Posted on 03/16/2019 11:26:56 AM PDT by Simon Green
The notion of “intelligent design” arose after opponents of evolution repeatedly failed on First Amendment grounds to get Bible-based creationism taught in the public schools. Their solution: Take God out of the mix and replace him with an unspecified “intelligent designer.” They added some irrelevant mathematics and fancy biochemical jargon, and lo: intelligent design, which scientists have dubbed “creationism in a cheap tuxedo.”
But the tuxedo is fraying, for intelligent design has been rejected not just by biologists but also by judges who recognize it as poorly disguised religion. Nevertheless, its advocates persist. Among the most vocal is Michael J. Behe, a biology professor at Lehigh University whose previous books, despite withering criticism from scientists, have sold well in a country where 76 percent of us think God had some role in human evolution.
Behe does not rely on the Bible as a science textbook. Rather, he admits that evolution occurs by natural selection sifting new mutations and that all species are related via common ancestors. Where he parts company with other biologists is in his claim that the important mutations producing new types of organisms are not random accidents but are deliberately installed by a designer with a plan. A pious Catholic, Behe sees the designer as the Christian God but concedes that there could be other mutation-makers. These designed mutations solve what he sees as a problem for natural selection: the origin of some complex biochemical features. Such features appear to defy Darwinian explanation because, claims Behe, they can’t function until all the parts are in place. (Unguided natural selection requires that every step in the evolution of a complex feature must enhance an organism’s fitness.) Ergo, these “irreducibly complex” systems must have been forged by a designer who made simultaneous changes in several genes.
(Excerpt) Read more at google.com ...
WRONG!
Actually, the opposite is true. And the process does not require random monkeys typing on keyboards.
The probability that life arose from a stochastic process is near 100% certainty.
It only needs an energy source. That is basic physics.
“Assemble them together correctly and you have life.”
Who or what did the assembly?
L
God created matter in such an exquisite mathematical symphony that the entire purpose of matter is to create life.
Or do you believe in an inferior god who is only capable of pulling rabbits out of hats like a carnival magician?
I believe that God can do whatever He likes.
Don’t you?
L
Please do show me the math and arrive at a probability.
Sure.
10^57 isotopes of the various elements are in the solar system.
10^52 are heavy ions (greater than 1 supernova-explode-eject-transport-get absorbed in second star-that one explodes in a supernova-ejects isotope to interstellar volume-transports new isotopes-gets absorbed-by-third-star ...)
So, to get the material here you need 10^52 individual unique atoms created.
In less than 9 billion years between the Big Bang and formation of the earth.
9 billion years isn’t enough time to transport the material from star to star to star given the distances we know we have between today’s stars.
Worse. The earth is credibly 4.5 billion years old. (I have fossils 3.5 billion years old on my shelf.) 13.7 billion - 4.5 billion years = 290x10^15 seconds.
You require more than 10^30 reactions per second every second between the Big Bang and formation of the earth just to make the elements existing here on earth.
Ignoring the rest of the entire galaxies.
Assuming no travel time at all between subsequent stars.
Or you can believe in one miracle.
That is an absurd request, given the scope of the problem. Nevertheless, the answer can be approximated to a degree that dismissing it is itself absurd.
First, let's understand the problem. Any organism is, by definition, a Von Neumann machine.
A simple internet search on the problem of creating a Von Neumann machine will demonstrate more math than you could ask for, or I care to reproduce here.
Then demonstrate it.
I believe he has created a universe composed of matter, don’t you?
Then why is all matter not alive?
“I believe he has created a universe composed of matter, don’t you?”
Indeed I do. So it looks like I have more faith in what He can do than you do.
L
“... built into the mathematics …”
Built into the mathematics period!
You keep dreaming. I just roll my eyes at people who try to slam science and how science is practiced by picking a certain portion of some article and taking it completely out of context. It’s like watching people who try to tell me that the Bible writers were not flat earthers.
So he made a quantum mechanical universe because he wanted to pull rabbits out of hats and trick us into thinking he had created a much more beautifully intricate universe?
If "life" is built into the mathematics of the universe, why has the vast majority of the universe failed to produce life? Even on our one data point (earth) the vast majority of matter is non-living.
I trust that at some point we will both be able to ask Him for ourselves. Until then I don’t really put a lot of thought into it.
Chances are the truth of things will be far more amazing than either side imagines.
L
Don’t know!
Do you know of any quantum differentiation between living and non-living matter?
If not, why are you bringing it into the discussion? If so, I’m sure your Nobel is just waiting to be picked up.
Then by what reasoning can it be claimed that "life" is built into the mathematics of the Universe?
Quantum mechanics is the only place in science where consciousness arises.
God is a conscious entity.
Existence depends upon there being a conscious observer.
That would be God.
Not really interested in getting into a discussion on this!
You have your opinions I have mine.
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.