Posts by AuldSoul

106

There is so much evidence around us to prove an Intelligent creator.

by nicolaou in

that's an 'ever so slightly' adapted quote from tophat on another thread; http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/12/108341/2880755/post.ashx#2880755.

i've been really dismissive of god/s, religion, faith and the abandoning of reason but when it comes to the 'argument from design', well you just have to give it a bit more .

respect?

AuldSoul

I don't know if there is room for discussion really. The "argument from design" falls flat on its face, crashes and burns, grinds to a halt, slams into a brick wall, etc. etc. etc. the moment the question is asked, "so who designed the designer?" I've never seen anything remotely approaching a good answer to that question.

Only if original genesis of all life is the issue. Take that need for a genesis explanation out of the equation and there is a real argument on the side of design. Evolution theory doesn't attempt to answer the genesis question, why should ID be compelled to do so?

Respectfully,
AuldSoul

365

Richard Dawkins Gets "Expelled" by Ben Stein!

by Perry in

i just got back from seeing the new movie release "expelled" which is a documentary exposing the militant culture of supression regarding intelligent design in the scientific community.

in a "million years", i never would have imagined that ben stein could get the author of "the god delusion", richard dawkins to speak favorably about i.d.

(intellignet design).

AuldSoul

serotonin_wraith: Incomplete? Your last post is incomplete. You haven't addressed the other transitional fossils yet.

I apologize for the oversight.

Ambulocetus natans, the 49 million year old "walking, swimming whale" discovered in Pakistan by Thewissen and team in 1992, and described in 1994-1996, is currently the oldest known saltwater cetacean. "With long hind legs and hands, but the teeth and ears of a more modern whale, this animal was on the fence between land and sea."

According to this, 49 million years ago, ambulocetus natas existed.

Fifty million years ago (a scant one million years prior), pakicetus existed. Ambulocetus natas was essentially the megahippus to the pakicetus.

The next tracable "link" in the progression you suggest I consider confirmed is what animal? Which lived when?

Is there a clearly defined series link between little horses and other horses? Yes. Is there a clearly defined link between pakicetus and ambulocetus natas? Yes.

Is there a clearly defined series link between pakicetus and the Beluga whale? No.

Addressed. Would you care to rebut?

365

Richard Dawkins Gets "Expelled" by Ben Stein!

by Perry in

i just got back from seeing the new movie release "expelled" which is a documentary exposing the militant culture of supression regarding intelligent design in the scientific community.

in a "million years", i never would have imagined that ben stein could get the author of "the god delusion", richard dawkins to speak favorably about i.d.

(intellignet design).

AuldSoul

inrainbows: My stab at humour/thought experiment/example of unreasonableness seems to miss you entirely.

I grasped completely the stab at humor. I even laughed the first time, because of the context. The second time it has more of the flavor of the highlighted portion, because of the context. For that purpose, your example was not humorous, it was a toothless attempt at biting humour. I simply showed the empty gumline.

Can we agree to the following description of proper acquisition of empirical evidence?

An algorithmic statement of the hypothetico-deductive method could be stated as
Gather data ( observations about something that is unknown, unexplained, or new )
Hypothesize an explanation for those observations.
Deduce a consequence of that explanation (a prediction). Formulate an experiment to see if the predicted consequence is observed.
Wait for corroboration. If there is corroboration, go to step 3. If not, the hypothesis is falsified. Go to step 2.

According to the rules of empirical evidence your case is not proved. That is not opinion, that is simply reading comprehension. My "unreasonable" standard arises from point #3, in case you were searching for the portion important to my argument. Point #3 has not been met, point #4 cannot begin until it has been met.

—AuldSoul

365

Richard Dawkins Gets "Expelled" by Ben Stein!

by Perry in

i just got back from seeing the new movie release "expelled" which is a documentary exposing the militant culture of supression regarding intelligent design in the scientific community.

in a "million years", i never would have imagined that ben stein could get the author of "the god delusion", richard dawkins to speak favorably about i.d.

(intellignet design).

AuldSoul

Hillary_Step,

I was very pleased that he directed his comments toward angry Christians. I very much doubt he would have said the same to the millions of unassuming Christians who don't presume to condemn anyone to any unfavorable destiny at all, and who are not burdened by their faith. It does seem that the most personally obliged "Christians" are the ones most ready to impose burdens on others, as well.

Respectfully,
AuldSoul

365

Richard Dawkins Gets "Expelled" by Ben Stein!

by Perry in

i just got back from seeing the new movie release "expelled" which is a documentary exposing the militant culture of supression regarding intelligent design in the scientific community.

in a "million years", i never would have imagined that ben stein could get the author of "the god delusion", richard dawkins to speak favorably about i.d.

(intellignet design).

AuldSoul

Of course, that dog-sized HORSE didn't provably evolve into something that wasn't a HORSE, did it?
serotonin_wraith: Do zebra and donkey count?

No. Zebra and donkey do not count. Obviously. They are both capable of . . . oh my! Were you suggesting they were an example of the ends of a ring species? I am so pleased to disappoint you.

serotonin_wraith: Google can help you on your search, but if you do get stuck I'm sure I can find things for you.

Physician, heal thyself: http://www.google.com/search?q=zebra+and+donkey

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

http://www.geocities.com/zedonknzorse/allabout.html

http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v26/i3/zonkey.asp

http://www.lovelongears.com/zorse.html

http://www.sciencedaily.com/articles/z/zeedonk.htm

Take your pick, or peruse the many others available from Google. There are lots more. Did YOU think the zebra and donkey proved your case?

One example of an animal with a skull similar in structure to pakicetus which is also similar in structure to a whale does not a "transition" make, even with all the dramaticism of the shadowed 'click to reveal' on the Web site you linked.

—AuldSoul

365

Richard Dawkins Gets "Expelled" by Ben Stein!

by Perry in

i just got back from seeing the new movie release "expelled" which is a documentary exposing the militant culture of supression regarding intelligent design in the scientific community.

in a "million years", i never would have imagined that ben stein could get the author of "the god delusion", richard dawkins to speak favorably about i.d.

(intellignet design).

AuldSoul

So, you don't have a theory. I obviously have to say it for you as you won't come out with it.

Proving WHO designed life intelligently is no more a task of ID than is proving abiogenesis a task of evolution. It is incredibly hypocritical to hold me to a standard you don't even aspire to acheive. On this thread I have not suggested WHO designed anything, have I? That would be a genesis theory, not a presence/progression of life theory.

I have never stated that I believe in special design of each kind of life. I believe any intelligent designer would account for enough flexibility within design to allow for a wide variety of adaption. Since WE even recognize that a high capacity for adaptation is useful for species survival, surely any intelligent designer would have known this, as well. Plus we have enough examples of known design to demonstrate clearly that KNOWN intelligent designs take into account, in advance, the potential for changing environments or circumstances in designs intended to survive over long periods of time.

I say life and the progression of life shows the markers of just such long-term planning, along with intermittent direct modifications. That is, remodeling using existing genetic "space" as opposed to brand new designs. Ask any human designer, they will know what I am talking about. That is why I believe it is by design.

365

Richard Dawkins Gets "Expelled" by Ben Stein!

by Perry in

i just got back from seeing the new movie release "expelled" which is a documentary exposing the militant culture of supression regarding intelligent design in the scientific community.

in a "million years", i never would have imagined that ben stein could get the author of "the god delusion", richard dawkins to speak favorably about i.d.

(intellignet design).

AuldSoul

You can accept a dog-like animal evolved into the modern horse when presented with different transitional fossils in the correct order, yet you won't accept pakitecus evolved into the modern whale, when presented with different transitional fossils in the correct order.

I can accept that a dog-sized HORSE evolved into the modern HORSE (and several other varieties of HORSES, for that matter) when presented with MANY different transitional fossils that are remarkably complete from which to judge the matter. Of course, that dog-sized HORSE didn't provably evolve into something that wasn't a HORSE, did it?

I won't accept as conclusive evidence a very incomplete set of transitional "fossils" that are, themselves, incomplete fossils from which to judge a different progression. You seem to think that is unreasonable, but won't explain why. The ordering only matters at all if the animal's progression can be proven to have taken the path believed to have been taken to reach the whale.

In other words, I can accept the complete transitional fossil record from a variety of horse to a lot of other varieties of horses much more easily than I can accept a very incomplete transitional fossil record from a pakicetus to a modern whale. You don't see the distinction between the proof in the two cases?

365

Richard Dawkins Gets "Expelled" by Ben Stein!

by Perry in

i just got back from seeing the new movie release "expelled" which is a documentary exposing the militant culture of supression regarding intelligent design in the scientific community.

in a "million years", i never would have imagined that ben stein could get the author of "the god delusion", richard dawkins to speak favorably about i.d.

(intellignet design).

AuldSoul

The level of proof you require is so high that if applied to the hypotheses of Creationism or ID, it makes them unprovable.

I know this was directed to BTS, but as I require the same proof I will also respond.

I might not be able to prove to you specifically who intelligently designed life, but humans can consistently reproduce intelligently designed life that is speciated, can't we, inrainbows?

Glow-in-the-dark tobacco plants come to mind, somehow. And the things we have done with various grasses? Oh my. Oddly, we don't have to actually start from scratch. Consistently, we can intentionally speciate by intelligently using existing material and tweaking it. We can even predict our results with a fairly accomplished accuracy.

We can produce a variant on a theme that cannot produce viable life when crossbred to the original organic material.

Can you consistently reproduce such speciation by generational separation and random mutation?

I can do it using intelligent design, but I can't do it without intelligent design. That's all I'm saying.

—AuldSoul

365

Richard Dawkins Gets "Expelled" by Ben Stein!

by Perry in

i just got back from seeing the new movie release "expelled" which is a documentary exposing the militant culture of supression regarding intelligent design in the scientific community.

in a "million years", i never would have imagined that ben stein could get the author of "the god delusion", richard dawkins to speak favorably about i.d.

(intellignet design).

AuldSoul

What use is mouthing respect if those you mouth it at don't feel it?

I 'mouthed' respect to you the last time I felt it on this thread, which was just before I read your baselessly ridiculing response to this post.

I haven't done so since and doubt seriously whether I will ever again on this subject, in future.

In effect you DO want to have an okapi give birth to a giraffe in your lap.

What I want is something we can empirically prove and reproduce which can no longer mate with either its ancestor or empirically known common descendant to produce offspring. To my knowledge (and possibly due to the rarity of okapi) no one has ever attempted to cross-breed an okapi and a giraffe. I have emailed to ask a noted zoologist whether this has been attempted and will be happy to share any reply I receive.

However inane your insistence that my standard is unreasonable, until that is accomplished you haven't got a proven case. I would recommend selecting something with a much faster life cycle and much larger populations to accomplish the feat. Your cute 'okapi' comment is not a very practical expectation at all, on either count, especially considering the low fertility rates among okapi due to widely divergent haploid variations.

Can you explain how dolphins with atavistic rear limbs fit ID/Creationism?

Variation allowed for within the coding itself.

Can you explain why evolutionists insist that intentionally engineered adaptability to environmental stressors within a given range would be a poor design model? It seems you want everything designed to be specific to a specific set of circumstances or to serve a specific function, when we have ample evidence of known design that does not fit that model at all.

—AuldSoul

365

Richard Dawkins Gets "Expelled" by Ben Stein!

by Perry in

i just got back from seeing the new movie release "expelled" which is a documentary exposing the militant culture of supression regarding intelligent design in the scientific community.

in a "million years", i never would have imagined that ben stein could get the author of "the god delusion", richard dawkins to speak favorably about i.d.

(intellignet design).

AuldSoul

BurnTheShips: . . . with the possible exception of Zea Mays, which may simply be an incredibly clever hybridization and selection of certain mesoamerican wild grasses.

Well, if we are going to be talking 'mays', it may be a fairly recent evidence of direct assistance from a source of intelligence superior to the humans who used it.