Article <ajsi3jdfqcr5095itvlrddnskb56h8ihd2@4ax.com>

Warning: mysqli::__construct(): (HY000/1203): User howardkn already has more than 'max_user_connections' active connections in D:\Inetpub\vhosts\howardknight.net\al.howardknight.net\includes\artfuncs.php on line 21
Failed to connect to MySQL: (1203) User howardkn already has more than 'max_user_connections' active connections
Warning: mysqli::query(): Couldn't fetch mysqli in D:\Inetpub\vhosts\howardknight.net\al.howardknight.net\index.php on line 66
Article <ajsi3jdfqcr5095itvlrddnskb56h8ihd2@4ax.com>
Deutsch English Français Italiano
<ajsi3jdfqcr5095itvlrddnskb56h8ihd2@4ax.com>

View for Bookmarking (what is this?)
Look up another Usenet article
Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!newsfeed.xs3.de!nntp-feed.chiark.greenend.org.uk!ewrotcd!news.eyrie.org!beagle.ediacara.org!.POSTED.beagle.ediacara.org!not-for-mail
From: Vincent Maycock <maycock@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: talk.origins
Subject: Re: West Virginia creationism
Date: Mon, 06 May 2024 17:31:52 -0700
Organization: University of Ediacara
Lines: 203
Sender: to%beagle.ediacara.org
Approved: moderator@beagle.ediacara.org
Message-ID: <ajsi3jdfqcr5095itvlrddnskb56h8ihd2@4ax.com>
References: <4fch1jpp5qtolug4bj158sl9tvn8h7htp9@4ax.com> <ZudSN.257840$hN14.25285@fx17.iad> <folk1jhbg7o63c0spnibf1j72jeb6tcllc@4ax.com> <RUISN.631461$Ama9.561968@fx12.iad> <lafv1jp2fv47for3jusorqcmncfk1d9142@4ax.com> <IA3UN.953$9pR2.722@fx13.iad> <dsbc2jhon7ontdokugvdfg6tedrqnkntq4@4ax.com> <%AzVN.19359$8tL7.11884@fx09.iad> <n7jd2j1lamelgiq69tvlih4mh708alb8d7@4ax.com> <FtDWN.112651$moa7.28881@fx18.iad> <3n8m2jtvhd0nahms2un4i2gjbt1t6bpbk2@4ax.com> <uca_N.78951$TyYf.63711@fx15.iad>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Info: beagle.ediacara.org; posting-host="beagle.ediacara.org:3.132.105.89";
	logging-data="9820"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@beagle.ediacara.org"
User-Agent: ForteAgent/8.00.32.1272
To: talk-origins@moderators.isc.org
Bytes: 11675

On Mon, 6 May 2024 15:29:30 -0400, Ron Dean
<rondean-noreply@gmail.com> wrote:

>Vincent Maycock wrote:
>> On Thu, 25 Apr 2024 21:31:17 -0400, Ron Dean
>> <rondean-noreply@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> Vincent Maycock wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 22 Apr 2024 16:16:59 -0400, Ron Dean
>>>> <rondean-noreply@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Martin Harran wrote:
>>>>>> On Thu, 18 Apr 2024 03:03:03 -0400, Ron Dean
>>>> [...]
>>>>>>>    From then, each succeeding generation the
>>>>>>> deleterious mutations multiplied. I think possibly the proofreading and
>>>>>>> repair, which was an elegantly and highly sophisticated design set up
>>>>>>> for the best results, but over the vast spans of time even the P&R
>>>>>>> mechanisms, which initially were perfect, but with the passage of time
>>>>>>> even the P&R became less perfect due to bad mutations that slipped
>>>>>>> passed the P&R mechanisms, consequent the P&R systems were affected. The
>>>>>>> results we see today.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Again, I wish you would dress my actual question - where does your
>>>>>> intelligent designer fit into that process?
>>>>>>
>>>>> It seems that after the task was completed it said "It is done".
>>>>
>>>> Why do you think that happened?
>>>>
>>> Disappointment maybe. Man's inhumanity to man: wars, murders, thief,
>>> rape etc etc. is a possibility.
>> 
>> Remember that man has only been around for a fraction of the time that
>> the rest of  life has been around.  What was there to be disappointed
>> in before humans were around?
> >
>Why would it be?

Because you just said it would be. 

>>> If we were puppets on a string, perhaps
>>> this would not have happens, IOW had we been denied free agency we might
>>> still be in its good graces. I strongly suspect God turned it's back of
>>> this planet and it's inhabitants, due to it's disappointment..
>> 
>> Do you think we *need* to have wars, murders, thievery, and rape to
>> achieve "free agency"?
> >
>I think you deliberately stated it have it exactly backwards

How would you state it?

>>>>> left things with the capacity and ability  to take care of itself.
>>>>
>>>> And how did that turn out for him, given the pervasiveness of
>>>> extinction?
>>>>
>>> I think due to gradual increasing genetic errors and increase rate of
>>> deleterious mutations each generation becomes  less fit than the
>>> preceding generation, so in the passing spans of time the genes of a
>>> species become less and less incapable of reproduction or species
>>> survival. This could account for many of 99%+ of of all species that
>>> ever lived that have gone extinct. Of course the dinosaurs became
>>> extinct due to a 6 mile diameter meteor striking the Earth. Also
>>> changing weather the coming and going of ice ages; as well massive
>>> volcano eruptions  accounts for extinction of many species for example
>>> in Siberia.
>> 
>> So it didn't turn out that well for him.  Why?
> >
>Because of free will. Had we been born robots with out a will or 
>thinking mind our lives totally controlled by unwavering instinct, would 
>this have been better? Is there another option?

Yes, in fact there is.  Give people their freedom of choice but don't
be so extremist about it that you  allow people to hurt others -- it's
the foundation of the criminal justice system, in fact.

>>>>> It
>>>>> seems that the designer left the scene. Over time and the 2ND law
>>>>> everything enters into downward tends, copying errors occur, things tend
>>>>> to disintegrate and inevitably things move towards dissolution and
>>>>> decay.
>>>>
>>>> If you believe the Designer is God, perhaps you could fill us in on
>>>> what we should expect to see if that designer was responsible for
>>>> life's diversity. What should we be looking for to prove or disprove
>>>> your "hypothesis"?
>>>>
>>> Falsify the existence of a designer(God)? I've only recently come to
>>> that conclusion.
>> 
>> How do you propose that we test for the existence of God?
> >
>Find an way to determine what we observe in nature as real design, 
>apparent design or illusion.And observation is the first principle of 
>the scientific method. It isn't science that determines whether design 
>in nature is real or apparent, but rather philosophical position. The 
>fact is, evolution is an alternative explanation.

If the evidence suggested that a designer existed, you would need more
than that to test for the existence of God.  

>>> One on the strongest evidence for a God, as far as I'm
>>> concerned, is the infusion of information in this planet I'm convinced
>>> that no one absolutely _knows_ how information arose in via natural
>>> processes in a blind, purposeless, random and mindless universe.
>> 
>> Would you agree that the sequence 1101100101 is information?  If so,
>> can you explain why you think it couldn't occur naturally?
> >
>It is but you don't  find this in nature, but rather on a computer, cell 
>phones etc. Whether or not there is a translation of such information it 
>serves of function.

What if a group of electrons sequentially went through a magnetic
field and were therefore deflected upwards or downwards.  Then say
that "up deflection" is 0 and "down deflection" is 1.  Then the
behavior of the electrons would be defined by 1101100101 as  "down,
down, up, down, down, up, up, down, up, down" -- without the
interference of any humans.

>>> But if
>>> you deny the existence of God, then you have no other options: all
>>> that's left for you are educated guesses, hypothesis and theories,
>>> because but no knows how natural processes originated information.
>>> Furthermore high levels of complex information comes from a mind.
>> 
>> So invoking a Designer changes your idea from being just an educated
>> guess?  You're trying to denigrate non-Designer ideas as being just
>> hypotheses and theories, but there's nothing wrong with those things,
>> and in fact, invoking God does not reach the level of being even a
>> hypothesis itself. 
>>
>The significant point in all this _is_ the undeniable fact that life 
>exist, where it should not, except  there's no know way to demonstrate 
>something or some0ne brought it about. But the fact that life exist is 
>evidence that life was purposefully and intentionally brought about 
>since nature or natural processes could have derived life from dead 
>matter. There are two requirements before the origin of the first cell 
>could happen: advanced information

That's just a buzz-word you're using to pretend that you're doing
something fundamental.  In reality information science has no deep
connections with the origin of life's complexity.

>and high complexity. It's an all or 
>nothing scenario. There is no know source of highly complicated 
>information apart from mind. This is one of the reason a new movement by 
>scientist who find that ne0-Darwinism faulty.

They have problems with neo-Darwinism, not evolution itself. 

>These are PhD with the same education levels and credentials as the 
>mainstream scientist who have no doubts. I agree these intellectuals are 
========== REMAINDER OF ARTICLE TRUNCATED ==========