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
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
... when Chemistry, Thermodynamics, environmental constraints etc spontaneously write the front page of the Irish Times, I'll believe you ... until then I'll continue to reject your idea that non-intelligently directed processes can produce the CFSI found in life and in print!!!:)
Nobody has claimed that Chemistry, Thermodynamics, environmental
constraints will ever spontaneously write
the front page of the Irish Times, what are you talking about???
Lets get what you've just said clear, you've just taken what I've said
100% completely wrongly, invented a strawman & then said because you
don't aceept the strawman I never erected you're going to continue to
deny every point everyone here makes :eek:Yes, you are correct that all you would need is a series of functional permutation that satisfies the environmental constraints ... but the spontaneous production of just one functional specific biomolecule is a mathematical impossibility
Erm, no it isn't. All you need is any permutation that gives an organism
with that genetic code an advantage over it's neighbours. That's all you
need, and it is explained by that thing "everybody accepts", NS.
Also, your "proof" has been invalidated, when I talk about permutations
I am not talking about the ones your "proof" discusses because you are
discussing permutations of some imagined protein chain sitting in empty
space being watched only by a snail and his companion electron, I'm
just talking about the random permutations that could exist in one of
the cells in the abiogenesis experiment that offered any beneficial
advantage over it's neighbours who all also have random internal contents.
Notice also that you assume a 100 chain protein to exist while I allow
for anything, that basically means the precursor molecules that were the
precursor of the precursor of the precursor of the ... of the precursor of
modern day complex proteins & all the other cellular components.
Notice also that this applies to any process in which competition
between molecules is aided by any random but beneficial "genetic"
content.... and we would need millions of such functional specific biomolecules to produce the living organisms that we observe in the biosphere.
What are you talking about? We only need one that has a beneficial
permutation that allows it to survive and reproduce thereby multiplying
itself and, shocker, filling up the biosphere. I think the extreme diversity
of life on this planet tells you that in fact many different organisms
exist & arise from lineages extending back extremely far indicating that
a huge diversity of FI existed & further diversified, as the fossil record
clearly indicates, as does the existence of archea, prokaryotes etc...... so even though all we would need is a series of functional permutations that satisfies the environmental constraints, this is mathematically impossible due to the vast inequilibrium between specific functional permutations and the non-specific, non-functional ones.
The vast inequilibrium between specific functional permutations and the
non-specific, non-functional ones Just imagine in a lipid bilayer is your
phantom 100-chain protein is like a sign that flashes HOOTERS and every
time it flashes a new permutation exists. All we need is one single flash
where the permutation is in any way more beneficial to the organism than
the permutations in it's neighbours. Does that make sense? If the
internal permutation gives the cell an advantage then it sparks competition
of genetic content which means an added sting in the already existing
competition fuelled by thermodynamics & the environment, now this is just
the situation I'm picturing as espoused on the Szostak video, given
a few hundred million years in the real world I think we know what
really happened but just using an ideallized situation you can see the
power of this explanation, and this is just the power of your phantom
protein chain in a cell in the situation of the Szostak experiment.
This is how FI could complexify due to competition, does the very fact
that this could possibly happen as explained by generic chemsitry not
tell you the obvious? Why go for the outrageous belief that a magic
finger dirty with the blood of genocide came down & injected "intelligence"
into a natural system that didn't need the bloody finger there in the first
place? It's as if this vengeful god raped the FI :eek: (Wouldn't surprise
me knowing the things that satisfy him :pac:).Intelligent behaviour is found in all living creatures ... and not just in Humans.
No, behaviour is found in all living creatures, we would call some of it
intelligent because it seems to us to satisfy a specific esoteric criterion,It is a virtual phenomenon and is the fourth great phenomenon of existence ... after matter, energy and time.
Says you & the other ID'ers, I don't agree with your complete & utter
nonsense because it's a subjective human idealization, a value judgement
that varies from person to person & especially the way you use intelligence
seeing as it's so religiously motivated, sorry it's unspecified (;)) but allows
for anything (hint hint
).How so?
Please bear in mind that I said that 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.
Raw energy from the Sun or any other energy source is at best neutral and at worst highly destructive in hurricanes, sunburn, etc.
Solar Energy only increases order and decreases entropy when it is intelligently harnessed using intelligently designed systems like photosynthesis, wind turbines, solar panels, combustion engines, etc.:)
So you don't call the sun intelligent then? I'm even more concerned than
before then, it's not the sun that's intelligent it's the chemistry that
manipulates the suns energy! I guess your a carbo-phile, carbon is
the intelligence you speak of!
You call photosynthesis an intelligently-designed system, I mean it must
include the non-biological system too right?
http://www.jstor.org/pss/20023610
And even still, it's just a materialistic system involving chemical
conversions completely explained by materialistic atheistic baby-eating
marxist-scientists, and wind turbines? I mean, it's obvious the intelligence
there is not the physics involved no, it's the human initiative isn't it :rolleyes:
That's a scientific conclusion worthy of a creationist scientific paper
alright, I mean if I see that a person is manipulating the physics of
rotational dynamics there is obviously a creator! Bicycle wheels obviously
refute evolution, it's so simple now!!!
Also, how can you call the laws of thermodynamics a major proof of
ID when the laws of thermodynamics predict a heat death for the
universe, predict that the sun will eventually lose all of it's energy &
would therefore provide no more light energy for that materialistic yet
intelligent system known as photosynthesis thereby ending life on this
planet?
Finally, I must applaud the way you choose to reply to only certain parts
of my post & ignore others, sometimes whole posts, and are able to
ignore most people questions, I'm not the only one curious to hear why
you were calling dinosaurs mammals, or why the fact that mammals once
ate dinosaurs somehow proves anything or is even relevant to our
conversation, or the macroevolution debacle, or even an explanation of
why your proof has any relevance to the theory of evolution whatsoever,
or why you were calling evolution a fairytale when you accept every
component that forms it's foundation:
"everybody accepts X"
"X is a fact"
How any times have I mentioned these things & gotten no response
from you? How many times has everyone here requested a real answer
because you continually ignore the substance and reply with some
cheap comment, a smiley & 5 exclamation marks?
You are extremely dishonest when you say you try to answer everything
because I have to keep mentioning these things in order that you'll finally
explain what you meant when you first made the outrageously false
statement that (repeating them again :pac:)
dinosaurs are mammals, that mammals once ate dinosaurs somehow proves
anything or is even relevant to our conversation, macroevolution is
unacceptable but microevolution is just obvious, that your proof has any
relevance to the theory of evolution whatsoever, that evolution is a
fairytale even though you accept every component that forms the
foundation of this fairytale.0 -
Advertisement
-
I never claimed that you said anything about written information.sponsoredwalk wrote: »Nobody has claimed that Chemistry, Thermodynamics, environmental
constraints will ever spontaneously write
the front page of the Irish Times, what are you talking about???
Lets get what you've just said clear, you've just taken what I've said
100% completely wrongly, invented a strawman & then said because you
don't aceept the strawman I never erected you're going to continue to
deny every point everyone here makes :eek:
However, Complex Specified Functional Information is CFSI whether it is written on the front page of the Irish Times ... or within the Human Genome ... and it can only be produced through the appliance of Intelligence!!!
... the minimum step is the production of additional functional infomation ... and not its degredation ... which is certain to happen if random changes are made to genetic information.sponsoredwalk wrote: »Erm, no it isn't. All you need is any permutation that gives an organism
with that genetic code an advantage over it's neighbours. That's all you need, and it is explained by that thing "everybody accepts", NS.
... and that is why everybody (including Evolutionists) avoid sources of mutagenesis, like the plague!!!!0 -
-
-
Complex Specified Functional Information is CFSI whether it is written on the front page of the Irish Times ... or within the Human Genome ... and it can only be produced through the appliance of Intelligence!!!
This is a lie, because there is very little intelligence in the Irish Times
first off & second because you have no proof whatsoever that the
human genome had to be produced through intelligence but there is a
mountain of evidence indicating that blind, materialistic, swamp-to-man,
baby-eating processes created the particular "CFSI" (:rolleyes:) in the human
genome. But I'm sure you have an article that discusses the fact
there was a time when scientists didn't even know about dinosaurs as
your proof that all the evidence in the human genome of common descent
is in fact wrong & that CFSI in the human genome is a concept that means
anything serious :cool:... the minimum step is the production of additional functional infomation ... and not its degredation ... which is certain to happen if random changes are made to genetic information.
... and that is why everybody (including Evolutionists) avoids sources of mutagenesis, like the plague!!!!
No it's not certain because that's what a beneficial genetic mutation is.
Remember I quoted you pages of studies of fruit flies where this
nonsensical claim of yours was refuted? That is another lie to your list,
that random genetic changes are nearly always detrimental to the genome
and never positive, (thanks for reminding me of more of your plain lies,
forgot about those ones). I remember you were banging on about that
point for quite a while until I quoted those studies, should I go back 30
pages to find them or do you want to check that out?
Makes for Pretty Funny Reading
Seeing as you continue to re-hash
old arguments only weaker than before you may as well top up on some,
why not bring back your arguments about microevolution as I've been
begging you to address for some time now, save your explanation of
dinosaurs as mammals for another month or so until you re-read the
same article about mammals eating dinosaurs to bring back the same
feelings & therefore the same arguments.- Dinosaurs are mammals
- Mammals once ate dinosaurs somehow proves anything or is even relevant to our conversation,
- "macroevolution is indeed a load of unsubstantiated baloney without a shred of evidence or logic supporting it" but you accept microevolution
- (and, to reiterate, macroevolution is defined as microevolution over time (lol:pac:))
- Your invalidated "proof" that all of a sudden you don't mention in every single response (for some reason) had any relevance to the theory of evolution whatsoever
- Evolution is a fairytale even though you accept every component that forms the foundation of this "fairytale" & a recent post of yours indicates that you accept evolution so much you think a creation scientist wrote the definition
- Genetic changes are always detrimental or barely noticeable
even though you've been given studies of drosophilia explicitly refuting that nonsense.
0 -
-
-
-
-
-
... indeed, come to think about it, the exchanges on the two mega-threads show the Atheists to be just as irrationally wedded to their Atheism as many other religious fanatics has been to their particular unfounded beliefs!!!
You're certainly irrationally wedded to ignoring questions, that's for sure 0 -
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
It is hard to imagine someone dedicating so much of their life to simply trolling. But then here you are.
But hasn't he been on this site for like 5 years spreading this fluff? There
is no way any human being would spend 5 years trolling, I mean 5 years is
just too much, over 5000 posts too. If it wasn't for these two factors I
never would have stayed here for so long, I remember thinking that when
someone first mentioned it, it just has to be totally serious
I think we're just undoing over 5 years of "high-wire" mental gymnastics in
this thread & it's tough on him, I mean he's beaten into such a corner
now that he has no frankenproof to rely on, no mamallian dinosaurs fresh
off Noah's ark to ride into the sunset on the back of, no dying drosophilia,
no reliance on "information" or "CFSI" seeing as he's told us that atheistic
materialistic processes like photosynthesis & wind turbines are CFSI &
these are explained not by a magic finger but by soulless Marxist
materialism, can't stop being called for his lies, but finally he has no
argument against evolution seeing as we got him to explicitly admit in his
own words that he accepts every part of the theory In fact, it'd be
pretty convenient for him to admit he was trolling all this time seeing as
every single argument he once arrogantly bragged about has been put
down & we know that he'd rather save face & restart than admit he is
lying to himself. The thing is that all creationists are like this, I mean
look at Dembski, Behe et al. They do on a global scale what JC does
in this thread!
If it is a big troll at least he's pushed me to check my facts as more than
once I wasn't really sure why I knew X, it's not a loss if this is just a
means to satisfy a lonely persons desire for attention or whatever it really
is, but this thread is definitely an anthropologists dream! 0 -
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement