Not only that, but belief in the Divine is un-natural for children. It's somemthing they have to be taught.
Denial of evolution IV
- Thread starter Hercules Rockefeller
- Start date
- Status
No, I am the one outside the closet, asking you to come out and meet Santa Clause, chief of accountability, who will give you a nothing but a lump of coal if you so much as utter the term 'intelligent design'.
Of course Santa Claus was created by intelligent design! He didn't appear by magic or by evolution. He thought about what he was doing. - That's intelligence.
Yes there is this fable that has developed around the historical account of the life of Saint Nicholas.Correct. Intelligent Design explains a fable.
I was meaning the actual historical person, St Nick, intelligently and purposefully designed his life style and from that evolved the fable.
Like yourself you are the work of intelligent design. Not the human organism as such but the thinking developing persona "Aqueous ID". You are not like you are by accident, but by design.
Will you be remembered 500 years later?
Supposition.
Of course it isn't. I know what it takes to become "good". It doesn't happen by accident. Even Einstein had to work at it. He is of about the same ilk as Saint Nicholas.
The Man of the last century was Albert Einstein. It is us who have given him the designation. Who knows how much commercialisation will develop around Einstein in years to come. His face, his name will not be soon forgotten.
Wrong.
How can we develop our personae by design if we have no control over who we meet throughout out lives? Over who has influence (any sort of influence - intellectual included) over us? Over what actually happens to us throughout our lives?
We make choices all the time. And this time I choose to go to bed.
Yes there is this fable that has developed around the historical account of the life of Saint Nicholas.
I was meaning the actual historical person, St Nick, intelligently and purposefully designed his life style and from that evolved the fable.
Like yourself you are the work of intelligent design. Not the human organism as such but the thinking developing persona "Aqueous ID". You are not like you are by accident, but by design.
Will you be remembered 500 years later?
My reasons for denying Intelligent Design include:
- it is a parent company of the creation science fantasy corporation
- creation science, on top of sheer BS, is a hoax, masquerading as science
- ID folks may try to sidestep CS, but it's like an incurable disease
- ID is nothing more than a rehash of Aristotle's prime-mover concept
- the fact of symmetries in nature does not mean a god took the sheet, folded it in half, and cut a pattern. Symmetries happen.
- coincidences happen, without calling upon the gods for explanation
- the abundance of scientific evidence, for me, exudes an attractive megaforce and I can't get enough of it. ID/CS is the enemy of that.
- the enemy of my friend is my enemy, so I loathe ID/CS
And since we cannot see the outcome of those choices...
In ref to ID being false, it is best to note that SD has more supporting evidence. See some of it here: http://www.sciforums.com/showpost.php?p=2865640&postcount=457
(SD is short for Stupid Design, if one wants to postulate life was designed.)
(SD is short for Stupid Design, if one wants to postulate life was designed.)
Let me go back to the basics, which is the membrane potential created by the segregation of sodium and potassium ions. This potential, once formed, represents lower entropy and higher energy. This can be seen if we stop adding ATP energy and let the potential dissipate in the natural direction of lower energy and higher entropy. That direction will remove the segregation to form a uniform solution of cations of both side so of the membrane. This mixed and uniform state represents higher entropy and lower energy.
Therefore, the membrane potential created, which segregates sodium and potassium ions, which uses the lion's share of ATP energy to drive protein work cycles, represents an induced situation of higher energy and lower entropy. This boundary condition is constantly renewed.
If we look at left handed protein helixes, these represent only one of the possible two options for protein helixes. Life only uses one of two possible. This loss of freedom also means the entropy of the proteins, relative to handedness, has decreased, permanently. I made the parallel between the boundary condition and the single handedness.
How does the existing theory explain single handedness? I know the answer by wish others to say to out loud so we can analyze that answer to see if it is full of wishful thinking. I still hear crickets.
Therefore, the membrane potential created, which segregates sodium and potassium ions, which uses the lion's share of ATP energy to drive protein work cycles, represents an induced situation of higher energy and lower entropy. This boundary condition is constantly renewed.
If we look at left handed protein helixes, these represent only one of the possible two options for protein helixes. Life only uses one of two possible. This loss of freedom also means the entropy of the proteins, relative to handedness, has decreased, permanently. I made the parallel between the boundary condition and the single handedness.
How does the existing theory explain single handedness? I know the answer by wish others to say to out loud so we can analyze that answer to see if it is full of wishful thinking. I still hear crickets.
I am not denying evolution, but evolution is denying this low entropy and higher energy boundary conditions, which should have an impact on evolution, such as inducing the lower entropy of single handedness. The denial is based on prestige and emotional appeal but never on actual scientific proof that says otherwise.
Please support this contention with facts.
Do you think you covered my point of personal intelligent design? I think it is different from ID main definition.
Personal development => personal intelligent design.
Your answer seemed to be more a rant against creationists.
We all agree that the natural direction of cationic flow is in the direction of lower energy and higher entropy. If we took the membrane potential, stopped ATP addition and allowed it to lower energy and increase entropy, it will move in the opposite direction of the gradient. As such the membrane potential creates a boundary condition of lowered entropy and higher energy. This take energy and work to establish and does not violate the entropy/energy of the universe. But it does create a boundary for the cells that maintains lower entropy and higher energy.
I have asked how does evolution take that into account? An intelligent design, based on science, does not ignore things that are new or inconvenient. A dogmatic design will try to defend traditions using whatever means necessary. The lack of response to what I showed, but followed by trying to discredit with emotional appeal is what I was talking about.
I asked a simple question, how does the cell maintain the low entropy with the single handedness of bio-materials?
- Status