LogFAQs > #908084588

LurkerFAQs, Active DB, DB1, DB2, DB3, Database 4 ( 07.23.2018-12.31.2018 ), DB5, DB6, DB7, DB8, DB9, DB10, DB11, DB12, Clear

Topic List	Page List: 1
Topic	What don't you get about evolution?
PokemonExpert44 09/04/18 9:39:05 AM #78:	Dragonblade01 posted... PokemonExpert44 posted... Dragonblade01 posted... PokemonExpert44 posted... Dragonblade01 posted... Vindris_SNH posted... Transitional fossils... They only make sense with the premise of evolution. With the premise of intelligent design, they're just unique species that were all there initially. Anything to counter this? Rebuttals are welcome. Well, there's no basis to say they were intelligently designed, so there's no real reason to begin with that premise to begin with. So, a trilobite's high level sophistication is not evidence for intelligent design how, exactly? Because contrary to what some may believe, complexity is not a hallmark of design. Complexity in the form of "irreducible complexity," and, "specified complexity," sure is massive amounts of evidence for intelligent design, though. "Specified complexity" also does not provide evidence for design and is completely bunk, and "irreducible complexity" in the context of biology is little more than a dolled up argument from ignorance. Specified complexity is evidence for intelligent design because that's what every organism shows; a specified pattern from intelligence in the genomes and pathways of organisms. Also, irreducible complexity has never been refuted, and, it also provides evidence for intelligent design due to what we know of stuff like the flagellum, transduction, and, gene duplication. It also means that our current knowledge of the irreducible/specified complexity of organisms is due to our research and knowledge about them, and, it's so not due to our so-called ignorance of them, and also, it never has been due to ignorance, but rather our continuing discoveries about how they work. --- I might just 6-0 you in Pokemon. Watch out for my teams. <cite>PokemonExpert44 posted [p:908084588] in What don't... [t:76959750]...</cite> <quote><cite>Dragonblade01 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>PokemonExpert44 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Dragonblade01 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>PokemonExpert44 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Dragonblade01 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Vindris_SNH posted...</cite> <quote>Transitional fossils... They only make sense with the premise of evolution. With the premise of intelligent design, they're just unique species that were all there initially. Anything to counter this? Rebuttals are welcome.</quote> Well, there's no basis to say they were intelligently designed, so there's no real reason to begin with that premise to begin with.</quote> So, a trilobite's high level sophistication is not evidence for intelligent design how, exactly?</quote> Because contrary to what some may believe, complexity is not a hallmark of design.</quote> Complexity in the form of "irreducible complexity," and, "specified complexity," sure is massive amounts of evidence for intelligent design, though.</quote> "Specified complexity" also does not provide evidence for design and is completely bunk, and "irreducible complexity" in the context of biology is little more than a dolled up argument from ignorance.</quote> Specified complexity is evidence for intelligent design because that's what every organism shows; a specified pattern from intelligence in the genomes and pathways of organisms. Also, irreducible complexity has never been refuted, and, it also provides evidence for intelligent design due to what we know of stuff like the flagellum, transduction, and, gene duplication. It also means that our current knowledge of the irreducible/specified complexity of organisms is due to our research and knowledge about them, and, it's so not due to our so-called ignorance of them, and also, it never has been due to ignorance, but rather our continuing discoveries about how they work. --- I might just 6-0 you in Pokemon. Watch out for my teams.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List	Page List: 1