Article <uorm17$1tt4n$1@dont-email.me>

Deutsch English Français Italiano
<uorm17$1tt4n$1@dont-email.me>

View for Bookmarking (what is this?)
Look up another Usenet article
Path: ...!news.mixmin.net!news2.arglkargh.de!news.karotte.org!news.szaf.org!nntp-feed.chiark.greenend.org.uk!ewrotcd!news.eyrie.org!beagle.ediacara.org!.POSTED.beagle.ediacara.org!not-for-mail
From: jillery <69jpil69@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: talk.origins
Subject: Re: West Virginia creationism
Date: Wed, 03 Apr 2024 01:00:06 -0400
Organization: What are you looking for?
Lines: 103
Sender: to%beagle.ediacara.org
Approved: moderator@beagle.ediacara.org
Message-ID: <gdop0jt4mvqljioufv7stmefniid401svh@4ax.com>
References: <utjrbi$2susg$1@dont-email.me> <ebfrvidkrucpm7kv4bctsnrgksg8hjn3go@4ax.com> <cBYNN.132676$GX69.32667@fx46.iad> <66ad07ee-b140-4518-a9df-bffa316b7391@gmail.com> <9OZNN.758376$p%Mb.330094@fx15.iad> <f43i0jh8u89nlndn5137sfa0uo7b0isoik@4ax.com> <8a_ON.491226$yEgf.384550@fx09.iad>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Injection-Info: beagle.ediacara.org; posting-host="beagle.ediacara.org:3.132.105.89";
	logging-data="26598"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@beagle.ediacara.org"
User-Agent: ForteAgent/8.00.32.1272
To: talk-origins@moderators.isc.org
Cancel-Lock: sha1:7CSlXNht/+n5ohuIPktlcfOg/gk=
Bytes: 5898

On Tue, 2 Apr 2024 16:48:04 -0400, Ron Dean
<rondean-noreply@gmail.com> wrote:

>jillery wrote:
>> On Sat, 30 Mar 2024 15:33:24 -0400, Ron Dean
>> <rondean-noreply@gmail.com> wrote:
>[snip]
>>=20
>>> erik simpson wrote:
>>>> On 3/30/24 11:11 AM, Ron Dean wrote:
>>>>> Bob Casanova wrote:
>>>>> Advocates can point to empirical evidence which they claim supports
>>>>> intelligent design. However, they can not point to any evidence =
that
>>>>> they can claim points to the identity of the designer. But
>>>>> in their world that's sufficient. Evidence of design is the =
Cambrian
>>>>> explosion where a myriad of new body plans appeared abruptly,
>>>>> geologically speaking.
>>>>>
>>>>> The problem is information. How and from where did the information =
to
>>>>> build the bodies of the Cambrian animals come from? If the present =
is
>>>>> key to the past. At the present time, today information comes only
>>>>> from mind. So, must it have been during the Cambrian.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Ron Okimoto
>>>>>
>>>> You need to educate yourself about the "Cambrian Explosion".=C2=A0 =
It's been
>>>> a subject of great interest for many years, and there's a great deal
>>>> that's been learned about it.=C2=A0 "Intelligent design" has =
presented no
>>>> such record of accomplishment regarding this period, nor the =
preceding
>>>> Ediacaran period.=C2=A0 In fact, it hasn't any record of =
accomplishment
>>>> regarding any subsequent period.=C2=A0 "It looks designed, so it =
must be"
>>>> isn't evidence of anything except ignorance.=C2=A0 Ignorance itself =
isn't
>>>> bad, since there's an available remedy. Hint; information doesn't =
come
>>>> from the mind.=C2=A0 It goes IN to the mind.
>>>>
>>> Really, if information goes into mind, this still does not answer the
>>> source of information, especially the origin of highly complex
>>> information contained in DNA. Have researched this topic?
>>>>
>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3DaA-FcnLsF1g
>>=20
>>=20
>> Once again, you rely on baseless claims.  You offer zero basis to
>> claim that information comes only from a mind, either now or in the
>> past.=20
>>
>Information is knowledge from books, observation, communication,=20
>research, experience etc.. As such it requires mind. There are no known=20
>exceptions.


DNA information comes from none of the sources you identified above,
therefore it doesn't exist.  QED.


>  You identify zero empirical evidence that supports ID. Instead,
>> you wave an ignorant finger at events like the Cambrian Explosion and
>> things like "information" and "complexity", and baldly assert them
>> evidence of design.
> >
>Life itself is evidence of design.=20


Your comment above is not empirical evidence, but is instead a
baseless conclusion.  Try to recognize the difference.


>Why is there life? What impelled dead=20
>matter towards life? Was it just accidental? At one time the argument=20
>was that first life was a _simple_ cell.
>Furthermore, according to what we find in the fossil record is primarily=
=20
>gaps.


Before you again ask mindless "why" questions, try to identify the
difference between "dead" and "live". =20

=20
>> And then you demand others prove your baseless claims false, while you
>> baselessly handwave away evidence for evolution via unguided natural
>> processes.  That's one way to justify spamming mindless PRATTs while
>> making zero effort to identify either positive evidence for ID or
>> negative evidence against unguided evolution.
>>=20
>> Once again, unguided evolution explains why there are no Cambrian
>> rabbits.  Identify what is ID's explanation for that lack, or show
>> once again you have no idea what you're talking about.  Pick your
>> poison.

--
To know less than we don't know is the nature of most knowledge