get the feeling that proving you wrong isn't the issue.

try if you can

You're arguing for irreducible complexity, I don't know about the actual complexity of the flagellum motor and i doubt you're an expert in biology either, but the case your making was proven wrong in a court a long long time ago, but like I said if you have proof that says evolution is definitely not true because you have evidence of irreducible complexity your talents are wasted here my friend, you should be giving this evidence to biologists and the nature experts who dedicate their life to studying nature and biology and do believe in evolution.

Quote:The flagellum evolved from a different body part, the type 3 secretory system, most likely.

let stick to this one.

how could it evolve, how could nature give instructions to different part to connect on correct places?

and by the way, let me clearfy it to you, beacuse you dont think deeply here

let say that

primodial bacterial flagellum was this

"ABCD" and then it evolve into this ------>
ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOP


NOW QUESTIONS ARE,how could nature put different parts on correct places like this ABCD and not like this CBDA?
how could nature know future so it created extra parts EFGHIJKLMNOP on correct places.

1. how could it create new parts, did it know future so it create for future negine

2. and if it created it, how could it put on correct places in the engine?

you cant just say The flagellum evolved from a different body part, the type 3 secretory system, most likely

if it evolved, then evolution is only logical if you attached Evolver/God to it. if you say it evolves itself, then i ask you can your mother give birth to herself then? if not, how can then natural engine give birth to itself by evolution???

(March 27, 2013 at 8:53 am)ciko83 Wrote:

Quote:The flagellum evolved from a different body part, the type 3 secretory system, most likely.

let stick to this one.

how could it evolve, how could nature give instructions to different part to connect on correct places?

and by the way, let me clearfy it to you, beacuse you dont think deeply here

let say that

primodial bacterial flagellum was this

"ABCD" and then it evolve into this ------>
ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOP


NOW QUESTIONS ARE,how could nature put different parts on correct places like this ABCD and not like this CBDA?
how could nature know future so it created extra parts EFGHIJKLMNOP on correct places.

1. how could it create new parts, did it know future so it create for future negine

2. and if it created it, how could it put on correct places in the engine?

you cant just say The flagellum evolved from a different body part, the type 3 secretory system, most likely

if it evolved, then evolution is only logical if you attached Evolver/God to it. if you say it evolves itself, then i ask you can your mother give birth to herself then? if not, how can then natural engine give birth to itself by evolution???

Your not talking about evolution, now you're talking about abiogenesis I think

(March 27, 2013 at 8:51 am)paulpablo Wrote: You're arguing for irreducible complexity, I don't know about the actual complexity of the flagellum motor and i doubt you're an expert in biology either, but the case your making was proven wrong in a court a long long time ago, but like I said if you have proof that says evolution is definitely not true because you have evidence of irreducible complexity your talents are wasted here my friend, you should be giving this evidence to biologists and the nature experts who dedicate their life to studying nature and biology and do believe in evolution.

that delusion, nothing has been debunked

If it is reducible, then it was created like that

let me clearfy this to you

natural engine with rotating propellers, left


natural engine with, different parts on correct places
ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOP(rotating propellers)

virus flagellum(without rotating propellers, right

ABCD(without rotating rotating propellers)

if God meant to create it in the first beging like this
ABCD(without rotating rotating propellers)

and he choosed to create natural engine with, different parts on correct places ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOP(rotating propellers)

if i chose to create bmw engine (connect it to natural engine with rotating proepllers)

another type of engine (connect it to natural co called engine without rotating proepllers)


and then atheist come to me and say, look it is reducible, but nobody said that this little evolved to the bigger BMW engine above, beacuse they were created spearate and have different purposes.

same it is with virus flagellum and bacteriell and spermcells flagellum.

I don't think English is your first language but either way what I'm trying to communicate to you is that I'm not a biology expert, but the biology experts out there disagree with you. You should give your evidence to them, if it is actual evidence then it would be a groundbreaking revelation, well done.

There is such a shroud of ignorance so great in this one that one does not even know where to begin. Ciko, my advice is that if you want to know about evolution, get an education, we are not here to teach you, nor we are paid to do so. But I'll bite a bit.

(March 27, 2013 at 8:53 am)ciko83 Wrote: 1. how could it create new parts, did it know future so it create for future negine

Genetic variation within the species, no future reading is needed. Those individuals in the species might develop aptitudes that allow them to better survive, hence more likely to make future generations with such trait.

Quote:2. and if it created it, how could it put on correct places in the engine?

Define 'correct'. Those within the population that had the flagellum in an unfavorable way for their survival were subject to natural selection.

Quote:you cant just say The flagellum evolved from a different body part, the type 3 secretory system, most likely

if it evolved, then evolution is only logical if you attached Evolver/God to it. if you say it evolves itself, then i ask you can your mother give birth to herself then? if not, how can then natural engine give birth to itself by evolution???

There you go, one last comment showing your blatant lack of knowledge in what evolution says. Just because all you have been taught revolves around a god, no matter how much you wish it to exist, it doesn't make it real. Stop trying to cram god in the voids of your knowledge.

(March 27, 2013 at 8:53 am)ciko83 Wrote: let stick to this one.

how could it evolve, how could nature give instructions to different part to connect on correct places?

Already explained in the post above, but let me just copy verbatim what I wrote there, since you apparently didn't see it: The short answer is that there isn't an intelligence guiding it, because organic development is nothing like a construction job. Do you think that your hand was put together piecemeal, first with just bare bones and nerves, and then musculature and skin layered over it separately? No, of course not; it all developed together during your gestational period. It's the same everywhere, dude; it's not a process of "this part goes here, and this part fits onto it there..." but rather an ongoing, fluid development based on the genetic blueprint of the organism in question.

How can I support this claim? Well, non-uniformity: occasionally you get examples of organisms where that development process failed, in the form of mutations. To use your own examples, not every sperm is created equal; some people do have non-motile sperm, for instance. If there was an intelligent designer at work, wouldn't you expect that all these little "machines" would come together the same every time? Why does your god spend so much time putting together these machines in defective ways, if that were the case?

Quote:and by the way, let me clearfy it to you, beacuse you dont think deeply here

Probably best not to insult any part of the group currently wiping the floor with your arguments, dude.

Quote:let say that

primodial bacterial flagellum was this

"ABCD" and then it evolve into this ------>
ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOP

I'll just say that the process wouldn't be that... jumpy. It's be more like, ABCD evolves into ABCDE, which over time evolves into ABCDEF and so on.

Quote:NOW QUESTIONS ARE,how could nature put different parts on correct places like this ABCD and not like this CBDA?

Couple of things: one is that the ABCD preferred system routinely does come together as CBDA, or any number of different combinations. We call those mutations, and sometimes they're helpful, at others they render the organism completely nonfunctional, or are neutral and provide no benefit or disadvantage. So, now the question to you is, if there is a designer dictating all of this, why does he spend such time making incorrect versions of his design.

The second, is that there's a genetic blueprint that's followed in the development of the organism. That's what "knows" where the parts go, so to speak.

Quote:how could nature know future so it created extra parts EFGHIJKLMNOP on correct places.

Nature doesn't know. Those parts developed gradually, in line with small changes in the genes of the organism. You know... evolution? That's literally the definition of the thing.

Quote:1. how could it create new parts, did it know future so it create for future negine

2. and if it created it, how could it put on correct places in the engine?

Asked and answered above. I don't know why you felt the need to repeat yourself.

Quote:you cant just say The flagellum evolved from a different body part, the type 3 secretory system, most likely

Sure I can, because that's what happened. You can't say no evolutionist has given you proof now that one has. So, apparently your answer is to simply ignore that proof and continue trundling on your way.

Quote:if it evolved, then evolution is only logical if you attached Evolver/God to it. if you say it evolves itself, then i ask you can your mother give birth to herself then? if not, how can then natural engine give birth to itself by evolution???

There's a lot wrong with that logic, but I'll have to focus; evolution isn't a process that requires a beginning. It's just a natural function of the fact that genes exist, and that those genes can differ, and that those differences can either be made to survive into the next generation or die out according to outside forces. You have a fundamental flaw in your reasoning, and to me that seems to be that you don't understand evolution. So, would you like to give a little definition of the theory so I can educate your ass, or would you just like to continue arguing from a position of misinformation?