Replies

I believe I've pinged you asking for observed instances of foreknowledge.

And I have answered your request directly at post 145 by excerpting that section from the original article.

The author cites Michael Ruse’s example of stegosaur plates, that they begin forming in the embryo but only have a function in the adult—supposedly for temperature control.

Off the top of my head, I would put antifreeze proteins on the table - or perhaps drought adaptation in wheat.

Such things occur at the highest level in the AP model.

Achieving autopoiesis from the lower levels remains the best and most important example.

Autopoiesis means automatic creation. The key element in autopoiesis - according to Maturana who coined the term - is autonomy, that an autopoietic system is self-contained or local.

A biological cell is autopoietic, it is self-contained. Wikipedia describes it as follows:

The eukaryotic cell, for example, is made of various biochemical components such as nucleic acids and proteins, and is organized into bounded structures such as the cell nucleus, various organelles, a cell membrane and cytoskeleton. These structures, based on an external flow of molecules and energy, produce the components which, in turn, continue to maintain the organized bounded structure that gives rise to these components. An autopoietic system is to be contrasted with an allopoietic system, such as a car factory, which uses raw materials (components) to generate a car (an organized structure) which is something other than itself (the factory).

The article continues with an interesting contrast in that so many investigators offer self-organizing complexity as the probable cause of the emergence of something new in biological life. A thing becomes different or more than it was, requiring a new term to describe what it “is.” A property becomes evident requiring a new term to describe it, etc.

Self-organizing systems are not autonomous, i.e. autopoetic.

I usually put it this way: that order cannot rise out of chaos in an unguided physical system. Period. There are always guides to the system. Even at the lowest level, space/time and physical laws are guides to the system. Self-organizing systems have guides. Cellular automata has guides, etc.

Therefore, autopoiesis in a biological cell – which is autonomous and yet obtains for such temporally non-local insight (anticipating, foreknowing or being aware of the need for maintenance and repair) – is the best example.

Or to put it another way, at the lower level there is no local (autonomous) capability to be aware, anticipate or foreknow and thus attain autopoiesis. Temporally speaking (timewise) - that insight is not local.

[ Self-organizing systems are not autonomous, i.e. autopoetic. ]

True.. belief that they are is a belief in "magic"..
Evolution(generally) is a belief in "magic"..

That feathers evolved from scales.. for insulation or flight purposes.. Evolution theory is like a scientific cartoon.. You just suppose(think up) that something happened and it "probably did".. they suppose..

People that believe nothing can believe in anything..
I admit, believing that God created creatures is simple..
But surely as rational as evolution is.. since literally NO ONE can ever know for sure.. What actually happened.. At least in this realm of understanding..

Evolution(generally) is a fairy tale for grown-ups..

It appears that "atoms" are NOT little balls revolving around some nucleus.. at all.. No one seems to know WHAT matter is.. or even energy.. exactly.. What life(and death) is, is totally up in the air..

The author cites Michael Ruse’s example of stegosaur plates, that they begin forming in the embryo but only have a function in the adult—supposedly for temperature control.

Genetalia also begin forming in embryos. How is this an example of foreknowledge?

Autopoiesis means automatic creation. The key element in autopoiesis - according to Maturana who coined the term - is autonomy, that an autopoietic system is self-contained or local.

Why not try phrasing this with reference to the video I linked earlier in the thread?

Here’s a current discussion on whether evolution is foresightful. Unfortunately, most evilutionists have been banned from the site, but it’s still a good place to acquaint yourself witht he latest ID thinking.

http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/is-evolution-biased/#comment-303026

[[I usually put it this way: that order cannot rise out of chaos in an unguided physical system. Period.]]

This is the central point that I was trying to make too- The following is a perfect example of why EVERYTHING (Even the cell containers, and the chemicals and biology that go into the building blocks of the container, and hte nutrients that flow to the cell, and hte membrane etc etc etc all need higher infor controlling every aspect of it’s creation, organization, maintanance, etc to keep it as distant from entropy as possible) needs to be ordered by a system of higher info- otherwise chaos will ensue, and a compelte breakdown will occure- IF we try to ‘create’ such systems of complexity using nothign but stepwise change, the system fails because htere are no higher orders of infromaiton controlling and directing every aspect of our systems. Any change that might occure woudl be met with confusion, one part not ‘knowing’ what to do with hte new change, and this change not being able to link to all the aspects of hte system it needs to intelligently link to in order to maintain fitness for the system.

[[The eukaryotic cell, for example, is made of various biochemical components such as nucleic acids and proteins, and is organized into bounded structures such as the cell nucleus, various organelles, a cell membrane and cytoskeleton. These structures, based on an external flow of molecules and energy, produce the components which, in turn, continue to maintain the organized bounded structure that gives rise to these components.]]

[[There are always guides to the system. Even at the lowest level, space/time and physical laws are guides to the system.]]

Yup- while there are ‘bounding guidlines’ which can bring a sense of order, this order is at such a low level of complexity that it can’t possibly hope to organize every aspect of essential coordination needed for life- there HAS to be higher guides- higher info, higher metainfo conducting every move and change and result

[[(anticipating, foreknowing or being aware of the need for maintenance and repair)]]

You simply can’t get this ‘self awareness’ from building models using pure chemical bonds, nor can it be gained from an outside influence as Demski seems to be suggesting it can. This ‘self-awarenesss’ is a built in biologically ingrained design that certainly can’t be gained by natural comunication from nature like Demski thinks it can somehow be.

Good post Alamo- these are the key points being made in the article- and somethign that I’ve said before that I think is far more important than Behe’s more simplistic single incidents of IC