Re: Why I believe in ID.

[kubedwheel]

The following are reasons why I believe in ID over evolution:

1. First Cause Argument- We know our universe had a beginning.  If you try to count from negative infinity to zero (zero representing the present) you would never reach it.  Science backs this up with the big bang theory.

Since our universe exists we know that something that already exists had to bring it into existence. The universe has a creator.

If this creator were a being like the universe, a being that exists in time, then this creator would have to be created by something else.  This tells us that the creator must be an eternal being that exists outside of time.

I believe in the big bang theory, I just think there has to be a banger.
   
2. Moral Argument- This argument states that moral laws are evidence for God’s existence.  The fact that we shouldn’t murder isn’t a fact about the world, it is a fact about how the world should be.  Nothing in our physical world makes moral facts true.  Moral facts are not descriptive, moral facts have the form of commands.

Commands can only exist when there is a commander.

Moral laws override everything else.  If someone morally ought to do something, then this over-rules any other consideration that might come into play.  Morality has the ultimate authority.  A command can only carry as much authority as the person who commands it, and since morality has more authority then any human or institution, God must be the commander.

3. Irreducible Complexity- Lehigh biochemist, Michael Behe introduced the concept of irreducible complexity. He defines it as “a single system that is necessarily composed of several well-matched, interacting parts that contribute to the basic function, and where the removal of any one of the parts causes the system to effectively cease functioning.”

 A great example of irreducible complexity is the bacterial flagellum.  The flagellum is similar to an outboard motor.  The machinery of the flagellum includes a rotor, a stator, O-rings, bushings, mounting disks, a drive shaft, a propeller, a hook joint for the propeller, and an acid-powered motor.  In addition, the flagellum requires coordinated interaction of roughly 30 proteins, which requires about 20 proteins to direct their assembly.  

The bacterial flagellum is not the work of an unguided natural process, but rather a creator.

4. Origin of Consciousness- Evolution can only explain the origin of traits that have survival value, so where did our consciousness come from?
   
5. Pre-Cambrian explosion- We know that the Cambrian explosion was an explosion of information.  Fossilized organisms found in Cambrian sediment support this.  Sponges that existed before the Cambrian explosion needed 5 types of cells.  Organisms that emerge during the Cambrian Explosion require at least 50 cell types.  In addition, many new specialized proteins would be required for these multiple cell types, which in turn would require new genetic information.  Evolution cannot account for this eruption of new information.

6. Argument from Design- Our universe is shockingly fine-tuned to support human life.  A few examples of this are the force of gravity, and the fundamental constants of nature, and the initial expansion of the big bang.  Had the rate of expansion been even slightly slowerâ€"one part in a million millionâ€"gravity would quickly force it to collapse on itself.  Had the rate of expansion been slightly fasterâ€"one part in a millionâ€"then stars and planets could not have formed.  I find it highly unlikely that the rate of the big bang expansion and other fine-tuned examples just happened by chance.  I believe that these perfect conditions can only be explained by a divine creator.

[Whitney]

Hi, welcome to the forum.  Please note that only points 3,4, and 5 have anything to do with evolution v ID.  Remember,  evolution is not a theory on how life started, it is about how life changed after it started.  I'd be glad to address your other points if you like, but for now I'm going to leave them alone since they shouldn't apply to why you believe in ID.

3.  The problem with Irreducible complexity is that, even if there is something we can't figure out how to make less complex, it is an argument from ignorance.  Just because we don't understand something doesn't mean a god did it.  Anyway, there doesn't appear to be a reason to consider the bacterial flagellum irreducibly complex now that we know more about it.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irreducibl ... y#Flagella  This is why we don't jump to assuming a god when we don't know the answer; guessing is poor science.

4.  You don't think being conscious of your surroundings and how you relate to your surroundings and other beings would have a survival value?  

5.  Why can't evolution account for the new life which evolved during the Cambrian explosion...it's not like it actually exploded.  It too about 70 or 80 million years to...er...explode.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cambrian_explosion

Anyway, that's my quick summary of why your problems with evolution have problems.  I'll let the more scientifically  minded members fill in the details...I'm more of a concepts person myself.  Also, feel free to search the forum for the many other threads covering evolution and ID/creationism....it comes up a lot.

[samiahurst]

Ooops, I almost thought the initial post was a troll. It seems I have a way to go to learn how to spot them properly...

[Whitney]

Ooops, I almost thought the initial post was a troll. It seems I have a way to go to learn how to spot them properly...

We try to give people the benefit of doubt even if what they have to say may be something we have come across multiple times.

[joeactor]

... Perhaps a diagram is needed:


OP: Please do a bit of research before re-posting the same drivel that has been refuted time and time again.
(multiple times on this forum alone)

Missed my nap... and I'm cranky   ,
JoeActor

[scott_hurst]

The following are reasons why I believe in ID over evolution:

1. First Cause Argument- We know our universe had a beginning.  If you try to count from negative infinity to zero (zero representing the present) you would never reach it.  Science backs this up with the big bang theory.

Pretty much gibberish.  You really need to have a much better understanding of our (humankinds) understanding of space and time before you argue on these things.  
1)  It is quite possible that our universe exists withing a large universe that may or may not have a beginning.
2)  Outside our universe (or before the big bang) the very concept of time may become meaningless.

Since our universe exists we know that something that already exists had to bring it into existence. The universe has a creator.

You simply have no way of knowing that.  Period.  That is purest unsubstantiated speculation.  You have absolutely no way to know judge that universe as a whole behaves as objects withing it behave.

If this creator were a being like the universe, a being that exists in time, then this creator would have to be created by something else.  This tells us that the creator must be an eternal being that exists outside of time.

More pure speculation. You are do nothing more than interjecting God in the abscence of knowledge.

I believe in the big bang theory, I just think there has to be a banger.

Good for you, you do it on absolutely zero evidence.

2. Moral Argument- This argument states that moral laws are evidence for God’s existence.  The fact that we shouldn’t murder isn’t a fact about the world, it is a fact about how the world should be.  Nothing in our physical world makes moral facts true.  Moral facts are not descriptive, moral facts have the form of commands.

What are these moral facts?  

I think it is a moral fact that slavery is evil. Do you agree?  If you do, please justify your answer using the bible.

Why is it that I have never ever heard a Christian hold up story of Lott offering his daughters to the crowd come to rape the angels as an example of goodness in the bible? Gen 19:5
Or the plethora of other horrendous stories that litter old testament and new?  I am always offered the inspriational bits.

Perhaps Christians can pick them out the same as me because they knew what was moral before cracking open the Bible.

Commands can only exist when there is a commander.

blah blah blah

Moral laws override everything else.  If someone morally ought to do something, then this over-rules any other consideration that might come into play.  Morality has the ultimate authority.  A command can only carry as much authority as the person who commands it, and since morality has more authority then any human or institution, God must be the commander.

The Bible is a TERRIBLE place to get your morals.  If you think otherwise, you really haven't considered any other sources.  I've got a long list if you are interested.

3. Irreducible Complexity- Lehigh biochemist, Michael Behe introduced the concept of irreducible complexity. He defines it as “a single system that is necessarily composed of several well-matched, interacting parts that contribute to the basic function, and where the removal of any one of the parts causes the system to effectively cease functioning.”

Wow, your first item that has ANYTHING to do with evolution vs ID.

Behe is a fool.  Every item that he has held up as irreducibly complex simply is not.  They've been checked, every one.  

A great example of irreducible complexity is the bacterial flagellum.  The flagellum is similar to an outboard motor.  The machinery of the flagellum includes a rotor, a stator, O-rings, bushings, mounting disks, a drive shaft, a propeller, a hook joint for the propeller, and an acid-powered motor.  In addition, the flagellum requires coordinated interaction of roughly 30 proteins, which requires about 20 proteins to direct their assembly.  

The bacterial flagellum is not the work of an unguided natural process, but rather a creator.

Actually, it's a terrible example.  It has been explained many times.
The flagellum is a derivative of bacterial excretory machinery.  For instance, it shares almost all of its genes and proteins with 'syringe' that the plague bacteria uses to inject toxin into other cells.
I doubt even Behe thinks a flagellum is IC any more. I am uncertain if he still thinks anything is IC anymore.  Your arguements are years out of date.

The biggest fallacy of IC is thinking that if you take you one part away it is no longer useful.  It may not be useful as, say a flagellum anymore, but it may be useful in some other role.
In existance today, there are a whole line of bacteria features that share 90%, 75%, 50%, etc, etc of the proteins and genes with the flagellum.  They're all useful.

4. Origin of Consciousness- Evolution can only explain the origin of traits that have survival value, so where did our consciousness come from?

You are arguing that conciousness has no survival value?  Wow, that's a new one.

5. Pre-Cambrian explosion- We know that the Cambrian explosion was an explosion of information.  Fossilized organisms found in Cambrian sediment support this.  Sponges that existed before the Cambrian explosion needed 5 types of cells.  Organisms that emerge during the Cambrian Explosion require at least 50 cell types.  In addition, many new specialized proteins would be required for these multiple cell types, which in turn would require new genetic information.  Evolution cannot account for this eruption of new information.

The Cambrian explosion lasted millions of years... We even know what likely set it off.
A billion or so years before when blue/green algea came on the scene the first free oxygen was put into the environment.  Eukyotic multi-cell life appeared soon after.
Still, for a long time, there was not much free oxygen.  The problem? There was a ton of iron disolved in the oceans.  It took until the time of the Cambrian explosion to 'rust' all that iron out of the oceans.  (Thus laying down our current iron ore deposits).  When the iron was exhausted, free oxygen level jumped enormously.  This is what finally allowed for larger, more complex, multicellular organisms to come on the scene.  And with no competition and free niches everywhere, many new body plans (relatively) rapidly appeared.
We know that

6. Argument from Design- Our universe is shockingly fine-tuned to support human life.  A few examples of this are the force of gravity, and the fundamental constants of nature, and the initial expansion of the big bang.  Had the rate of expansion been even slightly slowerâ€"one part in a million millionâ€"gravity would quickly force it to collapse on itself.  Had the rate of expansion been slightly fasterâ€"one part in a millionâ€"then stars and planets could not have formed.  I find it highly unlikely that the rate of the big bang expansion and other fine-tuned examples just happened by chance.  I believe that these perfect conditions can only be explained by a divine creator.

[/quote]
Probably the weekest arguement in existance.  If the universe was not favorable for life we would not be here to contempate the difference.  Our existance requires it.  It proves not a thing.

It also ignores the fact that 99.9999999999999999 (and keep going for a while) percent of the universe (by volume) is utterly and completely hostile to life.
It's been said that universe really appears to be finely tuned to generate black holes and as a side effect, there are a few miniscule islands suitable for life.

You might enjoy reading the transcript of the Dover trial.  See how huge ID fails in court as science in front of a conservatie, Christian judge appointed by Bush.

[Tanker]

You know we get so many hit and run posters I'm not responding untill i know the OP is coming back.

[curiosityandthecat]

Oh, boy. Here we go again.

 

Are we allowing guest accounts now if they say they're not bots?

[Whitney]

You know we get so many hit and run posters I'm not responding untill i know the OP is coming back.

Maybe they run because they don't like that the responses make sense?

[Tanker]

You know we get so many hit and run posters I'm not responding untill i know the OP is coming back.

Maybe they run because they don't like that the responses make sense?

Something my old platoon sargent used to say (in sarcastic jest) was "Why do you have confuse the answers with you're facts and logic." I always hear his voice when I argue with creationists. (FYI he was an atheist too he would just make that respose when I made a good point in whatever conversation we we having)

[Squid]

The following are reasons why I believe in ID over evolution:

1. First Cause Argument- We know our universe had a beginning.  If you try to count from negative infinity to zero (zero representing the present) you would never reach it.  Science backs this up with the big bang theory.

Since our universe exists we know that something that already exists had to bring it into existence. The universe has a creator.

If this creator were a being like the universe, a being that exists in time, then this creator would have to be created by something else.  This tells us that the creator must be an eternal being that exists outside of time.

I believe in the big bang theory, I just think there has to be a banger.
   
2. Moral Argument- This argument states that moral laws are evidence for God’s existence.  The fact that we shouldn’t murder isn’t a fact about the world, it is a fact about how the world should be.  Nothing in our physical world makes moral facts true.  Moral facts are not descriptive, moral facts have the form of commands.

Commands can only exist when there is a commander.

Moral laws override everything else.  If someone morally ought to do something, then this over-rules any other consideration that might come into play.  Morality has the ultimate authority.  A command can only carry as much authority as the person who commands it, and since morality has more authority then any human or institution, God must be the commander.

3. Irreducible Complexity- Lehigh biochemist, Michael Behe introduced the concept of irreducible complexity. He defines it as “a single system that is necessarily composed of several well-matched, interacting parts that contribute to the basic function, and where the removal of any one of the parts causes the system to effectively cease functioning.”

 A great example of irreducible complexity is the bacterial flagellum.  The flagellum is similar to an outboard motor.  The machinery of the flagellum includes a rotor, a stator, O-rings, bushings, mounting disks, a drive shaft, a propeller, a hook joint for the propeller, and an acid-powered motor.  In addition, the flagellum requires coordinated interaction of roughly 30 proteins, which requires about 20 proteins to direct their assembly.  

The bacterial flagellum is not the work of an unguided natural process, but rather a creator.

4. Origin of Consciousness- Evolution can only explain the origin of traits that have survival value, so where did our consciousness come from?
   
5. Pre-Cambrian explosion- We know that the Cambrian explosion was an explosion of information.  Fossilized organisms found in Cambrian sediment support this.  Sponges that existed before the Cambrian explosion needed 5 types of cells.  Organisms that emerge during the Cambrian Explosion require at least 50 cell types.  In addition, many new specialized proteins would be required for these multiple cell types, which in turn would require new genetic information.  Evolution cannot account for this eruption of new information.

6. Argument from Design- Our universe is shockingly fine-tuned to support human life.  A few examples of this are the force of gravity, and the fundamental constants of nature, and the initial expansion of the big bang.  Had the rate of expansion been even slightly slowerâ€"one part in a million millionâ€"gravity would quickly force it to collapse on itself.  Had the rate of expansion been slightly fasterâ€"one part in a millionâ€"then stars and planets could not have formed.  I find it highly unlikely that the rate of the big bang expansion and other fine-tuned examples just happened by chance.  I believe that these perfect conditions can only be explained by a divine creator.

I would suggest you research these examples of "support" further because you seem to not have accurate information.  For example, your information on the Pre-Cambrian fauna paints a very inaccurate picture.  And if I see the words "genetic" and "no new information" in any paragraph again I'm going to slap somebody with the entire 4 volume set of the Encyclopedia of Genetics.

I would also suggest you try doing a search with these terms on this very board for past posts where these items have been addressed ad nauseum by myself and many others on this board.  Maybe then you will see where the err in ID is.

[Whitney]

FYI kubedwheel has logged in without responding, so you might not want to waste any time posting anything more unless you wish to do so for the sake of lurkers who might benefit from the information or if you just feel like it.

[Squid]

FYI kubedwheel has logged in without responding, so you might not want to waste any time posting anything more unless you wish to do so for the sake of lurkers who might benefit from the information or if you just feel like it.

I am so tempted to tackle those items of "support" with a vengeance but I have to get up early and move into my new house in SA.  And unfortunately I won't have interwebs until Tuesday of next week...but I may pull a Zombie Jesus and resurrect the thread with all sorts of nifty citations and whatnot ...if I can get time away from writing my monster of a thesis - who knew you could write that much about stressed out smokers and their spit?

[kubedwheel]

Thanks for the fast respond time, sorry it is taking me so long.

Anyway, there doesn't appear to be a reason to consider the bacterial flagellum irreducibly complex now that we know more about it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irreducibl ... y#Flagella

The TTSS could be an indirect step in the evolution of bacterial flagellum, however, a detailed evolutionary path is required from the TTSS to the flagellum to explain the flagellum’s origin.  And such a detailed path would presuppose that we know how many intermediate systems between the TTSS and the flagellum exist, systems whose functions are neither that of a TTSS nor that of a flagellum.  The bottom line is the bacterial flagellum needs roughly 30 more proteins than exist in the TTSS.

The problem with Irreducible complexity is that, even if there is something we can't figure out how to make less complex, it is an argument from ignorance. Just because we don't understand something doesn't mean a god did it.

ID is not an argument of ignorance.  Everyone is ignorant of how complex biological systems are brought about by evolution.  I know intelligence is capable of bringing about such systems, so I infer on what I know rather than what I don’t.

You don't think being conscious of your surroundings and how you relate to your surroundings and other beings would have a survival value?

The process of natural selection selects organisms for survival based solely on their behavior. An organism that behaves as we behave but doesn’t have the attendant mental states that we have will have just as much survival value as we do. Mentality is not required for behavior, and nothing more than behavior is needed for survival, so there isn’t survival value to having mental states.

[kubedwheel]

Pretty much gibberish. You really need to have a much better understanding of our (humankinds) understanding of space and time before you argue on these things.
1) It is quite possible that our universe exists withing a large universe that may or may not have a beginning.
2) Outside our universe (or before the big bang) the very concept of time may become meaningless.

Your trying to refute my argument with speculation.  You have zero evidence.  A divine creator is a plausible explanation for the origin of the universe based on what I know.  Instead of flamming my post you should post a more plausible explanation of how our universe came into existence.