Jump to content


Photo

Evidence For Intelligent Design


  • Please log in to reply
155 replies to this topic

#1 gilbo12345

gilbo12345

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,006 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Completed BBiotech (Honours)

    Currently studying Masters of Teaching.

    Enjoys games of tactics and strategy.
  • Age: 25
  • (private)
  • Creationist
  • Australia

Posted 27 May 2014 - 06:01 AM

Had a chat with a fellow student today and he wanted to know the evidence for Intelligent Design, and unfortunately my debating skills are quite mediocre in discussing things in person (stage fright), so I figured I'd make a thread for him to check out.

 

So please feel free to post the evidence for Intelligent Design.

 

 



#2 Adam Nagy

Adam Nagy

    Honorable Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,053 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 37
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

Posted 27 May 2014 - 06:23 AM

I think the ID community has an extremely important one well defined... Specified Complexity.

Every effort I see to criticize it is first an effort to forget the word "Specified".

#3 gilbo12345

gilbo12345

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,006 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Completed BBiotech (Honours)

    Currently studying Masters of Teaching.

    Enjoys games of tactics and strategy.
  • Age: 25
  • (private)
  • Creationist
  • Australia

Posted 27 May 2014 - 06:27 AM

I think the ID community has an extremely important one well defined... Specified Complexity.

Every effort I see to criticize it is first an effort to forget the word "Specified".

 

Thanks Adam :) I attempted to share the complexity argument, however I must admit that whilst forum discussions are my forte, in person / on the spot discussions aren't.



#4 Adam Nagy

Adam Nagy

    Honorable Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,053 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 37
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

Posted 27 May 2014 - 07:54 AM

Thanks Adam :) I attempted to share the complexity argument, however I must admit that whilst forum discussions are my forte, in person / on the spot discussions aren't.

My pleasure. Don't feel too bad. 'On-the-spot' discussions always have unique challenges compared to writing things down, reviewing, correcting and repeating as necessary before submitting.

Back to complexity... The person you're talking to needs to acknowledge that there as a difference between the complexity of say; a pile of scrap in a heap (hugely complex) or a pattern on a wave lapped beach versus a claw-hammer in specific design use (simple complexity but specified). Yes a rock can achieve some of what a claw hammer can do but even without moving parts a hammer has a specified complexity.

#5 gilbo12345

gilbo12345

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,006 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Completed BBiotech (Honours)

    Currently studying Masters of Teaching.

    Enjoys games of tactics and strategy.
  • Age: 25
  • (private)
  • Creationist
  • Australia

Posted 27 May 2014 - 09:03 AM

My pleasure. Don't feel too bad. 'On-the-spot' discussions always have unique challenges compared to writing things down, reviewing, correcting and repeating as necessary before submitting.

Back to complexity... The person you're talking to needs to acknowledge that there as a difference between the complexity of say; a pile of scrap in a heap (hugely complex) or a pattern on a wave lapped beach versus a claw-hammer in specific design use (simple complexity but specified). Yes a rock can achieve some of what a claw hammer can do but even without moving parts a hammer has a specified complexity.

 

 

Thanks Adam, I agree that being able to collect one's thoughts is a big plus for writing things in a forum. Doubly so for myself ;)

 

Thanks for the explanation of specified complexity. I'm very much in tune with irreducible complexity, (specifically in terms of systems biology), however its only now that I realised that I hadn't delved that much into specified complexity.



#6 Adam Nagy

Adam Nagy

    Honorable Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,053 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 37
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

Posted 27 May 2014 - 09:40 AM

You're welcome, Gilbo.

Irreducible complexity is a good subject too.

I would add that Werner Gitt's contribution to understanding information in a way that Shannon Information only deals with data is vital too.

Data in the form of code has it's ambiguity problems. Gitt's work lays the groundwork for defining information as a feedback loop. Measuring data content can have its place but understanding the roles of sender/receiver/purpose is much more robust at detecting the reality of design as a deliberate action versus patterns that 'just happen'.

#7 gilbo12345

gilbo12345

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,006 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Completed BBiotech (Honours)

    Currently studying Masters of Teaching.

    Enjoys games of tactics and strategy.
  • Age: 25
  • (private)
  • Creationist
  • Australia

Posted 27 May 2014 - 03:24 PM

You're welcome, Gilbo.

Irreducible complexity is a good subject too.

I would add that Werner Gitt's contribution to understanding information in a way that Shannon Information only deals with data is vital too.

Data in the form of code has it's ambiguity problems. Gitt's work lays the groundwork for defining information as a feedback loop. Measuring data content can have its place but understanding the roles of sender/receiver/purpose is much more robust at detecting the reality of design as a deliberate action versus patterns that 'just happen'.

 

To be honest I totally forgot about the sender / receiver relationship of information within cellular systems, I used to post here about it frequently.

 

 

For those reading, the cells signal cascade system is a great example of something having a design due to the sender / receiver relationship.

 

We should ask

 

- how does the cell 'know' that gene X activates function X

 

This is in order to allow for the signal cascade system to function. In order for the function to be used effectively its function needs to be known, as well as the gene that operates it.

 

- how does the cell know what function function X performs?

 

In order to have a signal cascade system the cell would need to 'know' the effect function X would have, thus allowing for the initial settings for the cascade system to turn the function on. This is to ensure that the function is being used efficiently since wasted efficiency is wasted resources for the cell leading to a lack of fitness. For example if a function is to create a protein for the cell membrane then the signal system would need to be based on recognizing when a lack of this protein is present. Producing proteins willy nilly is going to lead to a decrease in efficiency and thus fitness and would not be selected for by natural selection.

 

- how does the cell 'know' what factors enable function X to function?

 

This relates to the multitudes of checks and balances in the cellular system. There are many MANY regulatory systems that are in place for each cellular system to ensure that the system is operating at peak efficiency. How could the system function without these regulatory elements? Remember a decrease in efficiency would defy natural selection

 

 

I've probably missed some points but that is largely the gist of it.

 

The issue here is that there are only two logical solutions (well actually three)

 

1- Cells are sentient

2- Natural selection doesn't matter that much, and cells can live whilst producing proteins willy nilly

3- The systems are designed



#8 MarkForbes

MarkForbes

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,294 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:South Africa
  • Age: 35
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • Waverley

Posted 27 May 2014 - 03:30 PM

You're welcome, Gilbo.

Irreducible complexity is a good subject too.

I would add that Werner Gitt's contribution to understanding information in a way that Shannon Information only deals with data is vital too.
 

 

That's correct, understanding what information means in this context and how it is different from data - is key to the debate. 
The following short film may help explaining it to friends:
https://archive.org/...ogrammingOfLife



#9 Adam Nagy

Adam Nagy

    Honorable Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,053 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 37
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

Posted 27 May 2014 - 04:08 PM

That's correct, understanding what information means in this context and how it is different from data - is key to the debate. 
The following short film may help explaining it to friends:
https://archive.org/...ogrammingOfLife

That is a great video. I've noticed that all protests against design always ignore these daunting issues by pretending information=data only and complexity=lots of stuff

#10 Adam Nagy

Adam Nagy

    Honorable Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,053 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 37
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

Posted 27 May 2014 - 04:13 PM

The signal cascades present in cellular systems are truly remarkable. The idea that instability is the thing 'maintained' by these cascades is really amazing. When organisms achieve actual 'stability', they're dead.

How long will it take before the godofthegaps chants start? ;)

#11 Zaccarias

Zaccarias

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 147 posts
  • Age: 33
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • PH

Posted 28 May 2014 - 01:02 AM

Thanks for the vid!



#12 gilbo12345

gilbo12345

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,006 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Completed BBiotech (Honours)

    Currently studying Masters of Teaching.

    Enjoys games of tactics and strategy.
  • Age: 25
  • (private)
  • Creationist
  • Australia

Posted 28 May 2014 - 05:23 AM

The signal cascades present in cellular systems are truly remarkable. The idea that instability is the thing 'maintained' by these cascades is really amazing. When organisms achieve actual 'stability', they're dead.

How long will it take before the godofthegaps chants start? wink.png

 

It shouldn't be long, that is if some evolutionists would like to post here :)

 

However if some were to, it would be prudent to work out that this is not a "God of the Gaps" argument, rather its an argument from what we do know, as well as the contradiction of natural processes.

 

We know that information requires a mind to create it, as well as to create the system that would recieve and act on said information.

 

Additionally the fact that natural selection would select against new traits or systems which are "evolving" demonstrates the contradiction, since if a selection advantage is required for natural selection to select, and a selection advantage will not occur due to a faulty unfinished system (or signal system), then how can natural selection be claimed to be the cause for the formation of new traits or systems since the progression of formation of said systems / traits defies the very process by which natural selection operates.



#13 macten

macten

    Bare Assertion Troll

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 324 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 39
  • no affiliation
  • Atheist
  • Nottingham, England

Posted 02 June 2014 - 06:49 AM

Two bad examples so far Gilbo.

 

 

 

We know that information requires a mind to create it, as well as to create the system that would recieve and act on said information.

 

I take it you are trying to push the notion that DNA contains ' information'?



#14 macten

macten

    Bare Assertion Troll

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 324 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 39
  • no affiliation
  • Atheist
  • Nottingham, England

Posted 02 June 2014 - 06:52 AM

 

 

Additionally the fact that natural selection would select against new traits or systems which are "evolving" demonstrates the contradiction, since if a selection advantage is required for natural selection to select, and a selection advantage will not occur due to a faulty unfinished system (or signal system), then how can natural selection be claimed to be the cause for the formation of new traits or systems since the progression of formation of said systems / traits defies the very process by which natural selection operates.

 

Just what is this 'faulty unfinished system' you talk of?

Are you assuming Mr Gilbo?



#15 Dig4gold

Dig4gold

    Banned

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,045 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 53
  • Judaism non-orthodox
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Raleigh, NC

Posted 02 June 2014 - 07:16 AM

macten: I take it you are trying to push the notion that DNA contains ' information'?


Notion? Try to explain DNA without using the word programming and if you can't then try to explain programming without using the word information. Simple!

#16 gilbo12345

gilbo12345

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,006 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Completed BBiotech (Honours)

    Currently studying Masters of Teaching.

    Enjoys games of tactics and strategy.
  • Age: 25
  • (private)
  • Creationist
  • Australia

Posted 02 June 2014 - 07:24 AM

 

Just what is this 'faulty unfinished system' you talk of?

Are you assuming Mr Gilbo?

 

The half-finished system that is still "evolving" surely you don't think that evolution occured instantaneously like magic do you? Darwin claimed it occured by small changes over time, yet such changes over time would leave the system unfinished and thus faulty...

 

 

Two bad examples so far Gilbo.

 

 

I take it you are trying to push the notion that DNA contains ' information'?

 

I and all other Biologists worth their salt...

 

You do realise that DNA contains the instructions / blueprints for the development, maintenance and reproduction of either a single cell... Or each specialised cell within a multi-cellular organism... Surely you're not attempting to claim that such instructions / blueprints are not information? Surely....

 

 

macten: I take it you are trying to push the notion that DNA contains ' information'?


Notion? Try to explain DNA without using the word programming and if you can't then try to explain programming without using the word information. Simple!

 

Thanks Dig, beat me to it smile.png It seems Mac forgot primary school Biology because they cover this in year 7.

 

But we'll give him the benefit of the doubt I guess he's been surrounded by 'DNA deniers' (evolutionists) for so long they've convinced him that there is no code / information / instruction / blueprints in DNA wink.png



#17 macten

macten

    Bare Assertion Troll

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 324 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 39
  • no affiliation
  • Atheist
  • Nottingham, England

Posted 02 June 2014 - 07:39 AM

macten: I take it you are trying to push the notion that DNA contains ' information'?


Notion? Try to explain DNA without using the word programming and if you can't then try to explain programming without using the word information. Simple!

 

Will I get a prize if I do?



#18 macten

macten

    Bare Assertion Troll

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 324 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 39
  • no affiliation
  • Atheist
  • Nottingham, England

Posted 02 June 2014 - 07:43 AM

 

The half-finished system that is still "evolving" surely you don't think that evolution occured instantaneously like magic do you? Darwin claimed it occured by small changes over time, yet such changes over time would leave the system unfinished and thus faulty...

 

 

It never stops,  every living system is in a state of change it will never be finished. Faulty?

No - I would say it works well enough. Life is still doing what it does isn't it?

I really do get the impression that you think evolution is a thinking process that knows what it wants to create and

has an end goal. Is that what you think Gilbo?



#19 macten

macten

    Bare Assertion Troll

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 324 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 39
  • no affiliation
  • Atheist
  • Nottingham, England

Posted 02 June 2014 - 08:07 AM

 

 

I and all other Biologists worth their salt...

 

You do realise that DNA contains the instructions / blueprints for the development, maintenance and reproduction of either a single cell... Or each specialised cell within a multi-cellular organism... Surely you're not attempting to claim that such instructions / blueprints are not information? Surely....

 

 

 

Thanks Dig, beat me to it smile.png It seems Mac forgot primary school Biology because they cover this in year 7.

 

But we'll give him the benefit of the doubt I guess he's been surrounded by 'DNA deniers' (evolutionists) for so long they've convinced him that there is no code / information / instruction / blueprints in DNA wink.png

 

  If you say DNA has instructions for anything it is

"make a protein with this sequence of amino acids" or "make an RNA with this sequence of nucleotides."  
In turn the RNA or protein may have structural, enzymatic, or regulatory roles in a cell.
That is it.
 
 
Gilbo - you are insisting on an interpretation of the word "information" that presumes intelligent agency.
That would bring us to another question of semantics, because
there are many different uses of that word, some of which do not support
your position. Biologists use it as a metaphor - It always seems to boil down to semantics when debating with creationists.


#20 Dig4gold

Dig4gold

    Banned

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,045 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 53
  • Judaism non-orthodox
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Raleigh, NC

Posted 02 June 2014 - 08:36 AM

macten: "make a protein with this sequence of amino acids" or "make an RNA with this sequence of nucleotides."
In turn the RNA or protein may have structural, enzymatic, or regulatory roles in a cell.
That is it.


Regulatory roles without information... Example?




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users