It doesn't have to do you any good. All it "has to do" is not kill you. Your skin, btw, is already collecting a shitload of information that you can't perceive, access, or even "do" anything with. It's also feeding you vast amounts of misinformation - which doesn't seem to have left you any worse for wear.

Quote: What's your contention here?

I think he is trying to prove that he is a creatard moron. I will happily concede that point to him.

Phototropism in plants is achieved by way of auxin (essentially a growth hormone). When the photoreceptive proteins in plant tissue (called phototropins) register a signal, auxin on the shaded side of the stem releases hydrogen ions - setting in motion a cascade of chemistry leading to the release of enzymes called expansins - which cause the cell to swell and bend -towards- the light. We're not even sure that the photoreceptors are necessary, as auxin appears to be photophobic in it's own right. Course, one could simply say that auxin functions as a sort of inverted receptor in any case. I don't think that you could really say that the plant "knows what to do" in either case, it's just chemistry. Or would you disagree?

Photoperiodism and circadian rhythm are also establish in plants by similar, boring, chemical processes. None of which seem to require any "knowing". I used phototropism above because it's a much more fantastic and noticeable "reaction" to light than either - and it doesn;t seem to be "irreduceable complex" - despite being much more (seemingly)complicated than other processes that plants go through.

This argument with him is just going to repeat itself. As in the last thread, he is provided with an avalanche of cited material and explanations and will completely ignore it. Meanwhile he will search for any minuscule exception or oddity and point it out without looking any further. It really is just a more "intelligent" god of the gaps argument. (pun intended) I know I am supposed to soldier on because others might benefit to see his arguments ripped to shreds but it becomes ridiculous at some point.

(August 14, 2014 at 5:33 pm)coldwx Wrote: This argument with him is just going to repeat itself. As in the last thread, he is provided with an avalanche of cited material and explanations and will completely ignore it. Meanwhile he will search for any minuscule exception or oddity and point it out without looking any further. It really is just a more "intelligent" god of the gaps argument. (pun intended) I know I am supposed to soldier on because others might benefit to see his arguments ripped to shreds but it becomes ridiculous at some point.

It really does highlight the uneven field that theists and ID proponents want to play on. They've set themselves up as interrogators, where we have to provide all this evidence for them, but all they have to do is poke single holes in it. In order to win, we need to have a perfect, comprehensive overview of absolutely everything concerning the specific topic, and for them to win, all they've got to do is find one flaw?

Meanwhile, they get to sit back, content to never provide evidence for their beliefs. It's ridiculous.

(August 15, 2014 at 1:42 am)Esquilax Wrote:

(August 14, 2014 at 5:33 pm)coldwx Wrote: This argument with him is just going to repeat itself. As in the last thread, he is provided with an avalanche of cited material and explanations and will completely ignore it. Meanwhile he will search for any minuscule exception or oddity and point it out without looking any further. It really is just a more "intelligent" god of the gaps argument. (pun intended) I know I am supposed to soldier on because others might benefit to see his arguments ripped to shreds but it becomes ridiculous at some point.

It really does highlight the uneven field that theists and ID proponents want to play on. They've set themselves up as interrogators, where we have to provide all this evidence for them, but all they have to do is poke single holes in it. In order to win, we need to have a perfect, comprehensive overview of absolutely everything concerning the specific topic, and for them to win, all they've got to do is find one flaw?

Meanwhile, they get to sit back, content to never provide evidence for their beliefs. It's ridiculous.

It's also the reason why nobody takes creationism or ID seriously. At least nobody who matters.