'Design vs. Chance' by PZ Myers, AAI 2009
Вставка
- Опубліковано 6 вер 2024
- PZ Myers' lecture at the Atheist Alliance International 2009 conference in Burbank, CA. Watch this UA-cam channel for many more talks from the conference.
Download Quicktime (720p HD):
c0116791.cdn.cl...
Produced by The Richard Dawkins Foundation and R. Elisabeth Cornwell
Filmed and Edited by
Josh Timonen
AtheistAlliance...
RichardDawkinsF...
scienceblogs.co...
"Metaphors are useful for getting across basic concepts to people but they are not the foundation of a strong logical argument"
I love that sentence.
I met him in melbourne. One of the best days of my life.
When he talks about abandoning the faith at 37:23, I really could relate to that because I felt lied to by my pastors at my church which was one of the many realizations I came to, and eventually lead me to my own atheism.
@intelligent design: do the math ... the only science that is true the rest are theory from reverse engineering ! There ain't a name for the number of the odds of all the necessary occurrences which start life to occur by chance. If it was science could create LIFE every day. But cannot without a STATER KIT FROM GOD!!! or correct me please. Respect
Ever notice how Creationists never think their gods were "created by chance?"
Or the people who argue that something is so complex it must've been created, then argue their creator is infinitely more complex than that, but in the same note say he wasn't created.
"There's beer out there!" - PZ Myers, visionary
One thing to keep in mind when listening to or dealing with the "scientific" figureheads of the Discovery Institute is that what they're saying isn't ignorance, it's almost always abject dishonesty. They're fully aware of the countless studies, experiments, papers, and other examples that disprove most of their claims.
I'd never seen P.Z. Myers speak before. Very impressive. Teach basic philosophy and critical thinking in schools. I agree completely.
@Myers . Let's start at the very beginning (tube froze you on my unit at 22:17 so maybe you covered this). We all come from an egg CELL,YES? That egg cell that contains the instructions (lungs,liver,heart,etc eventually into (under just the needed atmosphere and nourishment for 9 months,) bingo a child. From a single egg cell. Now from personal experience I wasn't born with knowledge I have had to aquire it. How did that single cell aquire it's blueprints if it was floating around in a puddle for 9 months trying to be a human. Or something.
@@tommerphy1286 Humans don't have blueprints.
@@rembrandt972ify don't tell that to anyone who has a medical practice
@@tommerphy1286 They already know.
@@rembrandt972ify how would YOU categorize an illustration of the different systems of the human body?
This man really helped me get over "complexity" argument....
Unfortunately he missed out the key part of the argument, funny that. The ID proponents do not speak of complexity but specified complexity. DNA is highly complex but it’s also specified and the specificity is the key component that points to design. The coding is functional information (directing the building of proteins etc) not just a complex assortment of base pairs. In the natural world, there may be various examples of complex arrangements such as the drift wood wall but there is absolutely no example of specified complexity including information that happened by chance. Think of a drift wood wall, you may be lucky to find a few random letters such as an A or a H that formed by pure luck in the pile but if you found them arranged in a sentence such as “this drift wood wall happened by chance”, you would absolutely be right to conclude that a human had arranged the drift wood. That’s the difference between complexity (the drift wood wall) and specified complexity (the wall arranged to convey information). I’m currently reading Stephen Myers book, Signature in the Cell. He repeatedly refers to the specified complexity found in cells and never just the complexity. You should ask yourself why would PZ Myers stop short of fully explaining their reasoning behind the complexity found in cells. Particularly as he is the one implying that it’s the ID proponents that are dishonest. Essentially he is attacking a straw man. If he’s so right and they’re so wrong, why would he need to straw man them? Peace.
@@timid3000 its always like that.. "not only complexity complexity complexity, also other complexity complexity complexity, they can't be random, its too crazy, therefore ID"
@@capjus he gave you a legit argument and you threw a 5 year old tantrum
@@purpose6113 specificness and beautiful arrangeness can happen out of mess and complexity. So what?
@@capjus lol you need to work on your reading comprehension skills, bud. He said that it's complexity in a way that it conveys information. This might come as a shocker to you, but this reality is made of information. This means that it's made of symbolism, and that symbolism conveys meaning. This isn't woo stuff, it's real physics.
Let me recomend you a mini-documentary called "What is reality?" by a channel called Quantum Gravity Research
I've learned tremendously from watching this video.
The key feature of design is simplicity, not complexity
perfect way to end a lecture!
"theres' beer out there!!
yaaaaaa
science!
(continued) Regarding the young man's question about humans evolving vs. dogs evolving. "Micro-evolution" means minor changes within a species (like humans becoming taller or changing skin color through time) while "macro-evolution" means evolving to another species (like a tiger evolving into a lion). That humans evolved from a gorilla-like animal (macro-evolution) is about as likely as tigers evolving into lions or vice versa.
There is no argument between science and religion,or was over when they started fitting lightening conductors to church steeples!
I love that he says at 32:00, the real heroes of science education have to be kindegarten, 1st & 2nd grade teachers.
Complexity is simply a long long chain of many many simple events piled onto one other through time.
Myers stupidly (and I suspect deliberately) omits a key nuance in the ID argument. It's not just about "complexity" as Myers alleges. The ID argument clearly provides a nuance Myers fails to mention, aka SPECIFIED complexity! See my comment for more on this....
@algadykhalifa The purpose of the driftwood example was to show that nature produces chaotic and random needlessly complex things, and that the hallmark of good design is simplicity, not complexity like the ID proponents claim.
Thanks for uploading. Really interesting!
He's most famous for his blog, Pharyngula, if you didnt know that already. Very interesting stuff, certainly worth reading.
i love his voice... can listen to him all day :)
Racism certainly didn't originate with Osborn (or with evolutionary theory), but he tried to give scientific-sounding reasons for deep racial divides.
Jim Crow segregation laws were already in effect in the American South. Thanks to the eugenics movement, those laws were supplemented with immigration quotas, asylum admissions, incarcerations and forced sterilizations.
I don't know what's funnier, the answer of Myers or the creationist whining down there, lol...
This genius (PZ Myers) said : "Humans are fish." Don't believe me? Go check out this brilliant comment on www.evolutionvsgod.com at 6:27.... "Nearer my Cod to thee....."
@@horaceball5418 as far as cladistics are concerned we are fish
Please answer this question....if some DNA were sent to a crime lab....would the lab be able to declare "It is from a fish" or "It is from a human"? If so, how?
@@horaceball5418 from a human. Because we don't have clownfish or flounder dna. Pretty easy to distinguish
EXACTLY! Trust genetics and biochemistry more than you trust man made cladistic drawings based upon imagination.
It was in this context that I stated it can be likened to the four points of the compass.
Since HT was saying that Isaiah believed the earth had corners I used the compass terminology to clear that up.
Yes there is some disagreement on whether Isaiah wrote the whole book, but the evidence for a single author outweighs the evidence for more than one writers of the book.
p.z. myers thinks people are fish, hahaha
Actually, we all start off as fish. You looked like something that resembled a fish in your mother's womb before evolving into a human baby. Study embryology instead of listening to charlatans that try to dupe you.
Better fish than mud and ribs....
13:12
An interesting point that is often overlooked. Why, given that intelligent agency produces simple solutions to complex problems, would an often overly complex design of life (unnecessary errors and missed shortcuts) be the necessary result of such an agency? Especially considering that such an agency is the supposed creator of all things, and that less than 1% of all species that have ever existed, exist today.
There is an occasional opinion offered that an early statement of a spherical earth occurs in the 8th century BC, in Isaiah 40:22 "It is he that sitteth upon the circle of the earth...". There are problems with this claim, the most obvious being that the text says "circle", not "sphere". The Hebrew word translated as "circle" is generally recognized as referring to a plane figure, perhaps the horizon, or possibly the vault of the heavens.
In the 21st century, a better understanding of the human genome has shown that greater divisions exist within races than between them, a finding that would probably have amazed - if not enraged - Henry Fairfield Osborn.
I also did not claim that the compass was in existence at the time of Isaiah but that his use of four corners indicated a sense of direction as with the use of the term after the compass was invented and not that he thought the earth was flat.
The hebrew word translated circle does indicate that he knew the earth was round as he could have easily said that God sits above the square of the earth.
@jib1000 Computer viruses are designed. Cameras are designed (and let's see them focus instantaneously when focusing on something immediately close and then across the room), All your examples are designed, AND borrow from the designs found in nature in order to design them. However, I am grateful for you arguing my point for me.
Darwin's most extensive discussion of human race was put forward in his 1871 book The Descent of Man. This book has been greatly misused by opponents of Darwin because in The Descent of Man Darwin assesses all of the various ideas about race that existed at the time, presenting many ideas of other people, which he later goes on to refute. In The Descent of Man Darwin takes questions such as "Are people composed of different species?" and he puts forwards all of the arguments for each position.
There is considerable debate about the dating of the text; one widely accepted critical hypothesis suggests that much if not most of the text was not written in the 8th century BC.Tradition ascribes the Book of Isaiah to a single author, Isaiah himself.
It is a matter of common agreement among scholars that a division occurs at the end of chapter 39 and that subsequent portions were written by one or more additional authors.
Coincidentally that passage referring to the circle...chapter 40!
If a desired result is to be manipulated, then an end result has to be computated, the desired result cannot be acheived sequentially, but all the components have to be applied simultaenously in ordered to acheive the projected results, this is scientifically tenable....
God, the limbs I'd give to have PZ as my Bio professor.
this was a very good way to get your point across.
A secondary issue is that this text is part of Deutero-Isaiah, often ascribed to the 6th century BC (and thus roughly contemporaneous with Pythagoras).
So you can forget about using Isiah 40:22 Pseudo ;)
To be honest, I heard Kent Hovind use it in one of his debates. The doctor replied saying it doesn't apple when it has large amounts of energy or something like that. Hovind rebuted it using explosions.
I havn't study bio or chem for a long time. I studied entropy as a senior in highschool.
The process is repeated until an acceptably fit solution is found.
Each member of each generation is subject to a small random mutation, to introduce a probabilistic driver into the population. Mutations that are harmful leave the solutions in which they occur at risk of being reaped according to the result of the fitness function.
Mutations that work, are preserved for subsequent generations in the configuration of the genome describing the solution in which they occur.
The laws of thermodynamics say that in a closed system, the enrgy levels equalize over time. Which they do. That does not exclude complexity and high order. High order is possible if the overall system gains disorder. I can quote the laws if you want. The point is that chemics, which evoltion genetics etc. are based on, can only be possbible under the law of thermodynamics. The laws of thermodynmaics are compulsory for evolution.
@vachief Well yeah because a uniformed brick is placed beside another, and above/below another so the layers overlap, filling the gaps with cement. It's a very simple principle when compared to interlocking, uniquely shaped and weighted trees being thrown onto each other over time and ending up looking like a large haystack. A wall is made up of 180 and 90 degree angles and horizontal and vertical lines, while the driftwood stack probably doesn't contain two angles or lines that are the same.
Yes, he is. A brick wall is constructed of linear rows of bricks, all of a standard size, stacked on top of each other, which is incredibly simple from a design standpoint. The driftwood wall, on the other hand, consists of a multitude of components of different sizes, shapes, and consistencies arranged in non-repeating sequences, which is much more complex. Complexity is actually NOT the goal or result of order, simplicity is.
@TheIceThorn shortening it: complexity is made from some simple things combined; design =/= complex cause it's create something with a purpose, a stone axe is designed but it's not something complex for example. Design do not needs or means complexity they're different things.
At 12:40 he show's two walls that are both complex. What he fails miserably at doing is understanding that there are different forms of complexity. The wall on the left made of driftwood(which isn't even a wall) can be classified as disorganized complexity while the wall on the right exhibits organized complexity.
Order, structure and harmony are far better examples of design than complexity anyway, and those things DON'T occur by mere chance. By the way I'm not arguing for ID/creationism.
@ImpressiveWebs I never said it was a "complex work of art", I said it was a complex object, which is a value neutral term. You're changing the argument from "is X more complex than Y?" to "why would anyone want to reproduce Y since I see no use for Y?" which is not the point. The argument really is over if you can't stay on topic, so: can you address the actual argument or not?
@jib1000 "The fact that you don't notice it doesn't mean it isn't there." Ok, agreed; you can run it into the ground, but I did clarify that what I was referring to was only the perception of, and not the actual timing. Even if all the things you've said about perceived flaws in designed things is true, the point i made, even the instantaneous part (considering how I was using the word), is still valid.
@pseudosaur text says "circle", not "sphere". The Hebrew word translated as "circle" is generally recognized as referring to a plane figure, perhaps the horizon, or possibly the vault of the heavens.
When John Thomas Scopes was tried for teaching evolution in Dayton, Tenn. in 1925, Osborn played a substantial but complicated role in the defense. Scopes's supporters frequently turned to Osborn for information, and Osborn worked furiously to demonstrate that evolution and religion could peacefully cohabitate. But rather than making the "non-overlapping magesteria" argument that Stephen Jay Gould would make decades later, Osborn infused his interpretation of evolution with religious conviction.
And no, a circle is usually used for a flat surface, a sphere would indicate the idea of the earth being round. I think my earlier quote was quite clear.
And since you now resort to suggesting, contrary to historian's views ,that Isaiah who lived around 800 BCE also wrote the book Isaiah 200 years or so later, and do not supply the other passages, should I presume there actually are none?
Trees and bushes only grow in certain areas, on certain kinds of soil, with enough light and water. That is not haphazard.
Animals do not roam about chaotically. They hunt for food, and are part of a very complex food chain that is not in any way random.
And if you look closely at the definition of "complex" you'll see that the driftwood does not qualify. Notice the examples given: a "highway system", and "machinery", both of which cannot happen by chance occurence, only by intelligent design.
I'm not well versed in this field, that I admit. But what I do know is that energy and heat is a theory used in order to make an exception to the laws of entropy. Entropy is a fact, saying that entropy doesn't apply when including energy and heat is a theory.
The Ensatina salamander is a ring species. The species grouping forms a U shape around the mountains, & though interbreeding can happen between each of the 19 populations around the U, the E. Eschscholtzii subspecies on the western end of the horseshoe cannot interbreed with the E. Klauberi on the eastern end. So it is an example of incipient speciation, & provides an illustration of "nearly all stages in a speciation process" (Dobzhansky,1958)
ring species is a connected series of neighboring populations that can interbreed with relatively closely related populations, but for which there exist at least two "end" populations in the series that are too distantly related to interbreed.
A can breed with B
B can breed with C
C can breed with D
A can NOT breed with D
If populations B & C were eradicated you'd call A & D different species
So why is the brick wall less complex than the random drift wood on the beach?
Gotta love a biologist who maintains a healthy respect for the evidence of beer!
@christianthinker
1) technically the universe has a relative beginning, however there's no reason to think that the universe was finely tuned, in order to state that you'd have to know how universes are made or formed, which is difficult in a sample size of one known and not knowing how it's formed.
2) Morals differ by culture and how one feels about it is affected by genes, this is why there's such things as psychotic killers that get a feeling like going out on a first date when killing (cont)
Amazing lecture, Dr. Myers!!!
@jib1000 "a human eye can't do anything INSTANTANEOUSLY." For all intents and practical purposes it is instantaneous because there is no noticing the passing of any time when we refocus on something else; it is to that that i was referring, not to the actual timing.
(cont) "It would seem likely however that a form of chemical natural selection took place to 'create' living organisms" I'm curious, based on what experiment?
Humans have the tendency to see order and meaning even in the absence of order and meaning. This evolved quirk has been confirmed many times and something tells me that it wont go away that easily.
« Just pointing out an error »
Ah. The illustrations could be younger, but even before it was universally known that cells formed the basic unit of living organisms (early 19th century), the internal structures of the cell had already been seen (late 17th century). So while it was not known what particular effect chromosomes had on the cell as a whole, it was known that they were there.
While consciousness expresses itself through matter and thus there is a correlation between consciousness and the brain, correlation is not causation. Such correlation is a given, while causation is another thing altogether. And if there is a causal relationship between matter and consciousness, it is more reasonable to conclude that consciousness is the causal agent.
As man advances in civilisation, and small tribes are united into larger communities, the simplest reason would tell each individual that he ought to extend his social instincts and sympathies to all the members of the same nation, though personally unknown to him. This point being once reached, there is only an artificial barrier to prevent his sympathies extending to the men of all nations and races.
Charles Darwin; The Descent of Man, 1871
Thank you for explaining it better.
@1tabligh Some questions for you: 1) Are you certain there is a god? 2) What evidence, besides anecdotal, can you bring towards this claim? 3) Do you have a solid grounding in information theory and how it pertains to the development of complexity? 4) You assert that Islam first requires that one believes in god and then one is to seek out the religion that best exemplifies such a belief. Q: Are/Were your parents Muslim? 5) How did you get so lucky to be born into the correct religion?
@HolyRevelation
i don't know about statistical processes, but as i understood it, new information is regularly generated in evolution, whenever a novel mutation or gene duplication arises.
examples of new traits have been observed for instance in recent years, such as nylon-eating bacteria, which developed enzymes to efficiently digest a material that never existed before the modern era.
Incidentally, GAs are used on Von Neumann architecture cpus, which puts the process at a serious disadvantage with respect to natural evolution. Essentially, you have a fundamentally parallel algorithm running on a cpu capable of maintaining a small number of threads of execution by virtue of its design. Nature, on the other hand, is massively parallel, at least from our standpoint.
But the different parts that make up the driftwood pile can be in virtually any order, and it will still be a pile of nothing. Sure, it might have certain inconsistencies, as tiggster13 pointed out, but it's still a pile of nothing. Whereas, bushes and trees have certain processes in place that cannot be adjusted or interrupted, to keep them healthy and growing.
What's interesting is that each individual piece of driftwood is enough to disprove natural selection. But that's another story.
Such people have generally visited at the houses of the upper classes, where the domestic slaves are usually well treated, and they have not, like myself, lived amongst the lower classes. Such inquirers will ask slaves about their condition; they forget that the slave must indeed be dull, who does not calculate on the chance of his answer reaching his master's ears.
--The Voyage of the Beagle; Charles Darwin, 1839
Love his talks 👍
@kicknotes The difference, and the reason it is not a double standard, is that the theist answering the question of theology must reply "We just can't know." There is no means by which the answers to those questions may be discovered, which strongly suggests that they are nonsensical questions to begin with.
When a scientist or science enthusiast answers the question about the origin of life, the answer is "We don't know, but we have the ability to find out."
Chance implies lack of intention behind the whole thing (life).
Design implies intention for everything that is.
Thats what the whole debate is about - ideology, point of view.
Please use your free will to decide whats better for you and the people around you.
100% RIGHT! We have everything we need to bring down the creation argument on the 'larger' levels. Although, the direction that is now being pursued by creation lobbyist is the area of 'Micro-Biology', were still in the development of truly understanding where and how these 'little machines' (as they would like to call it) came about.
I'm reading the 'Darwin's Black Box' by Micheal Behe... and although it totally misses the point, it does show we have yet to uncover the essentials of life. (:
@iliveon cont.....Did the new species gain some new or novel genetic information or did it lose genetic information which gave it a functional advantage? If so what is that functional advantage? The poodle had a common ancestor which was a wolf
To remove the bias the question should be rephrased, “Is there a biological make up to consciousness?” The simple answer then is “No,” both intuitively and logically.
Scientifically speaking, observable evidence leads us to assume that there is nothing in matter like experience.
Atoms do not produce experience. Experience does not come from non-experience. But it is experience that consciousness is all about.
If we read the preceeding verse to the one in question we see that Isaiah writes about God gathering the people from the countries in proximity to where he's talking about thus we conclude that Isaiah is speaking geographically.
The next verse(the one in question)he elaborates by saying that God will gather the people from the four corners of the earth, no reason to believe that he's no longer speaking geographically as that would be out of context.
@vachief
Please answer Shyhalu's question:
Where, in Proverbs, did Jesus condemn slavery?
Chapter and Verse
@Aanthanur Are you saying that a thunderbolt happens because of mere chance?
Yeah... that point was already met thank you very much!
I wasn't making a stand for creationism when I made the first comment, although it does seem that some people took it that way. I took Biology 101 (which was an introductory class) in college and failed it miserably! It goes to show that it requires a strenuous amount of work to get the core concepts down. Reading science literature is what I do pass on the time... I really want to get my hands on 'The Greatest Show on Earth', no1 has it.
DNA inside the cell is a sophisticated information storage medium which contains compressed, embedded, overlapping, and interdependent specified information. DNA stores and retrieves information by utilizing algorithms which conforms to linguistics law.
If you think "Specified Complexity" happens by chance, think again. There is no known law of nature, no known process and no known sequence of events which can cause information to originate by itself in matter.
If one single brick is off by just inches, it the entire wall may be compromised. But with the driftwood, it doesn't matter, because it's random junk placed in no specific order. In the brick wall, EVERY brick has a purpose, because if one is missing, the wall ceases to be a wall, but is instead only 99% of one. The driftwood is not complex, is not designed, thus is just random junk, which the universe does not produce. The universe produces beautiful, complete brick walls, not random driftwood.
@nextghost
...creatures I speak of required a designer(s) to set the initial conditions which allowed evolution to take over and take place. After-all the circuit didn't just come about and then evolve all on it's own now did it? ;)
Last time i checked driftwood walls can only form in very certain conditions as well. They only happen when there is a shore, and there is a wide variety of debris to be accumulated. Sounds just as non-haphazard as bushes and trees.
The evidence being: the style of the authorship is the same, separate sources of the book of Isaiah among the dead sea scrolls indicate that scribes familiar with his style saw no descrepancies therein thus ascribed full authorship to one writer Isaiah.
Considerable evidence since dual authorship would indicate about 200 years between when Isaiah wrote 1-39 and when a 2nd writer would have completed the book after the babylonian conquest.
@ClumsyRoot As for mentioning Flew, theres only a five hundred word limit. The first to change his mind was Fred Hoyle and this was long before the phrase Intelligent Design was even popular. Others to follow were Wilder Smith, Dean Kenyon, Charles Thaxton, John Sanford, Michael Behe, Michael Denton, Scott Minnich,.....
1 is a symbol, numbers are symbols. You can see it as
0=a-b
where a is energy and is b*(-1)
and b is antienergy (space) or a*(-1)
zero point singoularity means that energy and space are extremely compressed. No more, no less. This is the reason of the because i didn't talked about "matter". Matter is a form of energy in first place and it exists if the higgs field exists and to exist the higgs field energy must not be so much compressed as a zero point singoularity.
@HonestMan395 "Actually. Abiogenesis, which is the creation of life from in-organic chemicals is on the verge of being performed."
And there's already been RNA produced in the lab through this method in 2009 out of University of Manchester.
I go to the University of Minnesota Morris and PZ is not the village atheist. There's a huge atheist population on campus, the town is super conservative though. Pretty much everything is closed on Sunday.
@Kingfillins The elements? Meyers does not talk about elements (unless you mean the elements of the cell). That is beside the fact anyway, as what he is getting at is that an ex post facto emergent "purpose" (the complex wall of wood blocking easy access to the beach) of random behavior does not prove design. In fact, he goes further, pointing out that things that are actually designed are minimally complex to achieve their designed purpose, not needlessly complex, like the machinery or life.
@christianthinker
He stated it was begging the question which is related to circular logic, where the conclusion is assumed in the premise. IE "complexity can only be created by design" is something that should have to be demonstrated rather than assumed. I should add that if we assumed this was true then the far more complex, super intelligent, super powerful designer must clearly have a designer by the same reasoning.
@christianthinker
It is however begging the question and it wasn't "throwing down an atheistic strawman" whatever that means, but it was addressing points that you said in your statement and responding that the "logic" of intelligent design is simply filled with logical fallacies such as begging the question, argument from ignorance and special pleading just for a start.
@vachief
The Hellenistic culture, of which Greek was the common language, was spread by Alexander and his generals. The Seleucids spoke Greek. They built gymnasia in Palestine, attracting young Jewish men and fomenting the Maccabean revolt. The Ptolemys spoke Greek. Cleopatra was a Ptolemy and spoke Greek, long before Justinian.
I've already pointed out the "born again" pun in John which could have made sense only in Greek. Ehrman also mentions passages in Mark which hint at an Aramaic base.
@AFGknight
I'm not referring to Drs. Myers and Dawkins in regard to their academic work; I'm talking about their presumptive role as "spokesmen" for atheism.
Nonbelievers are already saddled with any number of unfair stereotypes, so whenever a self-proclaimed atheist acts like an arrogant jerk, it just reinforces that prejudice in the minds of believers.
We need more spokespeople like Sam Harris and Dan Dennett--intelligent, thoughtful men who are respectful and humble.
You're missing the point here. You cannot change the position of the bricks; you can only switch one brick for another, and so on. If the bricks move vertically, or horizontally, or become diagonal, the wall would cease to be a wall. If 10 bricks are tilted or slanted in any way, the wall gets compromised. That is NOT true of the driftwood.
And you're wrong: Complexity requires purpose, otherwise you reject the basic dictionary definition of "complex".
@vachief
Sorry about that. Did I really neglect to state that the Septuagint was intended for Greek speaking Jews OUTSIDE of Palestine.
There was only one temple, in Jerusalem, and I'm quite sure it's copiesof the "Law and the Prophets" were in Hebrew.
As to whether Jesus read the OT in Greek or Hebrew, the answer is probably neither.
Consider: in those days of hand copied manuscripts, what is the likelihood that the synagogue in the tiny village of Nazareth had a complete Torah?
(cont)
"Natural selection does not account for creation" well I'm talking about I.D. I'm talking about consciousness giving rise to consciousness (or order). how at 10:54 differs chance vs design (drift wood becoming a picket fence) Man takes wood and makes a fence, Nature takes wood and makes a drift wood wall. Man makes metal into complex machinery.(cont)
When these cells talk to each other, do they use a cell phone ?
I don't think you are reading me clearly red, I already stated that the fact that he spoke of a round earth before it was scientifically stated does not constitute proof of devine inspirition.
My assertion of the fact he was not stating that the earth was flat in his writings was a direct reply to HT.
His use of the four corners of the earth term was methaphorical as we both agreed.
On the contrary, genetic algorithms are a rudimentary copy of the way nature does things. What do you think DNA is for? Can you explain what speciation is, by the way?
This convo started on the dating of the book of Isaiah.
Isaiah's book contains certain prophecies hundreds of years before the actual events.
Now this is explained away naturally by saying that no man can do that, so part of the book had to be written later and that is cited as evidence.
That's not evidence, that's just people starting out on a faith based assumption that what he did was impossible to begin with.
NonThinker said, "You failed to present any argument why life is designed"
Why life is designed? Do you know why? Please share.
It is truly sad that in the 21st Century we have to still take time to debunk religious dogma. If we don't debunk the population will grow stupider and stupider until religion becomes a central power and we fall into a Theocracy. Please, please, please, teach your children critical thinking. Teach them science and math and promote rationality.
@HoleDweller
Without a doubt gravity plays a vital roll in our universe, but there are components within our universe which exhibit organization that gravity has little to no effect on, e.g., genetic code within DNA.