Replies

It goes waaaaaaaaaayyyyyyyyy beyond that. Even the simplest form of life is not just extremely complex. It is UNIMAGINEABLY complex. That is a simple fact. If it were NOT a fact, then someone would have IMAGINED how do do it, and would have CREATED some synthetic life. All the combined intellect of humanity through out history has utterly failed to CREATE synthetic life.

Well then, it must be beyond the ability of designers. So much for the "ID" presumption, eh?

(Walked straight into *that* one, didn't you?)

This part of the "ID argument" has always cracked me up. They argue that life is soooooo complicated that it's beyond our ability to fully understand or design, and therefore, it must have been designed. Ooookay -- want to try that one again?

Yet a lot of them seem to think it just happened accidentally.

No, we think it occurred by the operation of processes which are known to be able to produce arbitrary complexity without "design", because a) these processes are capable of performing the task, and b) that's the way the mountains of evidence point.

That takes faith.

No, it takes knowledge, understanding, and evidence.

...Which is a lot more than the ID folks have -- their primary argument (as you've so ably demonstrated) is, "well, *I* can't see how it could happen, and the result is so complex *I* can't grasp it, so it *must* have been manually created (by, um, someone else who *does* understand it, I guess...)".

That's nothing but the standard "fallacy from the argument of incredulity". It's a lame argument of the form, "I can't imagine any other possibility, so the only one I *can* imagine just *has* to be the truth..."

Sorry, not buying it, especially when there are plenty of us who *can* conceive of other possibilities, *and* have a ton of evidence and research validating them.

Yes!

ID == "Wahh! Science is too hard! It must be magic!"

...Which is a lot more than the ID folks have -- their primary argument (as you've so ably demonstrated) is, "well, *I* can't see how it could happen, and the result is so complex *I* can't grasp it, so it *must* have been manually created (by, um, someone else who *does* understand it, I guess...)".

Well then.... if *YOU* can imagine how life is made, or if *ANYBODY* in the whole wide world thinks they know, let them dig out their little chemistry sets and whip some up.

Earth is chock full of life. It's exceedingly common.

If it is such a proved fact that it occurred by random events, then it should be EASILY possible to whip some up in a beaker.

Until you, or anyone else, can do that, don't be lecturing anyone with the "We know how. Just because you don't, doesn't mean it's not possible" routine.

My statement of fact still stands. No person on earth has ever been able to IMAGINE how to create life.

As for your earlier comment..

Well then, it must be beyond the ability of designers. So much for the "ID" presumption, eh?

(Walked straight into *that* one, didn't you?)

Boy, I sure can't argue with logic like that. I know when I'm beaten.