Re: Re: Speculative Design Hypothesis (with predictions)

On Thu, 06 Apr 2006 19:02:24 GMT, Wall Of Sleep <Sabotage@xxxxxxxx>
enriched this group when s/he wrote:

Ken Shackleton wrote:

Wall Of Sleep wrote:

Ken Shackleton wrote:


Wall Of Sleep wrote:


Ye Old One wrote:



On Wed, 22 Mar 2006 20:03:54 GMT, Wall Of Sleep <Sabotage@xxxxxxxx>
enriched this group when s/he wrote:




The fact that mainstream "science" has treated ID as a form of leprosy
is undisputed.


No, they treat it as what it is - unscientific mumbo-jumbo.



So where is the critical analysis of the ToE? Have you ever seen an
article challenging it's premises in a peer-reviewed journal? Is this
the "scientific method" - to take for granted an untested premise and
castigate those who question it?


Hey...I've got an idea.....why don't you provide a critique of your
own?...be sure that it can stand up to minute scrutiny....and then
provide us with an alternative theory for the diversity of life on
earth that accounts for all observations to date.....while at the same
time giving superior explanatory and predictive abilities to what can
be found with the Theory of Evolution.

If you can do that.....you'd probably win a Nobel Prize.


OK, I'll be brief. The observed evidence shows that:

1. Life comes from life.


Yes....and since it is also a fact that earth was sterile at some
point, and now it is not....then at some point life rose from non-life
on earth....that's a fact. The mechanism may not yet be clear, but the
fact stands in any event.


How do you know that the first life on this planet did not come from
another planet?

There is, if fact, a small possibility that could be true.

How do you *know* it came from a non-living source?

Well, if it didn't happen here, then it just happened somewhere else.

How do you *know* that's even possible?

Because we, and all the rest of life, are here to prove it.



2. The simple cannot give rise to the complex.


Unsupported assertion...define your terms and prove the assertion with
evidence.


OK, maybe a better statement would be that an effect will not possess
more information than it's cause.
A simple algorithm contains all the information necessary to produce a
complex string, and the string can be traced directly back to the
algorithm that created it. The same can be said of a seed and a tree -
all the info necessary to make a tree is resident within the seed. No
outside information was generated that cannot be accounted for by the
simple algorithm or the seed.

And yet plants sport. A change occures. Explain that?




3. Intelligent agents are the only known cause of complex specified
information.


Again.....define your terms and prove the point with evidence.


Intelligent agents = humans.

Or a number of other animals.


And how about we substitute "complex machinery" for "complex specified
information"?

Define machinery.



4. All of life is related and shows evidence of common design.


All life is related....through common descent. If you are asserting
design....better provide some details about the designer, the design
process, and the construction techniques used to put the design into
practice.


Common *descent* is an assertion. The only part that's not asserted is
the "common" part. "Descent" has never been demonstrated as possible
via the mechanisms we are currently aware of, therefore common design is
a more reasonable assertion.

No it isn't. There in no hint of common design. Eyes have appeard in a
number of different forms. Yet all mammals share a common eye
structure because they share a common decent.



Therefore, life came from an intelligent living source that must
logically be more complex than the sum of all of life's parts.


Before you can come to this conclusion, you need to support your
premises.


See above.

In other words you don't have an answer.

--
Bob.

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Speculative Design Hypothesis (with predictions)
    ... Life comes from life. ... All life is related....through common descent. ... design....better provide some details about the designer, ... Common *descent* is an assertion. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Strike 3 [evolution is OUT!]
    ... Cambrian eon when life exploded on the earth. ... Life shares a common blueprint and common materials. ... Did we descend from apes? ... We're still left with humans share a "common design" with chimps and ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Ray Martinez
    ... well feel like it was the result of design. ... its power to an antonym is a nonsensical assertion ... The Bible says God decided to create intelligent life on Earth, ... Alleged material processes cannot produce common ancestry; ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: black holes and intelligent design
    ... What theory of intelligent design? ... Do you mean Dembski's assertion ... >scratch or even describe precisely the steps of how life evolved ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: black holes and intelligent design
    ... What theory of intelligent design? ... Do you mean Dembski's assertion ... >scratch or even describe precisely the steps of how life evolved ...
    (sci.chem)
Loading