Posted on 08/19/2006 6:39:43 AM PDT by RaceBannon
Prove it. Things like "complex" have rigorous specifications, and you should be able to prove the relative complexity without resorting to handwaving. You've already made an assertion, apparently by reason of incredulity, so throw us some red meat.
The eye is a good example of irreducible complexity. Not even the best and most expensive cameras can focus as quickly as the human eye.
I doubt I misread it. The logical fallacies rife in your reasoning exist regardless of how I read it, actually. The construction was sufficiently bad that the content was almost irrelevant.
and leave you with a challenge to place the idea of the number 14 under a microscope.
You apparently assume and attribute far more magic to "14" than I do. You are so caught up in your misplaced awe that it never occurred to you that reasonable people might not share it.
So you're saying that transcendental laws and lawlike principles that govern the universe standing on their own, with no particular meaning or intelligence behind them is perfectly rational? Very seriously: Do you realize how absurd that sounds?
Justify both the assertion and the reasoning. You once again display an ignorance of basic logic and principles of rationality. You seem to want to borrow mathematics only when it suits you. What, you've never heard of Occam's Razor? Newsflash: that some things sound "absurd" to you is a reflection of the limits of your knowledge and perspective. I do not care that neolithic peoples find the idea of humans landing on the moon absurd either.
To you, however, I have nothing more to say.
They should be allowed to teach their stuff as though it were science when, and only when, it is actually accepted as science, and not before. This will take some doing. Here's an example I posted on another thread:
When an evolutionist is told that a genetic marker (ERV, pseudogene, etc) is found in the same place in the genome of pigs and cows, but is not found in horses, he can tell you that it will definitely be found in the genomes of deer, sheep, giraffes, hippos and whales, it will definitely not be found in the genomes of rhinos, elephants, people, platypuses, and porcupines, and that there isn't enough data to make a prediction about camels and llamas. (So far, all such predictions have been correct; ie ToE is falsifiable). Maybe DI or AiG could sponsor research to find examples where the ToE's predictions are falseNeither ID nor creationism will be taken seriously until they can answer questions like the above. And in hte meantime, why should something that's demonstrably weaker be taught at all? Affirmative action?If an anti-evolution activist, whether an ID-ist or a Biblical/Koranic creationist, is presented with the genetic marker that's present in pigs and cows but not in horses, just what exactly will his predictions be? How are they arrived at?
No, it isn't. IC specifically states, and I quote, "By irreducibly complex I mean a single system composed of several well-matched, interacting parts that contribute to the basic function, wherein the removal of any one of the parts causes the system to effectively cease functioning. An irreducibly complex system cannot be produced directly (that is, by continuously improving the initial function, which continues to work by the same mechanism) by slight, successive modifications of a precursor system, because any precursor to an irreducibly complex system that is missing a part is by definition nonfunctional. An irreducibly complex biological system, if there is such a thing, would be a powerful challenge to Darwinian evolution." (Behe, Darwin's Black Box, p. 39)
That we observe precursor systems, variations, and evolution of IC systems invalidates IC. Since specified complexity proposes that these complex systems are specified in advance, there cannot be an evolutionary pathway nor should they be selectable for other functions, in that they are *specified* for specific functions. That we can show evolutionary pathways and observe evolution of complex biochemical systems invalidates IC AND CSI. Since these are *crucial* components of positive evidence for ID, the *entire* theory collapses.
haven't you read some of the details of our amazing dna code? It's not handwaving at all...there is a specific numbering system in our dna code and of course it puts into motion all of the complex functions of our bodies. I can do some reading up and send you some links if you like but I'm suprised you haven't read a bit about it.
There's a difficulty there: Yes, what they teach IS science, but it is rejected by the establishment for the same reason Galileo's teachings were rejected by the establishment of his time. We're not collectively, as a society, interested in free thought...
I've spent a good deal of time challenging the epistomological underpinnings of scientific positivism. Swinging across to the other end of the spectrum to brass tacks, it would be good if parents could choose to educate their children in either a humanistic school (public school system) or parochial school - and not be forced to fund the one or the other against their will. Pro-choice, any one?
the truth is that there are many scientific elements taught by creationists and it simply is accepted as a valid theory. Not by you; but that doesn't change the facts. You should be just a little more open minded. After all, the science pointing to creationism is alot more fascinating than the poor science of evolutionism. The facts are there for all to see and the kids who are denied them in school will find them on their own when they want to. But they shouldn't be denied them in a tax payers school.
Present your "plenty of proof." Otherwise, stop your vain imaginationsPsalms 2:1.
|
Isaiah 45:18 |
| For thus saith the LORD that created the heavens; God himself that formed the earth and made it; he hath established it, he created it not in vain, he formed it to be inhabited: I am the LORD; and there is none else. |
|
Colossians 2:8 |
| Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ. |
That is impossible. There are two types of anti-evolution activism: Biblical/Koranic creationism makes specific predictions, and was known to be false by the early 1800's. (EG, under the Flood hypothesis one would expect fish to be in all marine deposits, but they aren't found in Cambrian and preCambrian strata. There are a lot of other, purely geologic, problems as well.) ID, on the other hand, is squishy enough that it can never be pinned down; ie there is no way to test it.
After all, the science pointing to creationism is alot more fascinating than the poor science of evolutionism
It may be for some, but it still fails to say where to find a Tiktaalik or a Homo erectus. The "poor science" correctly predicted where these would be found.
The facts are there for all to see and the kids who are denied them in school will find them on their own when they want to.
Indeed. Be careful what you wish for.
But they shouldn't be denied them in a tax payers school.
Until they're science, they have no place in a science class. Show me where an anti-evolution activist, whether an ID-ist or a creationist, has ever made a detailed prediction about what would be found in a genome or a fossil dig. This is the standard that the rest of science adheres to; until ID or creationism make testable predictions, and they pass these tests, they cannot be considered science, and to try to pass them off as science is fraudulent.
Theoretical computer science, particularly the mathematical aspects relevant to this particular discussion, is what I do. Where you see "amazing", I see "necessary consequence" or "mathematically probable behavior". You presume significance where none can be inferred. I started out as a chemist and engineer, and ended up in bleeding edge computer science. I may not be easily amazed in this domain, but I also have a lot of educated perspective and experience.
Complex looking is not the same as complex in fact. An algorithm that can be scrawled on a cocktail napkin can generate apparent complexity that exceeds that of the known universe. Mathematics says this is trivially true, and many practical applications (such as encryption) are based on this fact. Proving that something is "complex in fact" rather than merely "complex looking" is a very non-trivial exercise and impenetrable to intuition. Do you alone possess this extra-mathematical capability? If not, then you have essentially made an unsupportable assertion.
I am sure there are. That you shrink from the simple observations of fact from a merely average soul such as myself betrays the weakness of your argument. Not once did you present a defense against my oh so common arguments of basic mathematical theory.
So of course you have nothing more to say. You can neither refute my assertions nor support yours. Game, set, and match.
Then where are the testable predictions? Show me how creationism or ID accounts for the fossil record and genetic results. Until they can, the "establishment" should reject them, on the grounds that they don't have the power of the esisting theory. When will DI or AiG start sponsoring fossil digs or genome sequencing? Are they afraid of something, perhaps?
The same reason Galileo ... So who's refusing to look at Jupiter or Venus through a telescope? Did Galileo's opponents have 150 years of concentrated research to back them up? No, they had some vague Biblical passages that said geocentricism is true (the Pope and Martin Luther agreed on that) and a theory that accounted for some observations, but made false predictions about what would be seen through the telescope.
I agree that school choice is a very good idea. However, teaching that something is science, when scientists disagree, is harmful.
freedumb2003, I believe this thread provoked some great conversation- thus my comment to RaceBannon. As to who is Christian or not, scientist or not- I couldn't care less. To quantify such individuals, in this thread conversation is diverting, to say the least. I stand on my opinions, and fall upon them also. So what? lol... Are you bereaved by my comments, or just "feeling" short?
You are to be commended for your humility.
If you want to engage in rational debate, stop acting like a pedantic, petulant child. You've won nothing through insult. You've only demonstrated your own insecurity and need for a sense of self importance at the expense of a fellow human being.
I fully agree. Yet, the Diaspora in Europe, during the birth of Nazism- were doing great, and had been for quite awhile. My point is that Hilter truly needed some type of ill gotten dialectic/rationale, to convince so many to do the unyielding evil- that was done. Would such inhumanity evolved without the specious background of Darwinism? Perhaps, although not for the same reasons at that time. Let's focus on what did in fact occur, not the past pograms. The Nazi's and collaboraters deserve no such pass, as you have proposed.
Again, this is a non-sequitur. It neither invalidates IC or ID. Nor does IC or ID invalidate evolution.
Isa 48:3 ... I have declared the former things from the beginning; and they went forth out of My mouth, and I shewed them; I did [them] SUDDENLY, and they came to pass.
Genesis 11. In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.
2. Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters.
3. And God said, "Let there be light," and there was light.
NIV Colossians 1:13-17
13. For he has rescued us from the dominion of darkness and brought us into the kingdom of the Son he loves,
14. in whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins.
15. He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation.
16. For by him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things were created by him and for him.
17. He is before all things, and in him all things hold together.NIV Revelation 4:11
11. "You are worthy, our Lord and God, to receive glory and honor and power, for you created all things, and by your will they were created and have their being."NIV Revelation 10:6
6. And he swore by him who lives for ever and ever, who created the heavens and all that is in them, the earth and all that is in it, and the sea and all that is in it, and said, "There will be no more delay!
NIV Matthew 8:2-32. A man with leprosy came and knelt before him and said, "Lord, if you are willing, you can make me clean."
3. Jesus reached out his hand and touched the man. "I am willing," he said. "Be clean!" Immediately he was cured of his leprosy.NIV Matthew 21:19
Seeing a fig tree by the road, he went up to it but found nothing on it except leaves. Then he said to it, "May you never bear fruit again!" Immediately the tree withered.NIV Mark 1:41-42
41. Filled with compassion, Jesus reached out his hand and touched the man. "I am willing," he said. "Be clean!"
42. Immediately the leprosy left him and he was cured.NIV Mark 5:41-4241. He took her by the hand and said to her, "Talitha koum!" (which means, "Little girl, I say to you, get up!").
42. Immediately the girl stood up and walked around (she was twelve years old). At this they were completely astonished.NIV Mark 10:51-5251. "What do you want me to do for you?" Jesus asked him. The blind man said, "Rabbi, I want to see."
52. "Go," said Jesus, "your faith has healed you." Immediately he received his sight and followed Jesus along the road.NIV Luke 5:13Jesus reached out his hand and touched the man. "I am willing," he said. "Be clean!" And Immediately the leprosy left him.NIV Luke 5:24-2524. But that you may know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins. . . ." He said to the paralyzed man, "I tell you, get up, take your mat and go home."
25. Immediately he stood up in front of them, took what he had been lying on and went home praising God.NIV Luke 8:44She came up behind him and touched the edge of his cloak, and Immediately her bleeding stopped.NIV Luke 13:12-1312. When Jesus saw her, he called her forward and said to her, "Woman, you are set free from your infirmity."
13. Then he put his hands on her, and Immediately she straightened up and praised God.NIV Luke 18:42-4342. Jesus said to him, "Receive your sight; your faith has healed you."
43. Immediately he received his sight and followed Jesus, praising God. When all the people saw it, they also praised God.NIV Acts 9:33-3533. There he found a man named Aeneas, a paralytic who had been bedridden for eight years.
34. "Aeneas," Peter said to him, "Jesus Christ heals you. Get up and take care of your mat." Immediately Aeneas got up.
35. All those who lived in Lydda and Sharon saw him and turned to the Lord.NIV Matthew 8:13
13. Then Jesus said to the centurion, "Go! It will be done just as you believed it would." And his servant was healed at that very hour.NIV Matthew 15:28
28. Then Jesus answered, "Woman, you have great faith! Your request is granted." And her daughter was healed from that very hour.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.