RE: Detecting design or intent in nature
January 23, 2015 at 7:46 pm
(This post was last modified: January 23, 2015 at 8:09 pm by Heywood.)
(January 23, 2015 at 7:30 pm)bennyboy Wrote: *resists desire to flame and post cat memes*
No, dude. The situation is simple. You are making an assertion about nature: that it is designed (i.e. by God). You are dancing in semantic circles, and ignoring the many, many posts in which we explained to you what begging the question is, and in what way you are doing it.
You don't get to demand proof AGAINST your assertion. You are asserting it-- you have to demonstrate that the things you say were created actually were created. And you haven't, because there is no good evidence supporting those assertions. So parrot away about making us accept the BOP and provide proof. I'll provide proof that no intellect created evolution just as soon as you prove that yin/yang or magic fairies didn't do it.
Here's a basic lesson about proving a negative, and about why people who ask for it think they've "won," and about why it's an epic logic fail. Enjoy:
Since you can easily falsify proposition 1 by presenting an example of an observation that supports proposition 2, there is no trying to prove a negative.
You are simply trying to weasel out of providing an observation which supports your worldview in the context of these two propositions.
Maybe your world view is wrong. Have you ever considered that?
(January 23, 2015 at 7:37 pm)Surgenator Wrote: I don't want to waste my time arguing the whether evolution is a system or not.
There is no argument. I keep telling you evolution is a process. This is just you staw manning in attempt to address the harder argument.
(January 23, 2015 at 7:37 pm)Surgenator Wrote: I have already demonstrated how evolution doesn't require intellects with the nylon-eating bacteria. From the lack of intellects through out the development of the new ability infers no intellect implemented something.
We both agree that the process evolution doesn't always require intellects to continue. The question is are intellects required to "jump start" the process? You keep avoiding this question and instead engage in straw manning and obfuscation. Are you afraid of it?
Internal combustion engines require an outside impetus to start. However once that impetus starts the engine it will continue to operate without any external help from the starter. There is nothing unreasonable about exploring the question, Do systems which utilize the process of evolution require intellects to come into existence? I know you have faith in your position that such systems do not always require intellects....but can you back it up with some observation?
That is all I am asking....and it isn't unreasonable.
(January 23, 2015 at 7:33 pm)rasetsu Wrote: What other evolutionary systems besides biological evolution are you seeing? Simulations of evolutionary systems aren't themselves evolutionary systems.
Simulations of biological evolution, such as the spider sim are real examples of evolution. What is evolving is variables in a computer. The simulation of biological evolution occurs when artwork and the motion/action thereof is directed by those actually evolved variables.
