Intelligent Design: Did you design yourself?
May 29, 2014 at 2:41 pm
(This post was last modified: May 29, 2014 at 2:44 pm by Rampant.A.I..)
(May 29, 2014 at 2:16 pm)Heywood Wrote:(May 29, 2014 at 1:49 pm)Rampant.A.I. Wrote: This has nothing to do with atheism. You advance the claim that natural organisms are intelligently designed, yet the only example of this claimed intelligent design is from a laboratory setting.
Neither atheism nor science advance any such claims, and you have not only failed to support the claims of ID, you've demonstrated how they are even more improbable by giving an example of an intelligently designed organism unlike anything witnessed in nature.
Big negative.
I advance the claim that natural organism could be intelligently designed. I don't believe they are, but I acknowledge they could be. I also believe it is a perfectly valid line of inquiry to look for evidence of such design and that such inquiry is still science even if it turns out to be fruitless.
Again, this is a fundamental misunderstanding of science. Science looks for evidence to form hypotheses to test, and refine into theories.
Science does not care what you believe, or what I believe, or what anyone else believes. It does not advance a belief system, it only deals in evidence.
Unlike ID, It does not discard empirical evidence based on a belief system, it starts with empirical evidence and then seeks to understand that evidence.
Furthermore, any scientist able to turn biology on its' head by demonstrating a natural organism is irreducibly complex would be set for life, win the Nobel prize, and would acquire grant money from numerous sources.
(May 29, 2014 at 1:49 pm)Rampant.A.I. Wrote: http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn13...4dwsIm9LCQ
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_of_flagella
http://www.millerandlevine.com/km/evol/d...ticle.html
http://evolutionfaq.com
http://www.microbemagazine.org/index.php...Itemid=674
http://www.princeton.edu/~achaney/tmve/w...agella.htm
http://youtube.com/watch?v=a_5FToP_mMY
(May 29, 2014 at 2:16 pm)Heywood Wrote: Your claim was we have substantial evidence that the bacterial flagellum did in fact evolve. You were asked to provide evidence of your claim. You failed miserably because these links you provided only suggest that the flagellum could have evolved....not that it did evolve. You have provided evidence for what you and I already agreed upon...that the flagellum could evolve. But your claim went beyond that....you claimed we have evidence it did evolve.
Do you have such evidence?
My claim was that there is no evidence the bacterial flagellum was intelligently designed, let alone for "intelligent design" appearing anywhere in nature and far more evidence supporting it is an evolved organelle.
Twist and shift the burden of proof as much as you like to support your argument from ignorance, but you still have yet to demonstrate the theory of ID, mechanism of ID, and provide even a sliver of evidence in comparison to the log mansion that is scientific observation and explanatory power of evolutionary principles in biology, medicine, and every other natural science.
You didn't view a single link, did you?
