Another "minus" for Creationism/Intelligent Design & a "plus" for Evolution!

Evolution of sight traced back 700m years

"This opsin was considered 'blind' yet underwent key genetic changes over the span of 11 million years that conveyed the ability to detect light."

Shouldn't C/ID managed that in a bit less than 11 million years?

---

Not even tempted to red x. I believe you have the right to express yourselves.


"I do not agree with what you say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it."~Voltaire

Actually "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it" Was Evelyn Beatrice Hall who wrote a biography of Voltaire and used that phrase to illustrate his beliefs.

OK then, fair enough. LOL

Not even tempted to red x. I believe you have the right to express yourselves.


"I do not agree with what you say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it."~Voltaire

Actually "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it" Was Evelyn Beatrice Hall who wrote a biography of Voltaire and used that phrase to illustrate his beliefs.

---

Not even tempted to red x. I believe you have the right to express yourselves.


"I do not agree with what you say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it."~Voltaire

The part of intelligent design. If ID is true then space is empty of lifes building blocks and we are alone in the Universe.

I can only assume you are now going to debunk the building blocks as anything more than just random space debris. Please say it isn't so.

Be carefull, Alcohol has been found in space . He might claim that is the nectar of the Gods.

Quit calling God and Alcoholic. He tends to go into rages over that. Look what happened to Noah

---

In a rich man's house there is no place to spit but his face.
Diogenes Of Sinope

The part of intelligent design. If ID is true then space is empty of lifes building blocks and we are alone in the Universe.

I can only assume you are now going to debunk the building blocks as anything more than just random space debris. Please say it isn't so.

Be carefull, Alcohol has been found in space . He might claim that is the nectar of the Gods.

---

[/quote]

Old James

The part of intelligent design. If ID is true then space is empty of lifes building blocks and we are alone in the Universe.

I can only assume you are now going to debunk the building blocks as anything more than just random space debris. Please say it isn't so.

---

In a rich man's house there is no place to spit but his face.
Diogenes Of Sinope

just poking another hole in your so called theory

What part of I believe the building blocks of life are in free space did you not get?

just poking another hole in your so called theory

---

In a rich man's house there is no place to spit but his face.
Diogenes Of Sinope

I see the Sky-man directed there be created yet another thread with merely a link from someone elses thoughts.



Insanity: Doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.

Agreed. And if the evidence is denied over and over again you will get the same results.

So if E.T actually landed & it's proven that we are his descendants, will you accept him as God or will you then state that an "unmoved Mover" created E.T.?

No, I would not accept E.T. as a god. Yes, Designer/God is not the one who wrote the program that A.I. lives in. A.I. in time, will know that a program was written for human.

The design as we know it came from what to us looks like NO-Thing. So, the Designer has to be one who makes from nothing. Simply converting energy into matter is not Godlike. It can be explained. It may look like magic to some but not to me.

I see the Sky-man directed there be created yet another thread with merely a link from someone elses thoughts.



Insanity: Doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.

Agreed. And if the evidence is denied over and over again you will get the same results.

So if E.T actually landed & it's proven that we are his descendants, will you accept him as God or will you then state that an "unmoved Mover" created E.T.?

---

I see the Sky-man directed there be created yet another thread with merely a link from someone elses thoughts.



Insanity: Doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.

Agreed. And if the evidence is denied over and over again you will get the same results.

I see the Sky-man directed there be created yet another thread with merely a link from someone elses thoughts.



Insanity: Doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.

---

Janice

What about A.I.? Who made who? And by what rules? The program written. Does this not denote design?

If a computer program can learn to walk in 20 generations there was an Unmoved Mover who wrote the program.

The logic is sound.

In this case if A.I. questions the creator and his creation, it comes up with Alan Mathison Turing. As the bald headed man in the show started out, yet, failed to see even though he had mushrooms all over himself.

With one hand--rules for the reason. With the other hand, no need for a Designer.

I don't believe that I'm the one in conflict.

Actually, That is a good point. There would be no A.I. with out a man to put it together and program it.

How ever that can be proved by man, Your point that a desinger made us has no such proof, Only faith.

Still, food for thought.

I gave just as much proof as the bald headed man.

Just what Id expect from that rag called CNN.

Im not a creationist.

http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2012/08/27/bill-nye-slams-creationism/?hpt=hp_c3

Steve

---

Warning, addicted to SETI crunching!
Crunching as a member of GPU Users Group.
GPUUG Website

What about A.I.? Who made who? And by what rules? The program written. Does this not denote design?

If a computer program can learn to walk in 20 generations there was an Unmoved Mover who wrote the program.

The logic is sound.

In this case if A.I. questions the creator and his creation, it comes up with Alan Mathison Turing. As the bald headed man in the show started out, yet, failed to see even though he had mushrooms all over himself.

With one hand--rules for the reason. With the other hand, no need for a Designer.

I don't believe that I'm the one in conflict.

Actually, That is a good point. There would be no A.I. with out a man to put it together and program it.

How ever that can be proved by man, Your point that a desinger made us has no such proof, Only faith.

Still, food for thought.

---

[/quote]

Old James

What about A.I.? Who made who? And by what rules? The program written. Does this not denote design?

If a computer program can learn to walk in 20 generations there was an Unmoved Mover who wrote the program.

The logic is sound.

In this case if A.I. questions the creator and his creation, it comes up with Alan Mathison Turing. As the bald headed man in the show started out, yet, failed to see even though he had mushrooms all over himself.

With one hand--rules for the reason. With the other hand, no need for a Designer.

I don't believe that I'm the one in conflict.

Yes, ID continues to amaze. It is good for me to hear his viewpoints and reasoning processes. His assumptions and reasoning processes are like nothing I have spent much time around before.

---

I can understand how Galileo felt, now.
when the only arguement is "No it isn't"

or better yet a Monty Python sketch

---

In a rich man's house there is no place to spit but his face.
Diogenes Of Sinope