| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"IKnowHimDoYou" |
| Date: |
02 May 2004 11:14:44 AM |
| Object: |
NIGM-the Hope of Evolution |
NIGM-the Hope of Evolution
Evolution belief depends upon new information being manufactured through
accidental mutations. This opinion is based what is called a natural
information-generating mechanism(NIGM) and is actually another term for
the evolutionary god of radom chance and accidental occurance.
Evolutionary religionists worshipping at the church of chaos know they
have no firm foundation of evidence so they manufacture some by smuggling
intelligence into their arguments opining that somehow information came
into being on its own, i.e. DNA contains a program
(intelligence-information-code) for directing the development of an
organism of one kind into a different kind. Experimental evidence with
fruit flies and other creatures has not confirmed any of these assumptions
and in fact shows just the opposite(which is why they are no longer
discussed in the Darwinist camps). Information is lost each time a
mutation occurs and is either of no observable effect or is harmful
unless the developmental repair mechanism(which is more critical embedded
information itself) can repair it.
The whole system of non-emperical, non-scientific assumption of evolution
is backrupt and totally without evidencial substance yet it is believed by
those who practice this religion with great vigor. When one states that
NIGM is a "fact" and must be swallowed whole by everyone it is time to put
some real estate between them and you.
.
|
|
| User: "Iain" |
|
| Title: Re: NIGM-the Hope of Evolution |
05 May 2004 05:06:44 AM |
|
|
(IKnowHimDoYou) wrote in message news:<IKnowHim-0205040914440001@pm1-34.kalama.com>...
NIGM-the Hope of Evolution
Evolution belief depends upon new information being manufactured through
accidental mutations.
No it does not.
Evolution is natural selection acting apon the normal difference
between parent and child over thousands of generations.
~Iain
.
|
|
|
| User: "Chris Devol" |
|
| Title: Re: NIGM-the Hope of Evolution |
05 May 2004 12:01:52 PM |
|
|
"Iain" <iain_inkster@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:6feb9a89.0405050206.494e36ea@posting.google.com...
IKnowHim@leavingsoon.com (IKnowHimDoYou) wrote in message
news:<IKnowHim-0205040914440001@pm1-34.kalama.com>...
NIGM-the Hope of Evolution
Evolution belief depends upon new information being manufactured through
accidental mutations.
No it does not.
Evolution is natural selection acting apon the normal difference
between parent and child over thousands of generations.
If that were really what the atheistic, mechanistic pseudoscientists are
saying, there would be no problem. Because the child of a dog is always a
dog, and the child of a bacterium without a flagellal motor is always a
bacterium without a flagellal motor.
But that's not what they're saying.
They're saying that the child of an X is a Y, and the child of a Y is a Z,
so that eventually, a prince will come whose great great great, etc,
grandfather is a frog.
They believe this on faith alone, and cannot produce any genealogies.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Tom" |
|
| Title: Re: NIGM-the Hope of Evolution |
05 May 2004 04:24:03 PM |
|
|
"Chris Devol" <eat@joes.pub> wrote in message
news:469mc.8092$Hs1.1588@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
"Iain" <iain_inkster@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:6feb9a89.0405050206.494e36ea@posting.google.com...
IKnowHim@leavingsoon.com (IKnowHimDoYou) wrote in message
news:<IKnowHim-0205040914440001@pm1-34.kalama.com>...
NIGM-the Hope of Evolution
Evolution belief depends upon new information being manufactured
through
accidental mutations.
No it does not.
Evolution is natural selection acting apon the normal difference
between parent and child over thousands of generations.
If that were really what the atheistic, mechanistic pseudoscientists are
saying, there would be no problem. Because the child of a dog is always a
dog, and the child of a bacterium without a flagellal motor is always a
bacterium without a flagellal motor.
That is what they are saying, your strawman construct notwithstanding.
But that's not what they're saying.
Of course it is. Chris, you would do yourself a favor to learn what
evolution really says before you make a further ***** of yourself.
They're saying that the child of an X is a Y, and the child of a Y is a Z,
so that eventually, a prince will come whose great great great, etc,
grandfather is a frog.
*****!
They believe this on faith alone, and cannot produce any genealogies.
The evidence for evolution is overwhelming. That is why it is the only
scientifc theory of the distribution and diversity of the flora and fauna on
earth. That is why these 400 Steve's say that evolution is supported by the
evidnece:
http://www.ncseweb.org/resources/articles/3697_the_list_2_16_2003.asp
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Iain" |
|
| Title: Re: NIGM-the Hope of Evolution |
06 May 2004 08:17:21 AM |
|
|
"Chris Devol" <eat@joes.pub> wrote in message news:<469mc.8092$Hs1.1588@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net>...
"Iain" <iain_inkster@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:6feb9a89.0405050206.494e36ea@posting.google.com...
IKnowHim@leavingsoon.com (IKnowHimDoYou) wrote in message
news:<IKnowHim-0205040914440001@pm1-34.kalama.com>...
NIGM-the Hope of Evolution
Evolution belief depends upon new information being manufactured through
accidental mutations.
No it does not.
Evolution is natural selection acting apon the normal difference
between parent and child over thousands of generations.
If that were really what the atheistic, mechanistic pseudoscientists are
saying, there would be no problem.
I don't know the people you are talking about. At any rate, they
aren't found in many educational or academic circles.
Because the child of a dog is always a
dog,
Yes, but consider a wolf. It's great, great, great, great, great,
great, great, great, great, great, great, great, great, great, great,
great, great, great, great, great, great, great, great, grandchild
could be a poodle.
Consider this evolution multiplied by one thousand, is it really
inconcievable that it could be barely recognisable as a wolf, or even
a dog?
This is an example of artificial selection. Humans created the
isolation necessary for this to occur.
There are also natural mechanisms of isolation, and natural changing
environmental pressures that affect the survival of various
individuals to various degrees therefore increasing the frequency of
beneficial characteristics at very gradual pace over millions of years
and generations. Life literally had "all the time in the world".
Didn't you do biology at high school, or are you just American?
and the child of a bacterium without a flagellal motor is always a
bacterium without a flagellal motor.
In the sense that it ought to have genetic information for a motor,
yes. What is your point? All you seem to be saying is that creatures'
immediate offspring tend to very similar to their parents, so similar
as to be the same species. What has this got to do with anything? For
as long as they are not always completely identical, evolution is
occuring.
But that's not what they're saying.
Its what mainstream biology has found long ago.
They're saying that the child of an X is a Y, and the child of a Y is a Z,
so that eventually, a prince will come whose great great great, etc,
grandfather is a frog.
They believe this on faith alone, and cannot produce any genealogies.
Our knowledge of evolution is old knowledge, deeply expored, based on
the entire fossil record, its correlation with geological history,
observance of the process in action, logic, and everything we know
about natural history. Many scientific successful benefits have
depended on the correctness of evolutionary theory. It is so
integrated with everything to know about biology, that it is a process
as evident as the existence of a hole once the existence of the ring
is proven.
~Iain
.
|
|
|
| User: "JessHC" |
|
| Title: Re: NIGM-the Hope of Evolution |
06 May 2004 04:45:26 PM |
|
|
(Iain) wrote in message news:<6feb9a89.0405060517.60dd8190@posting.google.com>...
<snip>
Didn't you do biology at high school, or are you just American?
That seems a smidge uncalled for. Are all people of your nationality
that ill-mannered?
<snip>
.
|
|
|
| User: "Iain" |
|
| Title: Re: NIGM-the Hope of Evolution |
07 May 2004 12:05:47 PM |
|
|
(JessHC) wrote in message news:<d58e3ac.0405061345.325ffeee@posting.google.com>...
iain_inkster@hotmail.com (Iain) wrote in message news:<6feb9a89.0405060517.60dd8190@posting.google.com>...
<snip>
Didn't you do biology at high school, or are you just American?
That seems a smidge uncalled for. Are all people of your nationality
that ill-mannered?
<snip>
I'm not talking about him - I'm talking about the institutions
involved and the their complete disregard for scientific discipline.
~Iain
.
|
|
|
| User: "JessHC" |
|
| Title: Re: NIGM-the Hope of Evolution |
07 May 2004 08:46:41 PM |
|
|
(Iain) wrote in message news:<6feb9a89.0405070905.41cbb2f9@posting.google.com>...
jesshc@phantomemail.com (JessHC) wrote in message news:<d58e3ac.0405061345.325ffeee@posting.google.com>...
(Iain) wrote in message news:<6feb9a89.0405060517.60dd8190@posting.google.com>...
<snip>
Didn't you do biology at high school, or are you just American?
That seems a smidge uncalled for. Are all people of your nationality
that ill-mannered?
<snip>
I'm not talking about him - I'm talking about the institutions
involved and the their complete disregard for scientific discipline.
And I was talking about your implication that to be American is to be ignorant.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Iain" |
|
| Title: Re: NIGM-the Hope of Evolution |
08 May 2004 07:27:19 AM |
|
|
(JessHC) wrote in message news:<d58e3ac.0405071746.1431035b@posting.google.com>...
iain_inkster@hotmail.com (Iain) wrote in message news:<6feb9a89.0405070905.41cbb2f9@posting.google.com>...
(JessHC) wrote in message news:<d58e3ac.0405061345.325ffeee@posting.google.com>...
iain_inkster@hotmail.com (Iain) wrote in message news:<6feb9a89.0405060517.60dd8190@posting.google.com>...
<snip>
Didn't you do biology at high school, or are you just American?
That seems a smidge uncalled for. Are all people of your nationality
that ill-mannered?
<snip>
I'm not talking about him - I'm talking about the institutions
involved and the their complete disregard for scientific discipline.
And I was talking about your implication that to be American is to be ignorant.
I made not that implication, although creationism in the modern sense
is amongst the English-speaking world most common in North America.
Coupled with the fact that he seemed to be a creationist, the wording
of my original statement makes sense, albeit a crude insult.
~Iain
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Stephen" |
|
| Title: Re: NIGM-the Hope of Evolution |
05 May 2004 08:49:33 PM |
|
|
If that were really what the atheistic, mechanistic pseudoscientists are
saying, there would be no problem. Because the child of a dog is always a
dog, and the child of a bacterium without a flagellal motor is always a
bacterium without a flagellal motor.
But that's not what they're saying.
They're saying that the child of an X is a Y, and the child of a Y is a Z,
so that eventually, a prince will come whose great great great, etc,
grandfather is a frog.
They believe this on faith alone, and cannot produce any genealogies.
"It is better to remain silent and be thought a fool,
than to speak aloud and remove all doubt".
Abraham Lincoln
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "IKnowHimDoYou" |
|
| Title: Re: NIGM-the Hope of Evolution |
06 May 2004 09:28:20 AM |
|
|
In article <469mc.8092$Hs1.1588@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net>, "Chris
Devol" <eat@joes.pub> wrote:
"Iain" <iain_inkster@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:6feb9a89.0405050206.494e36ea@posting.google.com...
IKnowHim@leavingsoon.com (IKnowHimDoYou) wrote in message
news:<IKnowHim-0205040914440001@pm1-34.kalama.com>...
NIGM-the Hope of Evolution
Evolution belief depends upon new information being manufactured through
accidental mutations.
No it does not.
Evolution is natural selection acting apon the normal difference
between parent and child over thousands of generations.
If that were really what the atheistic, mechanistic pseudoscientists are
saying, there would be no problem. Because the child of a dog is always a
dog, and the child of a bacterium without a flagellal motor is always a
bacterium without a flagellal motor.
But that's not what they're saying.
They're saying that the child of an X is a Y, and the child of a Y is a Z,
so that eventually, a prince will come whose great great great, etc,
grandfather is a frog.
They believe this on faith alone, and cannot produce any genealogies.
_______________________________________________________________
And in all their ignorance they still cannot tell us where the original
information came from or how it increases with mutations.
Until that answer is forthcoming they are simply practicing a religion
based on blind faith...
.
|
|
|
| User: "Joe" |
|
| Title: Re: NIGM-the Hope of Evolution |
06 May 2004 07:08:56 PM |
|
|
"IKnowHimDoYou" <IKnowHim@leavingsoon.com> wrote in message
news:IKnowHim-0605040728200001@pm4-12.kalama.com...
In article <469mc.8092$Hs1.1588@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net>, "Chris
Devol" <eat@joes.pub> wrote:
"Iain" <iain_inkster@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:6feb9a89.0405050206.494e36ea@posting.google.com...
IKnowHim@leavingsoon.com (IKnowHimDoYou) wrote in message
news:<IKnowHim-0205040914440001@pm1-34.kalama.com>...
NIGM-the Hope of Evolution
Evolution belief depends upon new information being manufactured
through
accidental mutations.
No it does not.
Evolution is natural selection acting apon the normal difference
between parent and child over thousands of generations.
If that were really what the atheistic, mechanistic pseudoscientists are
saying, there would be no problem. Because the child of a dog is always
a
dog, and the child of a bacterium without a flagellal motor is always a
bacterium without a flagellal motor.
But that's not what they're saying.
They're saying that the child of an X is a Y, and the child of a Y is a
Z,
so that eventually, a prince will come whose great great great, etc,
grandfather is a frog.
They believe this on faith alone, and cannot produce any genealogies.
_______________________________________________________________
And in all their ignorance they still cannot tell us where the original
information came from or how it increases with mutations.
Until that answer is forthcoming they are simply practicing a religion
based on blind faith...
According to Creationists, it doesn't matter where something originates from
hence the existince of god.
Joe
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Iain" |
|
| Title: Re: NIGM-the Hope of Evolution |
06 May 2004 01:58:47 PM |
|
|
(IKnowHimDoYou) wrote in message news:<IKnowHim-0605040728200001@pm4-12.kalama.com>...
In article <469mc.8092$Hs1.1588@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net>, "Chris
Devol" <eat@joes.pub> wrote:
"Iain" <iain_inkster@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:6feb9a89.0405050206.494e36ea@posting.google.com...
(IKnowHimDoYou) wrote in message
news:<IKnowHim-0205040914440001@pm1-34.kalama.com>...
NIGM-the Hope of Evolution
Evolution belief depends upon new information being manufactured through
accidental mutations.
No it does not.
Evolution is natural selection acting apon the normal difference
between parent and child over thousands of generations.
If that were really what the atheistic, mechanistic pseudoscientists are
saying, there would be no problem. Because the child of a dog is always a
dog, and the child of a bacterium without a flagellal motor is always a
bacterium without a flagellal motor.
But that's not what they're saying.
They're saying that the child of an X is a Y, and the child of a Y is a Z,
so that eventually, a prince will come whose great great great, etc,
grandfather is a frog.
They believe this on faith alone, and cannot produce any genealogies.
_______________________________________________________________
And in all their ignorance they still cannot tell us where the original
information came from or how it increases with mutations.
Until that answer is forthcoming they are simply practicing a religion
based on blind faith...
What are you talking about and why is it relevant?
A mutation creates new data. As natural selection acts upon a sum of
these mutations over hundreds of thousands of generations, genetic
code for complex functionality(therefore data) becomes inherent in the
species.
~Iain
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "JessHC" |
|
| Title: Re: NIGM-the Hope of Evolution |
06 May 2004 01:18:39 PM |
|
|
(IKnowHimDoYou) wrote in message news:<IKnowHim-0605040728200001@pm4-12.kalama.com>...
In article <469mc.8092$Hs1.1588@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net>, "Chris
Devol" <eat@joes.pub> wrote:
"Iain" <iain_inkster@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:6feb9a89.0405050206.494e36ea@posting.google.com...
(IKnowHimDoYou) wrote in message
news:<IKnowHim-0205040914440001@pm1-34.kalama.com>...
NIGM-the Hope of Evolution
Evolution belief depends upon new information being manufactured through
accidental mutations.
No it does not.
Evolution is natural selection acting apon the normal difference
between parent and child over thousands of generations.
If that were really what the atheistic, mechanistic pseudoscientists are
saying, there would be no problem. Because the child of a dog is always a
dog, and the child of a bacterium without a flagellal motor is always a
bacterium without a flagellal motor.
But that's not what they're saying.
They're saying that the child of an X is a Y, and the child of a Y is a Z,
so that eventually, a prince will come whose great great great, etc,
grandfather is a frog.
They believe this on faith alone, and cannot produce any genealogies.
_______________________________________________________________
And in all their ignorance they still cannot tell us where the original
information came from or how it increases with mutations.
Uh, that's not true. You just don't like the answer you get. You're
offended because it doesn't attempt to support your little book.
Until that answer is forthcoming they are simply practicing a religion
based on blind faith...
Again, that's not true. If someone comes up with a better
explanation, we'll go with that. Unfortunately, "god did it" doesn't
fit that criteria. If someone came up with a better religion, would
you switch?
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Robibnikoff" |
|
| Title: Re: NIGM-the Hope of Evolution |
06 May 2004 10:29:58 AM |
|
|
In article <IKnowHim-0605040728200001@pm4-12.kalama.com>, IKnowHimDoYou
says...snip
Until that answer is forthcoming they are simply practicing a religion
based on blind faith...
Oh, the motherf'ing irony.
You don't read your posts before you send them, do you.
Robyn
Resident Witchypoo & EAC Spellcaster
#1557
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Iain" |
|
| Title: Re: NIGM-the Hope of Evolution |
06 May 2004 02:00:51 PM |
|
|
NOTE: the parenthesis in my other post along with this, a muinite or
so before, should read:
"(therefore information)"
~Iain
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Holly the Heretic" |
|
| Title: Re: NIGM-the Hope of Evolution |
06 May 2004 01:02:21 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 06 May 2004 07:28:20 -0700,
(IKnowHimDoYou) wrote:
In article <469mc.8092$Hs1.1588@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net>, "Chris
Devol" <eat@joes.pub> wrote:
"Iain" <iain_inkster@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:6feb9a89.0405050206.494e36ea@posting.google.com...
(IKnowHimDoYou) wrote in message
news:<IKnowHim-0205040914440001@pm1-34.kalama.com>...
NIGM-the Hope of Evolution
Evolution belief depends upon new information being manufactured through
accidental mutations.
No it does not.
Evolution is natural selection acting apon the normal difference
between parent and child over thousands of generations.
If that were really what the atheistic, mechanistic pseudoscientists are
saying, there would be no problem. Because the child of a dog is always a
dog, and the child of a bacterium without a flagellal motor is always a
bacterium without a flagellal motor.
But that's not what they're saying.
They're saying that the child of an X is a Y, and the child of a Y is a Z,
so that eventually, a prince will come whose great great great, etc,
grandfather is a frog.
They believe this on faith alone, and cannot produce any genealogies.
_______________________________________________________________
And in all their ignorance they still cannot tell us where the original
information came from or how it increases with mutations.
Until that answer is forthcoming they are simply practicing a religion
based on blind faith...
The information is out there, in the public domain. I could post links
to research papers on the subject, but I'm afraid you're far too
stupid to be able to understand them. I don't mean that as an insult -
it's just a fact of genetic diversity that some people are clever and
some, like you, are incredibly stupid :-)
Never mind. You might know nothing about biology, but I bet you flip a
mean burger!
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Thore Schmechtig" |
|
| Title: Re: NIGM-the Hope of Evolution |
03 May 2004 05:40:08 AM |
|
|
Evolutionary religionists worshipping at the church of chaos...
....do not exist.
12 - 9 = ? <-- unsolvable mystery for the living chicken tract
--
TOP TEN SIGNS YOU'RE A (CHRISTIAN) FUNDAMENTALIST
(found on www.evilbible.com)
10 - You vigorously deny the existence of thousands of
gods claimed by other religions, but feel outraged when
someone denies the existence of yours.
9 - You feel insulted and "dehumanized" when scientists
say that people evolved from other life forms, but you
have no problem with the Biblical claim that we were
created from dirt.
8 - You laugh at polytheists, but you have no problem
believing in a Triune God.
7 - Your face turns purple when you hear of the
"atrocities" attributed to Allah, but you don't even
flinch when hearing about how God/Jehovah slaughtered all
the babies of Egypt in "Exodus" and ordered the
elimination of entire ethnic groups in "Joshua" --
including women, children, and trees!
6 - You laugh at Hindu beliefs that deify humans, and
Greek claims about gods sleeping with women, but you have
no problem believing that the Holy Spirit impregnated
Mary, who then gave birth to a man-god who got killed,
came back to life and then ascended into the sky.
5 - You are willing to spend your life looking for little
loopholes in the scientifically established age of Earth
(4.55 billion years), but you find nothing wrong with
believing dates recorded by Bronze Age tribesmen sitting
in their tents and guessing that Earth is a couple of
generations old.
4 - You believe that the entire population of this planet
with the exception of those who share your beliefs --
though excluding those in all rival sects - will spend
Eternity in an infinite Hell of Suffering. And yet
consider your religion the most "tolerant" and "loving."
3 - While modern science, history, geology, biology, and
physics have failed to convince you otherwise, some idiot
rolling around on the floor speaking in "tongues" may be
all the evidence you need to "prove" Christianity.
2 - You define 0.01% as a "high success rate" when it
comes to answered prayers. You consider that to be
evidence that prayer works. And you think that the
remaining 99.99% FAILURE was simply the will of God.
1 - You actually know a lot less than many atheists and
agnostics do about the Bible, Christianity, and church
history - but still call yourself a Christian.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "YOELK" |
|
| Title: Re: NIGM-the Hope of Evolution |
02 May 2004 10:03:08 PM |
|
|
Have you ever heard the term natural selection?
-----
YOELK
IKnowHim@leavingsoon.com (IKnowHimDoYou) wrote in message news:<IKnowHim-0205040914440001@pm1-34.kalama.com>...
NIGM-the Hope of Evolution
Evolution belief depends upon new information being manufactured through
accidental mutations. This opinion is based what is called a natural
information-generating mechanism(NIGM) and is actually another term for
the evolutionary god of radom chance and accidental occurance.
Evolutionary religionists worshipping at the church of chaos know they
have no firm foundation of evidence so they manufacture some by smuggling
intelligence into their arguments opining that somehow information came
into being on its own, i.e. DNA contains a program
(intelligence-information-code) for directing the development of an
organism of one kind into a different kind. Experimental evidence with
fruit flies and other creatures has not confirmed any of these assumptions
and in fact shows just the opposite(which is why they are no longer
discussed in the Darwinist camps). Information is lost each time a
mutation occurs and is either of no observable effect or is harmful
unless the developmental repair mechanism(which is more critical embedded
information itself) can repair it.
The whole system of non-emperical, non-scientific assumption of evolution
is backrupt and totally without evidencial substance yet it is believed by
those who practice this religion with great vigor. When one states that
NIGM is a "fact" and must be swallowed whole by everyone it is time to put
some real estate between them and you.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Josef Balluch" |
|
| Title: Re: NIGM-the Hope of Evolution |
03 May 2004 09:27:43 PM |
|
|
In a message sent 'round the world, IKnowHimDoYou poured fuel on the
fire with the following:
NIGM-the Hope of Evolution
Evolution belief depends upon new information being manufactured through
accidental mutations. This opinion is based what is called a natural
information-generating mechanism(NIGM) and is actually another term for
the evolutionary god of radom chance and accidental occurance.
Evolutionary religionists worshipping at the church of chaos know they
have no firm foundation of evidence ...
Baloney.
http://www.asa3.org/archive/evolution/199910/0118.html
http://www.findarticles.com/cf_dls/m2843/2_25/71563254/p1/article.jhtml
http://tinyurl.com/3gdab
... so they manufacture some by smuggling
intelligence into their arguments opining that somehow information came
into being on its own, i.e. DNA contains a program
(intelligence-information-code) for directing the development of an
organism of one kind into a different kind.
ROTFL !!
Got some references for this ridiculous claim?
Experimental evidence with
fruit flies and other creatures has not confirmed any of these assumptions
and in fact shows just the opposite(which is why they are no longer
discussed in the Darwinist camps). Information is lost each time a
mutation occurs and is either of no observable effect or is harmful
unless the developmental repair mechanism(which is more critical embedded
information itself) can repair it.
Silly twaddle.
....
Regards,
Josef
Evolution is cleverer than you are.
-- Francis Crick
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "David Jensen" |
|
| Title: Re: NIGM-the Hope of Evolution |
02 May 2004 11:46:39 AM |
|
|
In alt.talk.creationism, (IKnowHimDoYou) wrote
in <IKnowHim-0205040914440001@pm1-34.kalama.com>:
NIGM-the Hope of Evolution
Evolution belief depends upon new information being manufactured through
accidental mutations. This opinion is based what is called a natural
information-generating mechanism(NIGM) and is actually another term for
the evolutionary god of radom chance and accidental occurance.
Once again, you fail to realize that 'information' is a human
abstraction that is used to describe actual physical events. In this
case the event is biochemical reactions.
Evolutionary religionists worshipping at the church of chaos know they
have no firm foundation of evidence so they manufacture some by smuggling
intelligence into their arguments opining that somehow information came
into being on its own, i.e. DNA contains a program
(intelligence-information-code) for directing the development of an
organism of one kind into a different kind. Experimental evidence with
fruit flies and other creatures has not confirmed any of these assumptions
and in fact shows just the opposite(which is why they are no longer
discussed in the Darwinist camps). Information is lost each time a
mutation occurs and is either of no observable effect or is harmful
unless the developmental repair mechanism(which is more critical embedded
information itself) can repair it.
The whole system of non-emperical, non-scientific assumption of evolution
is backrupt and totally without evidencial substance yet it is believed by
those who practice this religion with great vigor. When one states that
NIGM is a "fact" and must be swallowed whole by everyone it is time to put
some real estate between them and you.
You have no idea what you are talking about, so I see no way to explain
to you how many different ways you are wrong.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Chris Devol" |
|
| Title: Re: NIGM-the Hope of Evolution |
02 May 2004 03:42:46 PM |
|
|
"David Jensen" <david@dajensen-family.com> wrote in message
news:dc9a90ldl99tp6q6sn7u2eagaborgb9a0k@4ax.com...
In alt.talk.creationism, (IKnowHimDoYou) wrote
in <IKnowHim-0205040914440001@pm1-34.kalama.com>:
NIGM-the Hope of Evolution
Evolution belief depends upon new information being manufactured through
accidental mutations. This opinion is based what is called a natural
information-generating mechanism(NIGM) and is actually another term for
the evolutionary god of radom chance and accidental occurance.
Once again, you fail to realize that 'information' is a human
abstraction that is used to describe actual physical events. In this
case the event is biochemical reactions.
Only a bluff.
Atheistic, mechanistic evolutionists believe that "human abstractions" are
also products of material evolution, and thus result from random genetic
mutations which are "naturally selected" to propagate through generations.
Thus, according to atheistic, mechanistic evolutionists, "information" is
also a material evolutionary phenomenon, and in that respect is no different
from "biochemical reactions".
The bait-and-switch dance to make "information" somehow fall outside the
purview of science fails.
It's a distinction without a difference.
<snip>
.
|
|
|
| User: "David Jensen" |
|
| Title: Re: NIGM-the Hope of Evolution |
02 May 2004 08:09:24 PM |
|
|
In alt.talk.creationism, "Chris Devol" <eat@joes.pub> wrote in
<a3dlc.3059$Hs1.1645@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net>:
"David Jensen" <david@dajensen-family.com> wrote in message
news:dc9a90ldl99tp6q6sn7u2eagaborgb9a0k@4ax.com...
In alt.talk.creationism, (IKnowHimDoYou) wrote
in <IKnowHim-0205040914440001@pm1-34.kalama.com>:
NIGM-the Hope of Evolution
Evolution belief depends upon new information being manufactured through
accidental mutations. This opinion is based what is called a natural
information-generating mechanism(NIGM) and is actually another term for
the evolutionary god of radom chance and accidental occurance.
Once again, you fail to realize that 'information' is a human
abstraction that is used to describe actual physical events. In this
case the event is biochemical reactions.
Only a bluff.
Atheistic, mechanistic evolutionists believe that "human abstractions" are
also products of material evolution, and thus result from random genetic
mutations which are "naturally selected" to propagate through generations.
I've never heard that claimed. Can you explain it further?
Thus, according to atheistic, mechanistic evolutionists, "information" is
also a material evolutionary phenomenon, and in that respect is no different
from "biochemical reactions".
Not as I understand it. Would you please cite your source of
information.
The bait-and-switch dance to make "information" somehow fall outside the
purview of science fails.
Outside the purview? No, I'm just pointing out that the "information
theory proves there is no evolution" argument is, at best, absurdist
theatre.
It's a distinction without a difference.
"I think I understand the analogy, so I must understand the underlying
phenomenon," strikes again.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Silver Blaze" |
|
| Title: Re: NIGM-the Hope of Evolution |
02 May 2004 04:34:16 PM |
|
|
In article <IKnowHim-0205040914440001@pm1-34.kalama.com>,
IKnowHim@leavingsoon.com (IKnowHimDoYou) wrote:
The whole system of non-emperical, non-scientific assumption of evolution
is backrupt and totally without evidencial substance yet it is believed by
those who practice this religion with great vigor. When one states that
NIGM is a "fact" and must be swallowed whole by everyone it is time to put
some real estate between them and you.
By your logic how much more "without evidential substance" are the claims
of Pauline Christianity, how much more in need of absolute rejection is
Atonement and Salvation Theology and the unfounded crap that
Fundamentalism promotes as its dogma.
Look stupid, belief is not about loyalty to wishful thinking, nor is it
about faith in things unseen. It is about using your God given brain to
reason, a brain that has evolved in accordance with the laws of a physical
universe that may well have God at its core.
Natural selection is a way in which we understand part of the pattern
whereby an apparent chaos evolves form. In understanding the mechanisms
of evolution we gain an insight into how God's universe operates, how out
of chaos we are formed and how through the processes of a developing
consciousness we evolve understanding
In this we gain insight into the processes that lead to what we understand
in HUMAN terms as such items as "Justice" and "Compassion" which in their
Divine form may be of a more complete nature and reflecting of a physical
harmony.
The contents of your head are meant to be used as something more than a
door stop.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "LP" |
|
| Title: Re: NIGM-the Hope of Evolution |
02 May 2004 09:21:20 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 02 May 2004 09:14:44 -0700,
(IKnowHimDoYou) wrote:
NIGM-the Hope of Evolution
Evolution belief depends upon new information being manufactured through
accidental mutations. This opinion is based what is called a natural
information-generating mechanism(NIGM) and is actually another term for
the evolutionary god of radom chance and accidental occurance.
We can safely conclude that living bodies are billions of times too
complicated - too statistically improbable - to have come into being
by sheer chance. How, then, did they come into being? The answer is
that chance enters into the story, but not a single, monolithic act of
chance. Instead, a whole series of tiny chance steps, each one small
enough to be a believable product of its predecessor, occurred one
after the other in sequence. These small steps of chance are caused by
genetic mutations, random changes - mistakes really - in the genetic
material. They give rise to changes in the existing bodily structure.
Most of these changes are deleterious and lead to death. A minority of
them turn out to be slight improvements, leading to increased survival
and reproduction. By this process of natural selection, those random
changes that turn out to be beneficial eventually spread through the
species and become the norm. The stage is now set for the next small
change in the evolutionary process. After, say, a thousand of these
small changes in series, each change providing the basis for the next,
the end result has become, by a process of accumulation, far too
complex to have come about in a single act of chance.
For instance, it is theoretically possible for an eye to spring into
being, in a single lucky step, from nothing: from bare skin, let's
say. It is theoretically possible in the sense that a recipe could be
written out in the form of a large number of mutations. If all these
mutations happened simultaneously, a complete eye could, indeed,
spring from nothing. But although it is theoretically possible, it is
in practice inconceivable. The quantity of luck involved is much too
large. The "correct" recipe involves changes in a huge number of genes
simultaneously. The correct recipe is one particular combination of
changes out of trillions of equally probable combinations of chances.
We can certainly rule out such a miraculous coincidence. But it is
perfectly plausible that the modern eye could have sprung from
something almost the same as the modern eye but not quite: a very
slightly less elaborate eye. By the same argument, this slightly less
elaborate eye sprang from a slightly less elaborate eye still, and so
on. If you assume a sufficiently large number of sufficiently small
differences between each evolutionary stage and its predecessor, you
are bound to be able to derive a full, complex, working eye from bare
skin. How many intermediate stages are we allowed to postulate? That
depends on how much time we have to play with. Has there been enough
time for eyes to evolve by little steps from nothing?
The fossils tell us that life has been evolving on Earth for more than
3,000 million years. It is almost impossible for the human mind to
grasp such an immensity of time. We, naturally and mercifully, tend to
see our own expected lifetime as a fairly long time, but we can't
expect to live even one century. It is 2,000 years since Jesus lived,
a time span long enough to blur the distinction between history and
myth. Can you imagine a million such periods laid end to end? Suppose
we wanted to write the whole history on a single long scroll. If we
crammed all of Common Era history into one metre of scroll, how long
would the pre-Common Era part of the scroll, back to the start of
evolution, be? The answer is that the pre-Common Era part of the
scroll would stretch from Milan to Moscow. Think of the implications
of this for the quantity of evolutionary change that can be
accommodated. All the domestic breeds of dogs - Pekingeses, poodles,
spaniels, Saint Bernards, and Chihuahuas - have come from wolves in a
time span measured in hundreds or at the most thousands of years: no
more than two meters along the road from Milan to Moscow. Think of the
quantity of change involved in going from a wolf to a Pekingese; now
multiply that quantity of change by a million. When you look at it
like that, it becomes easy to believe that an eye could have evolved
from no eye by small degrees.
It remains necessary to satisfy ourselves that every one of the
intermediates on the evolutionary route, say from bare skin to a
modern eye, would have been favored by natural selection; would have
been an improvement over its predecessor in the sequence or at least
would have survived. It is no good proving to ourselves that there is
theoretically a chain of almost perceptibly different intermediates
leading to an eye if many of those intermediates would have died. It
is sometimes argued that the parts of an eye have to be all there
together or the eye won't work at all. Half an eye, the argument runs,
is no better than no eye at all. You can't fly with half a wing; you
can't hear with half an ear. Therefore there can't have been a series
of step-by-step intermediates leading up to a modern eye, wing, or
ear.
This type of argument is so naive that one can only wonder at the
subconscious motives for wanting to believe it. It is obviously not
true that half an eye is useless. Cataract sufferers who have had
their lenses surgically removed cannot see very well without glasses,
but they are still much better off than people with no eyes at all.
Without a lens you can't focus a detailed image, but you can avoid
bumping into obstacles and you could detect the looming shadow of a
predator.
As for the argument that you can't fly with only half a wing, it is
disproved by large numbers of very successful gliding animals,
including mammals of many different kinds, lizards, frogs, snakes, and
squids. Many different kinds of tree-dwelling animals have flaps of
skin between their joints that really are fractional wings. If you
fall out of a tree, any skin flap or flattening of the body that
increases your surface area can save your life. And, however small or
large your flaps may be, there must always be a critical height such
that, if you fall from a tree of that height, your life would have
been saved by just a little bit more surface area. Then, when your
descendants have evolved that extra surface area, their lives would be
saved by just a bit more still if they fell from trees of a slightly
greater height. And so on by insensibly graded steps until, hundreds
of generations later, we arrive at full wings.
Eyes and wings cannot spring into existence in a single step. That
would be like having the almost infinite luck to hit upon the
combination number that opens a large bank vault. But if you spun the
dials of the lock at random, and every time you got a little bit
closer to the lucky number the vault door creaked open another chink,
you would soon have the door open! Essentially, that is the secret of
how evolution by natural selection achieves what once seemed
impossible. Things that cannot plausibly be derived from very
different predecessors can plausibly be derived from only slightly
different predecessors. Provided only that there is a sufficiently
long series of such slightly different predecessors, you can derive
anything from anything else.
Evolution, then, is theoretically capable of doing the job that, once
upon a time, seemed to be the prerogative of God. But is there any
evidence that evolution actually has happened? The answer is yes; the
evidence is overwhelming. Millions of fossils are found in exactly the
places and at exactly the depths that we should expect if evolution
had happened. Not a single fossil has ever been found in any place
where the evolution theory would not have expected it, although this
could very easily have happened: a fossil mammal in rocks so old that
fishes have not yet arrived, for instance, would be enough to disprove
the evolution theory.
The patterns of distribution of living animals and plants on the
continents and islands of the world is exactly what would be expected
if they had evolved from common ancestors by slow, gradual degrees.
The patterns of resemblance among animals and plants is exactly what
we should expect if some were close cousins, and others more distant
cousins to each other. The fact that the genetic code is the same in
all living creatures overwhelmingly suggests that all are descended
from one single ancestor. The evidence for evolution is so compelling
that the only way to save the creation theory is to assume that God
deliberately planted enormous quantities of evidence to make it look
as if evolution had happened. In other words, the fossils, the
geographical distribution of animals, and so on, are all one gigantic
confidence trick. Does anybody want to worship a God capable of such
trickery? It is surely far more reverent, as well as more
scientifically sensible, to take the evidence at face value. All
living creatures are cousins of one another, descended from one remote
ancestor that lived more than 3,000 million years ago.
The Argument from Design, then, has been destroyed as a reason for
believing in a God. Are there any other arguments? Some people believe
in God because of what appears to them to be an inner revelation. Such
revelations are not always edifying but they undoubtedly feel real to
the individual concerned. Many inhabitants of lunatic asylums have an
unshakable inner faith that they are Napoleon or, indeed, God himself.
There is no doubting the power of such convictions for those that have
them, but this is no reason for the rest of us to believe them.
Indeed, since such beliefs are mutually contradictory, we can't
believe them all.
There is a little more that needs to be said. Evolution by natural
selection explains a lot, but it couldn't start from nothing. It
couldn't have started until there was some kind of rudimentary
reproduction and heredity. Modern heredity is based on the DNA code,
which is itself too complicated to have sprung spontaneously into
being by a single act of chance. This seems to mean that there must
have been some earlier hereditary system, now disappeared, which was
simple enough to have arisen by chance and the laws of chemistry and
which provided the medium in which a primitive form of cumulative
natural selection could get started. DNA was a later product of this
earlier cumulative selection. Before this original kind of natural
selection, there was a period when complex chemical compounds were
built up from simpler ones and before that a period when the chemical
elements were built up from simpler elements, following the
well-understood laws of physics. Before that, everything was
ultimately built up from pure hydrogen in the immediate aftermath of
the big bang, which initiated the universe.
There is a temptation to argue that, although God may not be needed to
explain the evolution of complex order once the universe, with its
fundamental laws of physics, had begun, we do need a God to explain
the origin of all things. This idea doesn't leave God with very much
to do: just set off the big bang, then sit back and wait for
everything to happen. The physical chemist Peter Atkins, in his
beautifully written book The Creation, postulates a lazy God who
strove to do as little as possible in order to initiate everything.
Atkins explains how each step in the history of the universe followed,
by simple physical law, from its predecessor. He thus pares down the
amount of work that the lazy creator would need to do and eventually
concludes that he would in fact have needed to do nothing at all!
The details of the early phase of the universe belong to the realm of
physics, whereas I am a biologist, more concerned with the later
phases of the evolution of complexity. For me, the important point is
that, even if the physicist needs to postulate an irreducible minimum
that had to be present in the beginning, in order for the universe to
get started, that irreducible minimum is certainly extremely simple.
By definition, explanations that build on simple premises are more
plausible and more satisfying than explanations that have to postulate
complex and statistically improbable beginnings. And you can't get
much more complex than an Almighty God!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Richard Dawkins is Oxford's Professor of Public Understanding of
Science. He is the author of The Blind Watchmaker (on which this
article is partly based) and Climbing Mount Improbable. He is a Senior
Editor of Free Inquiry.
The above excerpt is from:
The Improbability of God, by Richard Dawkins
The following article is from Free Inquiry magazine,
Volume 18, Number 3.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.world-of-dawkins.com/Dawkins/Work/papers.shtml
.
|
|
|
| User: "Chris Devol" |
|
| Title: Re: NIGM-the Hope of Evolution |
02 May 2004 09:59:04 PM |
|
|
"LP" <whirl_pool@nospam.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:qsab90hbph9e777tid6lth5daeb9ldsblm@4ax.com...
On Sun, 02 May 2004 09:14:44 -0700,
(IKnowHimDoYou) wrote:
NIGM-the Hope of Evolution
Evolution belief depends upon new information being manufactured through
accidental mutations. This opinion is based what is called a natural
information-generating mechanism(NIGM) and is actually another term for
the evolutionary god of radom chance and accidental occurance.
We can safely conclude that living bodies are billions of times too
complicated - too statistically improbable - to have come into being
by sheer chance. How, then, did they come into being? The answer is
that chance enters into the story, but not a single, monolithic act of
chance. Instead, a whole series of tiny chance steps, each one small
enough to be a believable product of its predecessor, occurred one
after the other in sequence.
<snip>
Please post the exact sequence, in full scientific detail, of one of your
alleged "series of tiny chance steps" that produces, say, a bacterium with a
flagellal motor from a bacterium without one.
Then we will have some real evidence to evaluate. Until then, thanks for the
fantasies.
LOL.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Joe" |
|
| Title: Re: NIGM-the Hope of Evolution |
03 May 2004 06:14:07 PM |
|
|
"Chris Devol" <eat@joes.pub> wrote in message
news:Yzilc.3413$Hs1.380@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
"LP" <whirl_pool@nospam.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:qsab90hbph9e777tid6lth5daeb9ldsblm@4ax.com...
On Sun, 02 May 2004 09:14:44 -0700,
(IKnowHimDoYou) wrote:
NIGM-the Hope of Evolution
Evolution belief depends upon new information being manufactured
through
accidental mutations. This opinion is based what is called a natural
information-generating mechanism(NIGM) and is actually another term for
the evolutionary god of radom chance and accidental occurance.
We can safely conclude that living bodies are billions of times too
complicated - too statistically improbable - to have come into being
by sheer chance. How, then, did they come into being? The answer is
that chance enters into the story, but not a single, monolithic act of
chance. Instead, a whole series of tiny chance steps, each one small
enough to be a believable product of its predecessor, occurred one
after the other in sequence.
<snip>
Please post the exact sequence, in full scientific detail, of one of your
alleged "series of tiny chance steps" that produces, say, a bacterium with
a
flagellal motor from a bacterium without one.
Then we will have some real evidence to evaluate. Until then, thanks for
the
fantasies.
LOL.
All living things suddenly appear from an invisible guy waving a magic wand.
Where do I send my cheque.
Joe
.
|
|
|
| User: "Chris Devol" |
|
| Title: Re: NIGM-the Hope of Evolution |
03 May 2004 05:32:13 PM |
|
|
"Joe" <Joe@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:109dh10o2537d58@corp.supernews.com...
"Chris Devol" <eat@joes.pub> wrote in message
news:Yzilc.3413$Hs1.380@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
"LP" <whirl_pool@nospam.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:qsab90hbph9e777tid6lth5daeb9ldsblm@4ax.com...
On Sun, 02 May 2004 09:14:44 -0700,
(IKnowHimDoYou) wrote:
NIGM-the Hope of Evolution
Evolution belief depends upon new information being manufactured
through
accidental mutations. This opinion is based what is called a natural
information-generating mechanism(NIGM) and is actually another term
for
the evolutionary god of radom chance and accidental occurance.
We can safely conclude that living bodies are billions of times too
complicated - too statistically improbable - to have come into being
by sheer chance. How, then, did they come into being? The answer is
that chance enters into the story, but not a single, monolithic act of
chance. Instead, a whole series of tiny chance steps, each one small
enough to be a believable product of its predecessor, occurred one
after the other in sequence.
<snip>
Please post the exact sequence, in full scientific detail, of one of
your
alleged "series of tiny chance steps" that produces, say, a bacterium
with
a
flagellal motor from a bacterium without one.
Then we will have some real evidence to evaluate. Until then, thanks for
the
fantasies.
LOL.
All living things suddenly appear from an invisible guy waving a magic
wand.
Where do I send my cheque.
Not invisible, no magic wand, and all your cheques come from Him.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Tom" |
|
| Title: Re: NIGM-the Hope of Evolution |
03 May 2004 08:26:58 PM |
|
|
"Chris Devol" <eat@joes.pub> wrote in message
news:NLzlc.5782$V97.5666@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
"Joe" <Joe@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:109dh10o2537d58@corp.supernews.com...
"Chris Devol" <eat@joes.pub> wrote in message
news:Yzilc.3413$Hs1.380@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
"LP" <whirl_pool@nospam.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:qsab90hbph9e777tid6lth5daeb9ldsblm@4ax.com...
On Sun, 02 May 2004 09:14:44 -0700,
(IKnowHimDoYou) wrote:
NIGM-the Hope of Evolution
Evolution belief depends upon new information being manufactured
through
accidental mutations. This opinion is based what is called a
natural
information-generating mechanism(NIGM) and is actually another term
for
the evolutionary god of radom chance and accidental occurance.
We can safely conclude that living bodies are billions of times too
complicated - too statistically improbable - to have come into being
by sheer chance. How, then, did they come into being? The answer is
that chance enters into the story, but not a single, monolithic act
of
chance. Instead, a whole series of tiny chance steps, each one small
enough to be a believable product of its predecessor, occurred one
after the other in sequence.
<snip>
Please post the exact sequence, in full scientific detail, of one of
your
alleged "series of tiny chance steps" that produces, say, a bacterium
with
a
flagellal motor from a bacterium without one.
Then we will have some real evidence to evaluate. Until then, thanks
for
the
fantasies.
LOL.
All living things suddenly appear from an invisible guy waving a magic
wand.
Where do I send my cheque.
Not invisible, no magic wand, and all your cheques come from Him.
He doesn't exist except in the deluded minds of his followers and that group
is getting smaller as we become better educated. How great it is :-).
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Joe" |
|
| Title: Re: NIGM-the Hope of Evolution |
03 May 2004 10:01:37 PM |
|
|
"Chris Devol" <eat@joes.pub> wrote in message
news:NLzlc.5782$V97.5666@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
"Joe" <Joe@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:109dh10o2537d58@corp.supernews.com...
"Chris Devol" <eat@joes.pub> wrote in message
news:Yzilc.3413$Hs1.380@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
"LP" <whirl_pool@nospam.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:qsab90hbph9e777tid6lth5daeb9ldsblm@4ax.com...
On Sun, 02 May 2004 09:14:44 -0700,
(IKnowHimDoYou) wrote:
NIGM-the Hope of Evolution
Evolution belief depends upon new information being manufactured
through
accidental mutations. This opinion is based what is called a
natural
information-generating mechanism(NIGM) and is actually another term
for
the evolutionary god of radom chance and accidental occurance.
We can safely conclude that living bodies are billions of times too
complicated - too statistically improbable - to have come into being
by sheer chance. How, then, did they come into being? The answer is
that chance enters into the story, but not a single, monolithic act
of
chance. Instead, a whole series of tiny chance steps, each one small
enough to be a believable product of its predecessor, occurred one
after the other in sequence.
<snip>
Please post the exact sequence, in full scientific detail, of one of
your
alleged "series of tiny chance steps" that produces, say, a bacterium
with
a
flagellal motor from a bacterium without one.
Then we will have some real evidence to evaluate. Until then, thanks
for
the
fantasies.
LOL.
All living things suddenly appear from an invisible guy waving a magic
wand.
Where do I send my cheque.
Not invisible, no magic wand, and all your cheques come from Him.
You are seeing things. And if all cheques came from god then churches
wouldn't be begging for money they would have a direct line of credit.
Joe
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Stephen" |
|
| Title: Re: NIGM-the Hope of Evolution |
03 May 2004 03:32:32 AM |
|
|
"Chris Devol" <eat@joes.pub> wrote in message news:<Yzilc.3413$Hs1.380@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net>...
"LP" <whirl_pool@nospam.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:qsab90hbph9e777tid6lth5daeb9ldsblm@4ax.com...
On Sun, 02 May 2004 09:14:44 -0700,
(IKnowHimDoYou) wrote:
NIGM-the Hope of Evolution
Evolution belief depends upon new information being manufactured through
accidental mutations. This opinion is based what is called a natural
information-generating mechanism(NIGM) and is actually another term for
the evolutionary god of radom chance and accidental occurance.
We can safely conclude that living bodies are billions of times too
complicated - too statistically improbable - to have come into being
by sheer chance. How, then, did they come into being? The answer is
that chance enters into the story, but not a single, monolithic act of
chance. Instead, a whole series of tiny chance steps, each one small
enough to be a believable product of its predecessor, occurred one
after the other in sequence.
<snip>
Please post the exact sequence, in full scientific detail, of one of your
alleged "series of tiny chance steps" that produces, say, a bacterium with a
flagellal motor from a bacterium without one.
Then we will have some real evidence to evaluate. Until then, thanks for the
fantasies.
LOL.
I would hardly call Richard Dawkins' work 'fantasies' even if I didn't
agree with him. Your contempt for him doesn't strengthen your
position.
And besides, the exact sequence, in full scientific detail, of a
development that took probably millions of generations, would be
indeed difficult, for many reasons...time, to pick but one
example...but the inability to answer that request does not consitute
a negation of what Dawkins postulated (neither does it constitute a
proof of what he said). The guy's an Oxford professor - that DOES
unfortunately count for something. And unfortunately you'll find he
has an extremely large amount of "real evidence" to back his
statements up...the crude cut and paste of the article rather didn't
do justice to that.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
