Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: balrog666; Amos the Prophet; betty boop
Thanks for your post, balrog!

The definitions I've posted are all in the mainstream. And concerning Amos, I protest strongly your use of the pejorative "idiocy" to describe his posts. Neither he nor I will be dismissed by such statements.

My above post is supportive of Amos’ hypothesis as stated at post 127 as follows:

Evolution is predicated on an hypothesis that change occurs from less complicated to more complicated. If this, or some version of this, is true then there must be some principle that allows it to be so. Otherwise it could be as easily said that the simple leads to the complex which leads to the simple, ie random change.

Why is it that the notion of higher and lower orders is predicated? On what basis is this apparent natural phenomenon determined? This is an area of research that has gone unexamined.

I propose that it be examined to determine laws of nature which seem to impose order on existence. Why should there be order? Why not rampant disorder?

If order, then, and more so, if processional - lower to higher - order there must be determinative dynamics that make it so. What is the nature of these dynamics?

This line of reasoning from natural observation must necessarily discard random selection or random processes as not capable of explaining phenomenon.

If I may jump to a possible conclusion, ID is a perfectly legitimate proposition to explain the phenomenological issues raised above.

To paraphrase, the heart of his observation is that order cannot rise out of chaos in an unguided physical system. That is an unequivocal statement.

It follows that randomness cannot be a primary causation in evolution, etc. – indeed, as my point #1 avers:

What we declare is “random” in space/time may not be random in the "system" since we do not yet know what the “system” is. It would be more correct to say “apparently random”.

That also is an unequivocal statement.

If you want to try to defeat me on either statement, please go right ahead. You'll find that science is not on your side.

To defeat the first, find any physical system wherein order can arise from chaos without a guide. You will have to show how order (or anything for that matter) could arise without space/time, physical laws, physical constants, energy/matter and especially physical causation.

To defeat the second, disclose which of all the geometric physics models and cosmology models has been selected by all of science as the one which tells us what the system "is" - complete with all dimensions, cosmology, energy/matter, etc.

213 posted on 11/03/2005 1:47:13 PM PST by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 212 | View Replies ]


To: Alamo-Girl
Evolution is predicated on an hypothesis that change occurs from less complicated to more complicated. If this, or some version of this, is true then there must be some principle that allows it to be so. Otherwise it could be as easily said that the simple leads to the complex which leads to the simple, ie random change.

No. Tapeworms are descended from free-living platyhelminthes, and are less complex. Mycoplasmas are descended from free-living gram positive bacteria, and are considerably less complex. Cave fish lose eyes; birds on islands with no predators lose the ability to fly; humans and the great apes lost the ability to synthesize vitamin C.

216 posted on 11/03/2005 2:05:26 PM PST by Right Wing Professor (If you love peace, prepare for war. If you hate violence, own a gun.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 213 | View Replies ]

To: Alamo-Girl
Amos starts with a faulty premise, namely that "Evolution is predicated on an hypothesis that change occurs from less complicated to more complicated."

This is nonsense. Thus everything that he states based on this is nonsense.

To paraphrase, the heart of his observation is that order cannot rise out of chaos in an unguided physical system. That is an unequivocal statement.

It also utterly wrong. Order always arises out of chaos.

219 posted on 11/03/2005 2:22:21 PM PST by balrog666 (A myth by any other name is still inane.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 213 | View Replies ]

To: Alamo-Girl
heart of his observation is that order cannot rise out of chaos in an unguided physical system

That's good. And at least we could ask, what in evolution accounts for it, and if not evolution, what does account for it?

227 posted on 11/03/2005 2:55:40 PM PST by cornelis (Fecisti ad nos)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 213 | View Replies ]

To: Alamo-Girl
... the heart of his observation is that order cannot rise out of chaos in an unguided physical system...

False conclusion. Chaos generates all types of order.

231 posted on 11/03/2005 3:31:47 PM PST by Doctor Stochastic (Vegetabilisch = chaotisch ist der Charakter der Modernen. - Friedrich Schlegel)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 213 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson