You're claim is unconvincing, the observations you've made will not lead to your conclusion, even if they were true. It doesn't really matter whether I can or can't...or why. That's what makes the claim, and all these many pages you've spent, a waste from the very start......and that has nothing to do with me (or anyone else), that's your work. We're no closer to knowing whether or not there is a god on these grounds, and all you've demonstrated with them is your ignorance and willingness to lie for christ.

I couldn't have asked for a better example of the christian faith, personally.

("Atheistic faith" btw...jesus man...that was worse than the bit about cars, lol. Are you- that- determined to turn yourself into a complete joke? Do I even need to stick around to provide the punchlines or will you be handling them all by yourself? I really hope that you don;t actually think that you're presenting some argument against faith, however you imagine me to have it, or that your comments would even matter? That I don't believe in your stories, or in your claims is only incidental. I would be even more certain of the midgetry that is god-bothering -if I did believe-. You've misjudged both of us, yourself in your level of competence...and me, in my motivations.)

(January 22, 2015 at 9:37 pm)Heywood Wrote:

(January 22, 2015 at 9:30 pm)Rhythm Wrote: I was hoping we'd come back to chinese whispers. That's an example of information loss. Let me take a moment to bask in this super serious claim though.

-"The argument for the existence of god by means of parlor games"-.

No intellect is required for information loss to occur - in fact, it occurs more readily in the absence of intellect.

The spider sim is out, procedural gens don't require intellect -even for their implementation.

Tribes are an example of biological evolution - which you've said is out.

Automobiles don't evolve. That's out. (really?...this one is fucking sad btw)

The specialization of doctors....lol.....no...no somebody has to link me that one because it sounds fucking -rich-.

Lets examine automobiles and see if it has the elements of an evolutionary system:

Replication: Yes, automobiles are replicated on an assembly line.
Heritable traits: The basic design is carried over from year to year.
Change: The designers implement new changes every year.
Selection: Sales performance determines which features or cars continue to be produced.

So yes, automobiles have evolved in a system implemented by intellects.

Do I need to spoon feed you how doctor specialties evolve? Regarding the game Chinese Whispers, sometime new information is created so your claim it is just an example of information lost is ludicrous. Evolutionary systems sometime discard information. That is why you no longer have a tail.

No none implemented a system.

What you have confused is stuff happening with a system being followed.

You have here is an example that shows when given an ability to change and a stimulus to change evolution is the result inevitably.

Not people following a flow chart of evolutionary trends.

(January 22, 2015 at 9:50 pm)IATIA Wrote: You are the one making the claim that intellect is required.

I am making these claims:
Claim A: Only one of the following two propositions can be true:

• Proposition 1: All evolutionary systems require intellect to be implemented
  
• Proposition 2: Not all evolutionary systems require intellect to be implemented.
  

Claim B: Observational evidence exists to support proposition 1.
Claim C: No observational evidence exists to support proposition 2.

Now lets look at the claims. Claim A is obviously true because if one proposition is true it excludes the other. Claim B, Five Observations have been presented to support this claim. Claim C, We've looked for observational evidence to support this claim and have found none.

Conclusion: I conclude the observational evidence suggest proposition 1 is more likely to be true than proposition 2.

Now it's "the argument from the probability of there being a god based on the existence of parlor games people play". AKA, The Great and Powerful Parker.

(January 23, 2015 at 3:26 pm)downbeatplumb Wrote: No none implemented a system.

What you have confused is stuff happening with a system being followed.

You have here is an example that shows when given an ability to change and a stimulus to change evolution is the result inevitably.

Not people following a flow chart of evolutionary trends.

So you are saying there is no system which exists which produces automobiles....that automobiles just happen to come into existence? That is ludicrous. There is a system which produces automobiles and it has all the elements of an evolutionary system and it also happens to have been implemented by intellects.

I think you're in denial.

"The Argument for the existence of god by means of my Bitchin' Camaro"

(January 23, 2015 at 3:50 pm)Heywood Wrote: So you are saying there is no system which exists which produces automobiles....that automobiles just happen to come into existence? That is ludicrous. There is a system which produces automobiles and it has all the elements of an evolutionary system and it also happens to have been implemented by intellects.

I think you're in denial.

Automobiles are not natural occurring, they do not reproduce, they do not die.

Your analogy is a failure on all levels.

(January 22, 2015 at 9:44 pm)Rhythm Wrote: "Things made by humans require the involvement of humans"
- "no shit".

I started to look for evolutionary systems which are not the result of human intellect but rather animal intellect. I can't think of any systems which animal intellects implement. However, animals do use evolution. A squirrel uses evolution to work around the obstacles placed before it to prevent it from robbing bird feeders. It does this by making repeated attempts at the course(replication). Its memory is the heritable characteristic. In each attempt it strategy changes a bit(change). It rejects changes which don't further the goal(selection).

This squirrel had to make many attempts to solve this obstacle course:

Other than humans being animals, I can't see anything wrong with your statement. Not an ounce of equivocation or outright bullshit....nope.

Must be legit.

"Argument for the existence of god by means of squirrels who complete obstacle courses"

(I can snap a shot of my next bowel movement if you'd like - so you'd have another example of something which will probably fit your oh-so specific criteria -checkmate atheists! amiright?)

(January 23, 2015 at 3:50 pm)Heywood Wrote:

(January 23, 2015 at 3:26 pm)downbeatplumb Wrote: No none implemented a system.

What you have confused is stuff happening with a system being followed.

You have here is an example that shows when given an ability to change and a stimulus to change evolution is the result inevitably.

Not people following a flow chart of evolutionary trends.

So you are saying there is no system which exists which produces automobiles....that automobiles just happen to come into existence? That is ludicrous. There is a system which produces automobiles and it has all the elements of an evolutionary system and it also happens to have been implemented by intellects.

I think you're in denial.

Automobiles do not evolve. Automobiles come from automobile factories. Automobiles do not grow up to be automobile factories. Automobile factories do not mate with other factories to make automobiles.

As an example of evolution without intellect, how about bacteria evolving to consume plastics or nylon. In both cases, humans didn't do any selection process or genetic engineering. This wasn't done is some science lab. The only thing humans did was throw away trash.