RE: Detecting design or intent in nature
February 4, 2015 at 9:13 am
(This post was last modified: February 4, 2015 at 9:15 am by bennyboy.)
(February 4, 2015 at 6:58 am)Heywood Wrote: I have asked several times for you guys to come up with your own examples of evolutionary systems....preferably ones which don't require intellect. So far all the examples you guys have come up with have required intellect. I can hardly be accused exclusively piling the grains of sand.Your stipulations about "observing the implementation" don't leave much room, do they, you naughty little sand-filterer? The reason nobody comes up with anything is because they only care about one kind of evolution-- actual evolution, the kind we observe in animals, for which there is no actual evidence of intellect.
Since you're playing loosy-goosy with definitions, I'd say that any persistent pattern that replicates and changes in response to external stimuli would meet a loose definition of evolution. How about crystals? Each new iteration of a crystal's structure does so in response to the existing crystal, i.e. it's "parent." And a snowflake's shape "evolves" in response to variations in climate.
I predict that whatever free-style definition I make, you will shoot it down, but whatever arbitrary human system you make up that are kind of like evolution, you will find it supporting the conclusion that non-human systems are designed by intellect. The special pleading begins in
3. . . 2. . . 1. . .
