The more atheists try to prove that Intelligence has nothing to do with the rise of life, the more they show that Intelligence was absolutely required.
. Laws of nature (or biochemistry), which denote regular patterns, produce the opposite of specified complexity.
. The Chance hypothesis fails because there is simply not enough time nor resources in the whole universe since BB to have brought about the known outcome - specified complexity.
. DNA and RNA first scenarios don’t produce specified complexity.
Every model either presupposes specified complexity without explaining its origin, or simply moves the problem to another area without explaining its origin. Either way, the origin of specified complexity is ignored, sidestepped or purposely avoided - for good reason. Atheists know that to date, none of their hypothesis provides the Best Evidence for what we observe.
And then Hugo gives me examples of how scientists have shown how RNA replicates.
Good grief man! Each and every decision that the scientist makes is an Intelligent Design decision to either remove one by-product and not another or to empower one compound and not another. Each of these actions puts into the system huge amounts of specific information. Any success that these experiments may have, have been achieved by Intelligent deliberate and conscious actions of an Intelligent Mind.
The experiments themselves are clearly NOT simulations of actual events and are instead a clear indication of an Intelligent Agent working to bring about a desired outcome.
Computer Based Algorithms are probably the clearest case of Intelligent input. None of the experiments to date would have been possible without functional information being put into the system, information that simply would not have been there in the conditions atheists tell us existed at the primordial earth. Computer programs to simulate natural selection all have a target selection programmed in. There was / IS no such foresight in nature.
“Target selection” does not simulate natural processes.
Rather, it highlights the Intellectual powers of the computer programmers. Every computer algorithm is a testament to Intelligent Design.
Hugo specifically mentioned ribosyme replication.
. Intelligent Designers are the ones who enable self-replication to proceed.
. Intelligent Designers are the ones who select molecules that have a slightly enhanced ligase capacity.
. Intelligent Designers are the ones that preserve the optimal molecules.
. Intelligent Designers are the ones that enrich the molecules by repeated selection and amplification.
. Intelligent Designers are the ones who intervene before any of the other ways that polymerases perform.
. Intelligent Designers are the ones who anticipate the future function in a way that is not possible in nature.
. Intelligent Designers are the ones who choose RNA sequences knowing beforehand the required condition to bring about self-replication.
And then they say, "Look! Life could have arisen by natural means."
That is the atheist influence on science. True science, pure science, science uncontaminated by atheist bias could never make such a statement. Under the bigoted drive to eliminate Creator God, that is the only statement that is allowed.
I find that profoundly sad.
None of this foresight is present in nature.
Yet, this is what atheists are like. This is how they think.
Tuesday, May 18, 2010
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Lol, so arrogant AND ignorant again... you obviously did not watch the video I proposed, or read the article, and preferred to just attack some keywords you saw, pretending to know exactly what they mean... and more importantly, what they imply.
ReplyDeleteDon't even pretend you read the article, because I noticed after posting the link that you had to be registered to NewScientist to read it in full. So if you had been honest, you would have said: 'Hugo, sorry but I cannot read the article in full, can you provide me with another link?'
Or perhaps you are a subscriber yourself? That would be shocking news...
BTW, the research work you discard so quickly earned prof Szostak and his team a Nobel price... but I guess it's part of a big atheist conspiracy?
I said: "Specified complexity, as we know from uniform experience only appears in the presence of or at the direction of Intelligence that has designed that complexity, OR in DNA, RNA, and Proteins."
You disagree - So give me an example where this isn't the case.
The fist replicating MOLECULES did NOT need that pointless specified complexity you are arguing for. That's why there is nothing to reply to that. Simple molecules assemble themselves spontaneously under the right conditions. That's a fact you reject when tossing away any natural explanations for the origin of life.
You don't understand that information started to be useful AFTER the first replications took place. No information was needed for the replication to take place. You would understand that if you read a little bit about these parts of the subject you refuse to look at.
More on why specified complexity is pointless:
http://www.talkreason.org/articles/eandsdembski.pdf
Try to read it in full this time :-)
Great reply Hugo.
ReplyDeleteHere's another interesting article from newscientist.com...
http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20627573.900-selfstarter-life-got-going-all-on-its-own.html?
"Intelligent Designers are the ones who enable self-replication to proceed."
ReplyDeleteWell if thats all it takes to prove matters of gods.Then it makes humans,horses,lions,ants anything that can self-replicate whatever way it manages to,out to be a intelligent designer god
"Good grief man! Each and every decision that the scientist makes is an Intelligent Design decision to either remove one by-product and not another or to empower one compound and not another. Each of these actions puts into the system huge amounts of specific information. Any success that these experiments may have, have been achieved by Intelligent deliberate and conscious actions of an Intelligent Mind."
But Mak imagine the billions of years this planet existed for this evolution to happen, being a bit like having zillions and zillions of tickets in some lottery.You dont need many tickets to be winners, for the prize to stil end up paying.
Mak you make it sound like evolution is something that has to work with the first ticket thats been presented.
Thats not what evolution is about at all.Very very far from it.
Mak the simple reason scientists make a "decision to either remove one by-product and not another or to empower one compound and not another"
Is simply because they dont have the time to throw everything in a bucket and wait for another billion years to prove it can happen.
Mak you talk about all things like computers or cars or what ever taking intelligent design.Well thats correct ....But lets not forget there is still the evolution process involved in it,creating these things takes many trails and errors!, where quite often before having even one success,there is first off many failures!.
This is not so very much unlike the process of evolution.