Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
"The Origin of Specious Nonsense"
Options
Comments
-
-
... what are you talking about???
Can't read all of a sudden? Crack out that analytic scientist-myself muscle
& give my post a whirl again
Here is the list:
natural selection,
sexual selection,
thermodynamics,
environmental pressures
Now, since you're so keen on mathematical proofs you should understand the
axiomatic method. Therefore, modelling your response on that style I'd like
you to show us, by referring to the axioms (your proof!), how everything
in my list is disproven by your axioms (proof!). It's not hard, in my
last response I used your snail example to disprove the element called
thermodynamics in my list, I think you'd need to do a bit better than my
model proof though, it can be disproven by the strenuous exercise of
examining the truth content of those statements!
Think about it, I'll be in around 6am to read your expository work :cool::D0 -
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
NS is a fact ... and it acts on the pre-existing CFSI genetic diversity infused into the various genomes at Creation. It's existence therefore doesn't have any bearing on my proof that CFSI doesn't generate itself ... and that CFSI requires an input of intelligent design to produce it.sponsoredwalk wrote: »... give my post a whirl again
Here is the list:
natural selection,
sexual selection,
thermodynamics,
environmental pressures
SS is a fact ... and it acts on the pre-existing CFSI genetic diversity infused into the various genomes at Creation. It's existence therefore doesn't have any bearing on my proof that CFSI doesn't generate itself ... and that CFSI requires an input of intelligent design to produce it.
The laws thermodynamics indicate that everything in the universe is moving from a state of order to disorder ... and this can only be locally reversed by the input of intelligently harnessed energy. They are therefore a major supporting proof for the Intelligent Design of life.
Environmental pressures are a fact ... and they act on the pre-existing CFSI genetic diversity infused into the various genomes at Creation. It's existence therefore doesn't have any bearing on my proof that CFSI doesn't generate itself ... and that CFSI requires an input of intelligent design to produce it.
Thanks for your devotion to my every word.:cool::Dsponsoredwalk wrote: »... I'll be in around 6am to read your expository work :cool::D
... now go and devote yourself to the Word of God ... and get Saved and stop believing that you are glorified 'pondslime made Man' by a process of selected mistakes ...
... when you are, in fact, a Specially Created Son of God ... with an eternal destiny of your own choosing ahead of you!!!0 -
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
all this creationism stuff makes me sick how can someone believe that an omnipotent force created the universe.. All there scientific study is based on a book that was written about 1600 years ago when people thought the earth was flat. I think if anything the theory of Evolution is is evident when you have forward thinking people talking about the scientific points of things and solving problems; and the you have the backward people who believe in a mystical sky fairy who can send his only son down here and then murder him to prove a point... Retarded if you ask me
0 -
-
... when you are, in fact, a Specially Created Son of God ... with an eternal destiny of your own choosing ahead of you!!!
I know that I alone choose my destiny thanks & I don't need a book
that preaches genocide as a just response to tell me that
NS is a fact ... and it acts on the pre-existing CFSI genetic diversity infused into the various genomes at Creation. It's existence therefore doesn't have any bearing on my proof that CFSI doesn't generate itself ... and that CFSI requires an input of intelligent design to produce it.
Okay, so natural selection exists & it is a key component of the theory
of evolution. So the very fact you accept this means the evolution
"fairytale" is not a fairytale because there is some truth there already,
so I think you'd agree that you cannot continue calling evolution a fairytale
you'll have to concede that there is some truth to the theory, whatever
that truth is.SS is a fact ... and it acts on the pre-existing CFSI genetic diversity infused into the various genomes at Creation. It's existence therefore doesn't have any bearing on my proof that CFSI doesn't generate itself ... and that CFSI requires an input of intelligent design to produce it.
Now we have two components of the theory you were calling a fairytale
to actually be true. Notice that you are talking about the "origin" of
CFSI again. and the theory of evolution, that fairytale, says absolutely
nothing about the origin of CFSI rather it just discusses how this CFSI
can become less or more complex due to environmental pressures,
breeding pressures etc... About the origin of CFSI, I mean it's such a
stupid idea, CFSI is just FI (functional information) that is Complex
due to an originally simple bit of Functional information Complexifying due to
beneficial genetic mutation that is Specified to do a certain task. It's
Specified by the beneficial Function it undertakes. I guess I don't mean
tha evolution says nothing about the origin of CFSI, I mean that evolution
simply selects FI in the first place & by evolutionary processes this
information gradually Complexifies & assumes new Specified Functions,
but the idea that originally this CFSI is selected is a joke, a red herring
argument by ID'ers to say - how could something so complex come from
mud in the way it is???? The answer is time & accumulation, & you consistently
ignore the importance of time, as your denial of macroevolution explicitly
illustrates as proof of this.The laws thermodynamics indicate that everything in the universe is moving from a state of order to disorder ... and this can only be locally reversed by the input of intelligently harnessed energy. They are therefore a major supporting proof for the Intelligent Design of life.
I'm really happy you made this statement, by this logic the sun is
intelligent. The sun offers up this "intelligent" energy in the form of
heat & allows for plants to convert this energy into other forms.
This is the logic of a sun-god advocate
But I think you know that
I was talking about thermodynamics as espoused in the abiogenesis
video. Do you remember that? Do you remember what fuelled the
cells to eat other cells & grow bigger thereby having an advantage over
other cells? Thermodynamic disparities. Your proof said nothing about
this, it simply talks about a 100 chain protein that is sitting inside a
cell that is stuck in the struggle for survival because of uncontrollable
thermodynamic & environmental pressures to survive competitively.Environmental pressures are a fact ... and they act on the pre-existing CFSI genetic diversity infused into the various genomes at Creation. It's existence therefore doesn't have any bearing on my proof that CFSI doesn't generate itself ... and that CFSI requires an input of intelligent design to produce it.
This is an outright lie, unintentional I'm sure, but a lie nonetheless.
Environmental pressures do not act on "pre-existing CFSI genetic
diversity infused into the various genomes at Creation" they act on
"pre-existing CFSI genetic diversity infused into the various
genomes at Creation". There is a hell of a lot of importance to that fact,
that CFSI is excluded from that sentence.
So lets get this straight, you accept that every component of the fairytale
evolutionary theory is a fact, you accept microevolution is a fact but do
not accept macroevolution even though macroevolution is defined as
microevolution over time, in math terms [latex] macroevolution \ = \ \frac{ \Delta \ (microevolution)}{ \Delta \ t}[/latex],
or possibly more accurately,
[latex] macroevolution \ = \ \sum_{i=1}^{n} \ ( microevolutionary \ change)_i \ = \ \sum_{i=1}^{n} \
(beneficial \ genetic \ change)_i[/latex]
so accepting microevolution instantly forces you to accept macroevolution
by definition. You also accept NS acts on existing CFSI, you accept
sexual selection acts on existing organisms & you accept thermodynamics
acts locally on a system to lower entropy (i.e. reduce disorder), I mean
you accept all components of the fairytale theory you despise. Now, the
important thing that you have a problem with is abiogenesis, i.e. the
origin of CFSI. You constantly talk about issues pertaining to abiogenesis,
the orign of CFSI & the fact that the high probability simply does not
allow for it therefore it must of been created by an intelligence. This is
not the theory of evolution though, this is abiogenesis. Once that
CFSI is produced & is made to replicate & survive in it's environment it
becomes the theory of evolution. So once again this is all abiogenesis,
you literally accept evolution but just don't agree that evolution can
cause new organisms, or new species result from evolution.
I want to talk about your proof now, the fact that your proof discusses
a protein chain sitting inside an already self-replicating & environmentally
dependent & competetive cell (NS, Therrmodynamics) is a discussion of
the origin of "intelligent" chains of code, but that is not a disproof of
evolution. Your proof simply cannot disprove a theory that focuses on the
survivaly & replication of organisms that do not even depend on the
genetic content of their cells. Does that make sense? The cells are
splitting & eating one another irrespective of the 100 chain "protein"
sitting inside them :eek: How does your theory disprove that? Explain it?
It doesn't, your proof is simply a discussion of the origin of "intelligence",
i.e. what you think is intelligent. The point of NS is that whatever survives
is intelligent because, shocker, it's surviving.you haven't succeeded in providing any substantive evidence for the non-intelligently directed production of the CFSI found in living organisms ... nor have you provided any substantive invalidating evidence for my mathematical proof of ID.
Do you know what an enzyme is? It speeds up reactions in cells & is
extremely specific to certain molecules. The existence of enzymes is
proof of the non-intelligently direction production of CFSI in cells
because if enzymes did not exist it would take 78 million years to
create the building blocks of DNA and RNA
What is the point of mentioning this? It is that even without enzymesOne scientist who studies these issues is Dr. Richard Wolfenden, Alumni
distinguished professor of biochemistry and biophysics and chemistry at
the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and a member of the National
Academy of Sciences. In 1998, he reported a biological transformation
deemed "absolutely essential" in creating the building blocks of DNA and
RNA would take 78 million years in water.
"Now we've found one that's 10,000 times slower than that," Wolfenden
said. "Its half-time - the time it takes for half the substance to be
consumed - is 1 trillion years, 100 times longer than the lifetime of the
universe. Enzymes can make this reaction happen in 10 milliseconds."
link
biologically necessary molecules could still be produced without a magic
finger descending from the heavens. So I guess enzymes and the sun are
this "intelligence" ID'ers have long been searching for all this time.OK
1. Am I correct that the number of possible permutations in a 100 chain protein is 10^130?
I haven't studied cobinatorics yet but the point is not that you've got
the right figure in your maths its the fact you'd even do this calculation
in the first place that concerns us. In a 100 chain protein completely
disorganized & constantly permutating, if just 1 protein change in the
collection of permutations was beneficial to the cell in any way the
replicating cell would keep that permutation intact, it would not change
anymore. Why? Because that is NS, the good permutations are kept &
the bad ones are discarded. Imagine the cell with a completely random
genome has 1 permutation that works, some of it's daughter cells would
also have random genetic changes. There are 100+ descendants of that
original cell with the beneficial mutation & say 5% have random genetic
permutations, say 1% have beneficial changes, well there's even more
genetic change! 99% of the 5% had bad genetic changes & died out
but just 1% lived on! That is natural selection, the thing you accept.
Now, crack out the math: [latex] \sum_{i=1}^{n} \ (beneficial \ genetic \ change)_i[/latex]
:eek:2. Am I correct that a 100 chain protein is quite a small protein ... and there are many functional proteins with chain lengths of hundreds of amino acids in their chains?
Yes, the hilarious thing though is that when your "proof" talks about
proteins it already concedes defeat
How did the proteins originate?
Proteins are composed of what exactly? They are composed of specific
combinations of amino acids which, in turn, are composed mainly of
C O H & N atoms but in specific side groups which only admit specific
bonds. When your "proof" talks about proteins it already conceded that
a hell of a lot of "intelligence" already exists to work on This intelligence
has a certain range of possibilities.4. Am I correct that If every cubic millimetre of the supposed 93 billion light year diameter Universe volume had a 'machine' running the permutations for a 100 chain protein once every second, they collectively would only produce 1.56E+107 permutations in the 13.9 billion years supposedly since the Big Bang ... which is an infinitesimal fraction of the 1.27E+130 permutations of amino acids in a 100 chain protein?
As I said I haven't done combinatorics yet so I can't say how you
arrived at that figure & honestly in a proof it's poor taste to leave out the
explicit calculational techniques involved in arriving at such a figure but
the thought process behind this is most definitely wrong. It doesn't
mention natural selection. Why does that disprove your "proof"? Because
NS would instantly select any beneficial permutation and allow it to
survive & reproduce into the next & future generations thereby allowing
for more beneficial genetic permutations in it's sequence thereby
complexifying the information in the genome. I alread told you about
this, remember? I went on a rant about each generation acquiring a
beneficial genetic mutation. Your "proof" does not explain what actually
happens in nature, that a beneficial genetic permutation will be selected
to survive into future generations & the permutations that do nothing for
an organism will linger on until the organism is wiped out by the more
successful predators.
Your "proof" doesn't mention this at all so it doesn't say a thing about
reality, it is talking about a 100-protein chain existing in empty space
constantly permutating into your 'ideal' sequence, that is not the real
world in which cells have ever existed so it's a phantom proof about
combinatorics. It doesn't mention the environment, it mentions a snail
pushing an electron through the universe ffs!
So you accept evolution because you accept all of the components that
make up the theory of evolution, your proof already admits that proteins
exist when proteins themselves are already made up of complex
combinations of atoms that only allow specific bonds to form between
neighbouring proteins in the chain, your proof does not mention that
the permutations in the protein chain are acted upon by natural selection
so as to select the beneficial ones that can then further complexify &
increase information content & despite being told about all these problems
more than once in this thread you repeat the claim that this "proof"
actually matters while insulting the theory of evolution even though
your proof says absolutely nothing about any component of the theory
but instead discusses the origin of what you perceive as intelligence.
For 'some' reason it doesn't matter to you that through the indirect process of
evolution this CFSI is gradually & cumulatively selected from FI over
extended periods of time by NS, SS i.e. all the components of evolution that
you have told us are a fact.0 -
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
Does that not strike you as being just a tad bit suspicious? Their research was not deemed good enough for publication so they had to go about publishing it themselves. Reminds me of the literary masterwork that is Moon People - a book so awesome that 'THE MAN' had to supress it.
From the amazon reviews:
Here is the book describing the wonderful Powleen people on Mars withMoon People has reshaped my literary perceptions. After reading the heroic
story of Captain David Braymer, 1st Science Officer of the space ship USS
Lunar Base One, I feel as if I have been unbound from the restraints put in
place by a dozen English teachers. "Amazing", I said to myself, when I
realized the linguistic flexibility that comes from releasing character speech
from its quotation marks. There is a certain joy that comes with exercising
the freedom to end a sentence on any punctuation, even a comma.
Question marks needn't be for interrogative statements! Must we bind
every interjection to an exclamation point? Henceforth we shall be free to
transpose homophones with the confidence that the reader will still get
the point. Even chapters needn't be logical containers for portions of the
story; why can't we start a new chapter in the middle of a conversation
with two characters? Even the rules of spelling and capitalization serve
only to bestow an unnecessary magniloquence when plain conversational
writing will do. After reading this book, I scoff even at the concept of
'correct' word order.
http://www.amazon.com/Moon-People-Dale-M-Courtney/product-reviews/1436372135/ref=cm_cr_dp_all_summary?ie=UTF8&showViewpoints=1&sortBy=bySubmissionDateDescending
all there trees and plants & a discussion. On the plan to getVenus the same 0
This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement