RE: Intelligent Design, Proof III
May 28, 2013 at 4:34 am
(This post was last modified: May 28, 2013 at 4:37 am by Muslim Scholar.)
(May 28, 2013 at 3:34 am)Fidel_Castronaut Wrote:Just avoiding the question again!(May 28, 2013 at 2:01 am)Muslim Scholar Wrote: I already did, the problem is that you ready to reject and deny anything for the sake of your "no" religion!
You need to tell me, what is your definition of intelligence and how to distinguish an intelligent process from a non-intelligent one.
No, that's not true. We actually just reject nonsense, you know, like when someone postulates a contention to an established and thoroughly supported theory without actually defining or seeking to establish the premises on which that contention is based (aside god did it).
It reeks of something that makes no sense at all.
But please, do continue wasting yours and everyone else's time. If nothing else, the post count is ticking over nicely.
(May 28, 2013 at 3:31 am)Esquilax Wrote:I already did, then you rejected my definition!!!Quote:You need to tell me, what is your definition of intelligence and how to distinguish an intelligent process from a non-intelligent one.
No, you do, because you're the one making the claim against the consensus of scientists. I can rely on the fact that the people who actually study this stuff disagree with you. Besides, it's your contention, you need to define the terms of it and then provide evidence for it.
I said that a non-intelligent process must be outperformed by intelligence or else it is not on-intelligent.
Can you refute that, or at leas bring a counter example?
