(March 17, 2014 at 9:33 pm)Heywood Wrote: Actually it is you guys who seem to be asserting that evolutionary systems can come into existence without the involvement of an intellect......but for some reason....you can never substantiate that assertion.

On the other hand....its very easy to demonstrate evolutionary systems coming into existence with the involvement of an intellect.

Yeah, so super intelligent aliens did it! That's a logical jump. I wonder if they evolved? Or did an even more power, intelligent species create them?!

Heywood Wrote:I have claimed:

1. Evolution is not a blind process as Dawkins suggested.

You have been shown repeatedly that it is a completely blind process without guidance or direction of any kind. It's a process that operates independent of a guiding hand, independent of any goals.

Quote:2. God or any other sufficient intellect, can use evolution to create specific forms by designing the fitness paradigm(or selection criterion or what ever you want to call it).

You have not shown that, only asserted it as an opinion. There is no evidence that providing certain environments will give you exactly the species you want with the exact DNA you want. Even species that are similar cannot breed with each other in many cases.

What would be the purpose of this, anyway? Which species does god want to create, and which ones is he okay with throwing by the way side? Because natural selection favors certain animals over others. What's the goal? If there is a god "using" evolution to shape animals, why is he/she/it doing it?

(March 17, 2014 at 5:37 pm)Heywood Wrote: Now I know for a fact that evolutionary systems can come into existence when the selection criterion is contrived. This is easily demonstrable. What I am asking you to do is demonstrate that evolutionary systems can come into existence when the selection criterion isn't contrived. Everytime I ask that from this forum....the result is a sound of crickets chirping.

---

No, they weren't contrived. They just existed. It was either life existed or it didn't. It didn't matter. Only because some life forms were better at prolonging their existence to the point of self-replication did those traits come to dominate. As competition increased, it created contrivance, your fitness paradigm, which at first meant nothing to the original self-replicators.

You might say in some sense the Universe is very much alive. But it is not conscious apart from conscious observers such as yourself. Not any more than your heart is conscious or your blood vessels are conscious.

Heywood Wrote:Actually it is you guys who seem to be asserting that evolutionary systems can come into existence without the involvement of an intellect......but for some reason....you can never substantiate that assertion.

It's not an assertion. There is absolutely NO EVIDENCE to suggest whatsoever that an intelligent being had anything to do with evolution. It's a natural process, just like rain falling from they sky. I know it's complex and that might be hard for you to grasp, but it doesn't require a guiding hand.

Quote:On the other hand....its very easy to demonstrate evolutionary systems coming into existence with the involvement of an intellect.

Yet, you have failed to demonstrate this. You just keep saying that certain environments that (sometimes) create certain features are evidence of this. Even if specific environments could create incredibly specific species (which is, in actuality, not guaranteed at all), that STILL is not evidence of an intelligent creator, only evidence of natural laws, like a ball falling to the ground due to gravity.

(March 17, 2014 at 10:29 pm)Pickup_shonuff Wrote:

(March 17, 2014 at 9:33 pm)Heywood Wrote: Actually it is you guys who seem to be asserting that evolutionary systems can come into existence without the involvement of an intellect......but for some reason....you can never substantiate that assertion.

On the other hand....its very easy to demonstrate evolutionary systems coming into existence with the involvement of an intellect.

Yeah, so super intelligent aliens did it! That's a logical jump. I wonder if they evolved? Or did an even more power, intelligent species create them?!

Intelligence doesn't appear to exclusively originate via evolution(see IBM's Watson).

(March 17, 2014 at 10:52 pm)Heywood Wrote:

(March 17, 2014 at 10:29 pm)Pickup_shonuff Wrote: Yeah, so super intelligent aliens did it! That's a logical jump. I wonder if they evolved? Or did an even more power, intelligent species create them?!

Intelligence doesn't appear to exclusively originate via evolution(see IBM's Watson).

Watson is an extension of our phenotype and is indeed (indirectly) the product of evolution by way of natural selection.

(March 17, 2014 at 9:33 pm)Heywood Wrote:

(March 17, 2014 at 6:44 pm)Rampant.A.I. Wrote: And you haven't supported either claim, nor the claim <God exists>.

They're simply unnecessary add-ons that make no sense when evolution functions without either of those assertions being true, and so far you haven't provided any support.

Actually it is you guys who seem to be asserting that evolutionary systems can come into existence without the involvement of an intellect......but for some reason....you can never substantiate that assertion.

On the other hand....its very easy to demonstrate evolutionary systems coming into existence with the involvement of an intellect.

We can describe mechanisms that function without any guidance. Evolution is completely explicable without guidance. Guidance is entirely unnecessary to the workings of evolution.

Intellect is completely unnecessary to explain evolution and there is absolutely no evidence of intellect, guidance, forethought, planning, or goals in evolution.

(March 17, 2014 at 10:55 pm)Pickup_shonuff Wrote:

(March 17, 2014 at 10:52 pm)Heywood Wrote: Intelligence doesn't appear to exclusively originate via evolution(see IBM's Watson).

Watson is an extension of our phenotype and is indeed (indirectly) the product of evolution by way of natural selection.

I wouldn't call it a product of evolution. I would say Watson is another link in an emergent chain that includes us.

(March 17, 2014 at 11:41 pm)Heywood Wrote:

(March 17, 2014 at 10:55 pm)Pickup_shonuff Wrote: Watson is an extension of our phenotype and is indeed (indirectly) the product of evolution by way of natural selection.

I wouldn't call it a product of evolution. I would say Watson is another link in an emergent chain that includes us.

If and when Watson's descendants take on lives of their own and begin reproducing independently of us then you'll have your first example of intelligently guided evolution (artificial selection not withstanding).

(March 17, 2014 at 11:41 pm)Heywood Wrote:

(March 17, 2014 at 10:55 pm)Pickup_shonuff Wrote: Watson is an extension of our phenotype and is indeed (indirectly) the product of evolution by way of natural selection.

I wouldn't call it a product of evolution. I would say Watson is another link in an emergent chain that includes us.

It is as much a product of evolution as a bird's nest or a beaver's dam.
How do you think those came about?