Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: June 25, 2024, 7:11 pm

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Detecting design or intent in nature
RE: Detecting design or intent in nature
(January 19, 2015 at 4:08 pm)Heywood Wrote:
(January 19, 2015 at 4:04 pm)Stimbo Wrote: How about "Biological evolution is an evolutionary system which has been observed to come into existence without an intellect [or requirement of same]. It is an evolutionary system because it has these elements or their equivalents of evolutionary systems. Those elements are: Replication, Heritable traits, Change, and Selection."

Thanks Stimbo, this along the lines of what I am looking for. The problem with biological evolution is we did not observe its implementation....its coming into existence. So putting "biological evolution" into the blank creates a false statement.

Can you put another evolutionary system into that blank that we have observed coming into existence?

There is no system.
Evolution is a blind, mechanical process. It is the inevitable result of imperfect replication.
Just like it takes no intellect for a galaxy to start rotating when sufficient infalling mass creates it.


***Post 3000*** Hmph
Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
Reply
RE: Detecting design or intent in nature
Define unambiguous in the context you're using it.
At the age of five, Skagra decided emphatically that God did not exist.  This revelation tends to make most people in the universe who have it react in one of two ways - with relief or with despair.  Only Skagra responded to it by thinking, 'Wait a second.  That means there's a situation vacant.'
Reply
RE: Detecting design or intent in nature
(January 19, 2015 at 4:21 pm)Heywood Wrote: I am just looking for one unambiguous example.
You already have at least one. You quoted it. If you're content with rank dishonesty rather than rigorous argumentation I'm content with pointing it out to you.
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
Reply
RE: Detecting design or intent in nature
(January 19, 2015 at 4:21 pm)Chas Wrote: Just like it takes no intellect for a galaxy to start rotating when sufficient infalling mass creates it.

Matter doesn't start rotating. It exists or comes into existence with angular momentum.

(January 19, 2015 at 4:29 pm)Rhythm Wrote:
(January 19, 2015 at 4:21 pm)Heywood Wrote: I am just looking for one unambiguous example.
You already have at least one. You quoted it. If you're content with rank dishonesty rather than rigorous argumentation I'm content with pointing it out to you.

We've already discussed the problems with "procedural gens" and why they are not evolutionary systems.

Maybe you can fill in the blank with a system that has the elements of an evolutionary system that I spelled out for you instead of trying to weasel out of simple questions.

At least Stimbo tried. All you try to do is obsfuscate
Reply
RE: Detecting design or intent in nature
(January 19, 2015 at 4:31 pm)Heywood Wrote:
(January 19, 2015 at 4:21 pm)Chas Wrote: Just like it takes no intellect for a galaxy to start rotating when sufficient infalling mass creates it.

Matter doesn't start rotating. It exists or comes into existence with angular momentum.

Did I say matter was rotating? No, the galaxy is rotating. But it's nice that you avoid the actual point.

Your whole premise is flawed. There is no "system" to come into existence.

But you will almost certainly keep flogging this silly idea.
Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
Reply
RE: Detecting design or intent in nature
(January 19, 2015 at 4:31 pm)Heywood Wrote: We've already discussed the problems with "procedural gens" and why they are not evolutionary systems.
Ah, excellent. So, what other "observations" have you made that lead you to conclude that there is some requirement of intellect in evolutionary systems, now that procedural gens like your spider sim are off the list (and since biological evolution is off the list)?
(btw, you're still stuck on the crux of your statements not following -even if they were true-...that's why I don;t actually -have- to provide you with anything. You'll have to propose some valid structure for inference before that becomes important in the least)
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
Reply
RE: Detecting design or intent in nature
We have never seen a thermonuclear reaction come into existence except with intellect, i.e. H-bomb, Tokamak reactor

The sun is a thermonuclear reaction.

We did not see the sun come into existence.

Therefor, the sun required an intellect. Thinking

In fact, all stars require an intellect.

Isn't that your argument, Heywood?
Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
Reply
RE: Detecting design or intent in nature
We've never observed -anything-......ever, without the involvement of intellect. Full stop. That intellect, of course, being the observer. "Involvement" is a weasel word, and a poor choice at that. The statement will always be true, but only trivially so, and most likely not in relation to whatever conclusion we're trying to draw from it. Figured so long as it keeps getting repeated page after page I'd have to mention it every 5 or so myself.
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
Reply
RE: Detecting design or intent in nature
(January 19, 2015 at 6:10 pm)Chas Wrote: We have never seen a thermonuclear reaction come into existence except with intellect, i.e. H-bomb, Tokamak reactor

The sun is a thermonuclear reaction.


The sun is not a thermonuclear reaction. A sun is a luminous sphere of plasma held together by its own gravity. We have observed gravity holding matter together without the aid of intellects.

Further we have several observations of stars in various stages of being "born" and none of those observations include intellects....except maybe this one:


Reply
RE: Detecting design or intent in nature
What makes the solar plasma luminous?

Incidentally, the Keyhole Nebula is my favourite too.
At the age of five, Skagra decided emphatically that God did not exist.  This revelation tends to make most people in the universe who have it react in one of two ways - with relief or with despair.  Only Skagra responded to it by thinking, 'Wait a second.  That means there's a situation vacant.'
Reply



Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Argument against Intelligent Design Jrouche 27 3375 June 2, 2019 at 5:04 pm
Last Post: Pat Mustard
  The Nature Of Truth WisdomOfTheTrees 5 1112 February 21, 2017 at 5:30 am
Last Post: Sal
  The Dogma of Human Nature WisdomOfTheTrees 15 2675 February 8, 2017 at 7:40 pm
Last Post: WisdomOfTheTrees
  The nature of evidence Wryetui 150 15995 May 6, 2016 at 6:21 am
Last Post: ignoramus
  THE SELF-REINFORCING NATURE OF SOCIAL HIERARCHY: ORIGINS AND CONSEQUENCES OF POWER .. nihilistcat 9 3885 June 29, 2015 at 7:06 pm
Last Post: nihilistcat
  Religion had good intentions, but nature has better LivingNumbers6.626 39 9320 December 3, 2014 at 1:12 pm
Last Post: John V
  On the nature of evidence. trmof 125 27911 October 26, 2014 at 5:14 pm
Last Post: Fidel_Castronaut
  Who can answer? (law of nature) reality.Mathematician 10 3018 June 18, 2014 at 7:17 am
Last Post: ignoramus
  On the appearance of Design Angrboda 7 1838 March 16, 2014 at 4:04 am
Last Post: xr34p3rx
  Morality in Nature Jiggerj 89 24465 October 4, 2013 at 2:04 am
Last Post: genkaus



Users browsing this thread: 4 Guest(s)