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
@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.
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 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
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.
@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.
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.
(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.
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.
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....
WOW!I'm grateful for this man because had I not listened to him,I would never not have accepted the concept of intelligent design.He and Richard Dawkins have really given me an insight into how deficient evolution is of the truths.It seems sometimes the best way to look at things is by considering at its counter factors. They should keep it up!加油！！！
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....."
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?
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.
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.
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. (:
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 ;)
When i heard stephen meyers, all his kinda discussions, this was exactly what it came to my mind about. Whatever he speaks: complexity complexity bla bla.. then omg, can't be random omg.. therefore ID omg omg omg its a proof OMG OMG OMG!!!!
@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.
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!
(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?
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.
The first premise is fallacious. You have to demonstrate complexity can only be produced by design. But of course, you can't demonstrate that otherwise someone would have been awarded the Nobel Prize years ago. The intelligent design argument boils down to ignorance in many disparate areas/fields of science.
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?
@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
The human body is "created" rather sloppily. For example, the gallbladder and appendix have no function in the human body. They are vestigial organs left over from earlier, ancestral species. And secondly the trachea and esophageal tubes starts off sharing the same pathway and they diverge away into their respective organs which is a pretty stupid and messy "design" that can make a person get liquid in their lungs and develop pneumonia. Not only that but people may also choke on their food or beverages. There's nothing perfect about the human body. It's merely a byproduct of evolutionary biology.
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.
@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?
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.
That first quote which you wrongly attributed to Darwin and never corrected or apologize for comes from a book called " The evolution of human races" by H.F. Osborn. And if you want to know where I found that information a site where you got it from most likely even if you didn't take the trouble to read the whole article...Apologetics Press.
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.
@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? ;)
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.
@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.
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.
As it is improbable that the numerous and unimportant points of resemblance between the several races of man in bodily structure and mental faculties (I do not here refer to similar customs) should all have been independently acquired, they must have been inherited from progenitors who had these same characters. - The Descent of Man; Charles Darwin; 1871
@christianthinker If it's the conclusion from another argument then please do tell what it was? Are you merely asserting it was the conclusion from another argument or not?
Now when naturalists observe a close agreement in numerous small details of habits, tastes, and dispositions between two or more domestic races, or between nearly-allied natural forms, they use this fact as an argument that they are descended from a common progenitor who was thus endowed; and consequently that all should be classed under the same species. The same argument may be applied with much force to the races of man.
@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.
@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)
@HolyRevelation what's the thing with information-theory vs. evolutiontheory, that evolutionary mechanisms such as mutation cannot generate new information?
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.
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.
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....
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?
@ClumsyRoot I responded to your thread but I dont see it posted. If you did not get it then let me know and I will send again. Since I live in Rancho Cordova you should have gotten it in a flash.
@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.
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.
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.
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.
« 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.
He puts forward the evidence and claims of those who argued in favor of the position that humans are in fact separate species, and then he puts forward his own position, which is that humans are all one species. It is quite easy, however, to takes quotes from The Descent of Man out of context and make it appear that Darwin held positions which were in fact the exact opposite of his beliefs, and this is what many opponents of Darwin have done.
Here's what I know Pseudo. .. The concept of a spherical Earth dates back to around the 6th century BCE in ancient Greek philosophy. If you say the old testament had it written down earlier than that please refer me to the passages.
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)
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
@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,.....
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.
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.
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.
Hey HT, firstly if what doesn't mean anything to me? 2ndly the text does not say that the earth is flat, but that God sits above the circle of the earth,so it has been argued that Isaiah thought the earth was shaped like a coin because he used the hebrew word chuwg which was also used for circular things, since there is not a hebrew word for sphere Isaiah used that word to describe the earth.
@Rofamily6 "If there is a supernatural realm, faith in that realm is a necessary prerequisite to knowing and working in that realm." What is the basis for that assertion? I mean, how is it that people of different faiths come to dramatically different conclusions about the very same supernatural realm? The three Abrahamic religions, for example, are mutually exclusive. Of what use is faith if it can't provide reliable information about the supernatural?
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.
@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.
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.
"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
I've learned tremendously from watching this video.
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?
"There's beer out there!" - PZ Myers, visionary
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
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.
The key feature of design is simplicity, not complexity
@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.
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.
this was a very good way to get your point across.
Thanks for uploading. Really interesting!
(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!
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.
perfect way to end a lecture!
"theres' beer out there!!
yaaaaaa
science!
I love that he says at 32:00, the real heroes of science education have to be kindegarten, 1st & 2nd grade teachers.
i love his voice... can listen to him all day :)
Amazing lecture, Dr. Myers!!!
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....
WOW!I'm grateful for this man because had I not listened to him,I would never not have accepted the concept of intelligent design.He and Richard Dawkins have really given me an insight into how deficient evolution is of the truths.It seems sometimes the best way to look at things is by considering at its counter factors. They should keep it up!加油！！！
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.
When these cells talk to each other, do they use a cell phone ?
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....
This was a fantastic talk.
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.
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. (:
Love his talks 👍
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 ;)
When i heard stephen meyers, all his kinda discussions, this was exactly what it came to my mind about. Whatever he speaks:
complexity complexity bla bla.. then omg, can't be random omg.. therefore ID omg omg omg its a proof OMG OMG OMG!!!!
@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.
He's most famous for his blog, Pharyngula, if you didnt know that already. Very interesting stuff, certainly worth reading.
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!
(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?
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.
The first premise is fallacious. You have to demonstrate complexity can only be produced by design. But of course, you can't demonstrate that otherwise someone would have been awarded the Nobel Prize years ago. The intelligent design argument boils down to ignorance in many disparate areas/fields of science.
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?
@pseudosaur The Talmud (Bava Basra 15a) says that the book of Isaiah was written by King Hezekiah and his assistants
13:25 Is this is a joke or a test how dumb audience is ? You describe a mess as complex ?
@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
The human body is "created" rather sloppily. For example, the gallbladder and appendix have no function in the human body. They are vestigial organs left over from earlier, ancestral species. And secondly the trachea and esophageal tubes starts off sharing the same pathway and they diverge away into their respective organs which is a pretty stupid and messy "design" that can make a person get liquid in their lungs and develop pneumonia. Not only that but people may also choke on their food or beverages. There's nothing perfect about the human body. It's merely a byproduct of evolutionary biology.
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.
God, the limbs I'd give to have PZ as my Bio professor.
So why is the brick wall less complex than the random drift wood on the beach?
@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?
@vachief what kind of questions does it answer?
i commend you on your incredible patience
@Aanthanur Are you saying that a thunderbolt happens because of mere chance?
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.
such an awesome and nice guy
That first quote which you wrongly attributed to Darwin and never corrected or apologize for comes from a book called " The evolution of human races" by H.F. Osborn.
And if you want to know where I found that information a site where you got it from most likely even if you didn't take the trouble to read the whole article...Apologetics Press.
@Miguelthedominator You mean "CrIntelligent Design Proponentcists"?
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.
@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? ;)
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.
@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.
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.
@vachief
Please answer Shyhalu's question:
Where, in Proverbs, did Jesus condemn slavery?
Chapter and Verse
As it is improbable that the numerous and unimportant points of resemblance between the several races of man in bodily structure and mental faculties (I do not here refer to similar customs) should all have been independently acquired, they must have been inherited from progenitors who had these same characters.
- The Descent of Man; Charles Darwin; 1871
@christianthinker
If it's the conclusion from another argument then please do tell what it was? Are you merely asserting it was the conclusion from another argument or not?
Now when naturalists observe a close agreement in numerous small details of habits, tastes, and dispositions between two or more domestic races, or between nearly-allied natural forms, they use this fact as an argument that they are descended from a common progenitor who was thus endowed; and consequently that all should be classed under the same species. The same argument may be applied with much force to the races of man.
@HooahW2475
that is some of the best rhetoric I have ever seen.
and so true.
good job.
cheers
@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.
@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)
@HolyRevelation
what's the thing with information-theory vs. evolutiontheory, that evolutionary mechanisms such as mutation cannot generate new information?
@Kr0n1k4Lyfe which god? which bible? if it was god who created god?
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.
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.
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....
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?
@ClumsyRoot I responded to your thread but I dont see it posted. If you did not get it then let me know and I will send again. Since I live in Rancho Cordova you should have gotten it in a flash.
Gotta love a biologist who maintains a healthy respect for the evidence of beer!
Watched all of it
+ 1 -1=0 if there is nothing, then what would +1 represent?
@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.
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.
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.
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.
« 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.
He puts forward the evidence and claims of those who argued in favor of the position that humans are in fact separate species, and then he puts forward his own position, which is that humans are all one species. It is quite easy, however, to takes quotes from The Descent of Man out of context and make it appear that Darwin held positions which were in fact the exact opposite of his beliefs, and this is what many opponents of Darwin have done.
Here's what I know Pseudo. .. The concept of a spherical Earth dates back to around the 6th century BCE in ancient Greek philosophy.
If you say the old testament had it written down earlier than that please refer me to the passages.
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)
when will this end?
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
@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,.....
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.
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.
What case?
Historians traditionally place the beginning of Greek mathematics proper to the age of Thales of Miletus (ca. 624 - 548 BC).
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.
Hey HT, firstly if what doesn't mean anything to me?
2ndly the text does not say that the earth is flat, but that God sits above the circle of the earth,so it has been argued that Isaiah thought the earth was shaped like a coin because he used the hebrew word chuwg which was also used for circular things, since there is not a hebrew word for sphere Isaiah used that word to describe the earth.
@Rofamily6
"If there is a supernatural realm, faith in that realm is a necessary prerequisite to knowing and working in that realm."
What is the basis for that assertion? I mean, how is it that people of different faiths come to dramatically different conclusions about the very same supernatural realm? The three Abrahamic religions, for example, are mutually exclusive.
Of what use is faith if it can't provide reliable information about the supernatural?
Also, is the Asian girl that is asking the question in the end, Stephanie Jacobson? The girl from Terminator TV show and Melrose Place.
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 wall example is very powerful.
Does every knot need a knot-tier? Look at the wires behind your computer.
@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.
I agree with your post regarding the brick wall, however, do you accept evolution or..?
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.