Life's Irreducible Structure (DEBATE THREAD)

CMI ^ | Alex Williams

[metmom]

The question arises as to why someone who so objects to how a website is run would stay in the first place. It’s not like there aren’t any other places to go.

[metmom]

*persistence hunting*?

Seems that other carnivores do just fine with fur.

And man can eat more than meat. There’s plenty of plants and small game that men could hunt that wouldn’t take nearly the effort that chasing down an antelope would. So there was no need for man to waste his time and energy doing that.

[js1138]

while big bang theory gets a free pass?

I suggest you do some reading on the subject.

[betty boop]

For there to be "no universal (higher) frame of reference" the property of infinity must apply to space/time and nothing could be either beyond the coordinate system or be the "frame of reference" for the system itself.

Amazingly well put, my dearest sister in Christ! Thank you, oh so very much!

[tacticalogic]

There wouldn't be enough time to waste on things that were benign at best, deadly at worst.

4 billion years is a long time.......

[betty boop]

I also think that what makes it all the more improbable is that for it to even begin to work, all the blind chances would have to be necessary.

But this doesn't answer the question: Necessary in terms of what? There's no where to "land," no where to put one's foot down on solid rational ground, with such a line of thinking.

Just trying to think the problem through....

Thanks ever so much for writing, metmom!

[Ha Ha Thats Very Logical]

ummm: “persistence hunting”?

"Persistence hunting is a type of hunting where the predator uses a combination of running and tracking to pursue the prey to exhaustion. Nowadays it is very rare among humans hunting animals, but it is seen in a few Kalahari bushmen and the Tarahumara or Raramuri people of Northern Mexico. It has been thought to be one of the earliest forms of human hunting.

"Persistence hunting requires endurance running - running many miles for extended periods of time. Among primates endurance running is only seen in humans and is thought to have evolved 2 million years ago."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persistence_hunting

Why didn’t we just start sweating more through our tongues like dogs?

Evolution seeks to explain why what happened, happened, not why what didn't happen, didn't happen.

[Ha Ha Thats Very Logical]

Nobody said the original perfect man was hairless. Variation within species would be one reason some people have lots and some have none. But it would take far more than differing amount of body hair to move man in the direction of the ape.

I'm talking about guys like this:

That's more than "differing amounts of body hair." Why did the designer give us a gene that could do that if he didn't expect us to ever have to use it?

I asked why evolution would produce something so unnecessary [male nipples] and didn't get an answer.

Cecil Adams says: "To tell you the truth, nobody really knows. The best explanation I've been able to find (and frankly it doesn't explain very much) is that nipples aren't a sex-linked characteristic. In other words, nipples are just one of those sexually neutral pieces of equipment, like arms or brains, that humans get regardless of sex."

I don't know if anybody has a better answer than that. You will ask, Why hasn't evolution gotten rid of them? And I will reply, There's no requirement that evolution get rid of something that's essentially harmless.

Okay, your turn. Why did the designer give men nipples?

[Larry Lucido]

Okay, your turn. Why did the designer give men nipples?

To give an angry woman something to twist.

[tpanther]

Ummm if I read a million volumes on the subject how is this going to disabuse anyone of the notion there’s virtually only one “step” to the big bang theory...

it goes something like this js...

BANG!

You can talk about what happened afterwards, but that’s not going to be about anything but the post-event.

http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_761570694/Big_Bang_Theory.html

[metmom]

It’s a good thing I don’t drink coffee while I FReep.

[metmom]

And so there was enough persistence hunting to cause humans to lose most of their hair?

And then, miles from home, when the kill is made, the hunter does what with it? Schlep it all the way back home?

Persistence hunting may happen on occasion, but I would have serious doubts that it was widely practiced enough to cause it to influence human genetics simply because it’s extremely impractical when there are other sources of food nearby that are much easier to kill and bring home.

[tpanther]

I don’t suppose either side has a good answer for nipples, but why don’t people have more eyes, or more arms?

[tpanther]

I think the information can be present in a gene, but yet not necessarily be meant for application in the way manifested in that picture of the boy with the excessive facial hair.

[metmom]

Exactly.

God didn’t tell us.

Evolution can’t tell us.

Both sides are just guessing.

[CottShop]

[[I certainly agree with your statement, “...the species simply could not flourish long enough to wait for the finished product of the necessary metainfo system.” Indeed, that’s what the ToE’s “pushing up daisies” model, which I would describe, (in terms of Williams’ IC/AP model), as the inversion of levels (i) – (v); i.e., there’s no “pull” from the higher levels (v) being “highest”), but a “push” from level (i), and from there on “up” through the levels. Until finally, we have — mirabile dictu! — level (v), “fully-loaded” with metainformation....]]

Ok- I see where logically, the ‘pull from higher levels makes the most reasonable sense- most scientific sense, but I’m not sure I’m conprehending your [[To make a “necessity” of “pure, blind chance” the very necessity on which your argument rests automatically completely rules out any and all non-chance solutions to problems — in principle.]]

I’m not sure we can imply chance needign to becoem ‘necessity’,- what you say is true, bland chance can’t becoem a necessity the species relies on, or that bland chance becomes some sort of informaiton vessel that dictates what the species needs.

If we’re talking randomness, then I guess what I’m tryign to get at is that it might, very remotely, be possible that a myriad of chance mutations ended up stacking info on info- with no will to do so, but rather, just randomly- sort of like throwing a bunch of pennied about 10 feet or so until a bunch stack up on each other- but the differecne beign that the info all has different functions, but when accidently coupled with previous random info, it combines quite by mistake, to create a higher level of info- like hte ‘green/red’ info I mentioned earlier post- the ‘red info’ (or ability to see red in my example) wouldn’t be utilized because everythign is green, but the species carries the info on down the line, and htne one day, Red is introduced to the environment, and the species has the info needed, quite by chance, to feed from the red food source- It’s a silyl example of course, but I think it illustrates sort of how info can be added, not in anticipation of future ‘red food source,’ but rather that hte info was added, and by pure chance, red foods sources get itnroduced, and hte species has now hte ability to feed from the red because it can distinguish from the green less nutritious food sources they previous fed from.

Uggh- I think I’m getting lost here.

[[On what basis ought we to believe that information piling up randomly could ever “mean” anything at all?]]

Well I’m not sure- which is why I’m askign what I am-

Let’s suppose that we reach into a bag, pull out single pages of info- and throw them into a heap- when one word lands on another beneath it, it can either add to that bottom info intelligibly, or it coudl mean nothing at all in relation to hte word underneath it- let’s assume we do this for a million years, all day long- to me it woudl seem that eventually, you would get some words that land on others that make sense in combined context, nd you woudl get soem on top of them that would also make sense when combined with hte previous two words, and hten, by pure luck, you ‘might’ even get a kind of higher info that then relates to all the other words below it.

Bleh- that isn’t such a great way to describe it. I dunno-

[[Jeepers, quite aside from the evident epistemological problems involved in the “chance is necessity” point of view, does this seem likely to you?]]

No- to me it doesn’t make any sense- as the species simply could not afford to wait around for metainfo to somehow accumulate via pure chance- which would make it a necesssity I guess- I’m just wondering htough if piling info on info could even remotely result in even a lower form of metainfo- but here we get into the problem of “Incomplete MetaInfo” which simply wouldn’t work- Aha! I think that’s it- That might be the coutner arguemtn to those who argue piling info on info ‘could result in’ metainfo- Incomplete metainfo wouldn’t be capable of sustaining and maintaining the species.

I’ll have to htink htis through a bit more

[CottShop]

[[I just have one general question. Where will you move the goalposts when these technical problems are solved through research?]]

I have fuill confidence the goalposts aren’t going anywhere JS- Evolution is biologically impossible- can’t say it much clearer than that- All the evidence coming forward just keeps showing just how impossible when looked at objectively, and not with a ‘it could have happened’ attitude that ignores the evidences- the goalposts are clearly within view, and we sir are not the ones that keep moving htem- We simply follow the evidneces-

[[The book I linked to is a simplified version of a more technical publication. I doubt if it can be made simpler.]]

Well- good news for me then- does it have lots of pictures?

[[Yes, I’ve read it. I own a copy. I recommend it before you continue looking silly by asserting these problems are new or haven’t been addressed by biochemists.]]

The ‘problem’ of metainfo’ has ‘been addressed’? Really? Mind givign a brief sysnopsis informing us all how biochemists have refuted the idea of metainfo being IC or specially created?

[js1138]

Read the book and I’ll talk about it.

[CottShop]

Yuo won’t even give a brief synopsis? I’ll see what I can find online about it- not goign to purchase it. But you shoudl have at least a breif outline about what it was about?

[CottShop]

nm- found soem more thorough reviews online- will get back to you