Originally posted by tabibito
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
Natural Science 301 Guidelines
This is an open forum area for all members for discussions on all issues of science and origins. This area will and does get volatile at times, but we ask that it be kept to a dull roar, and moderators will intervene to keep the peace if necessary. This means obvious trolling and flaming that becomes a problem will be dealt with, and you might find yourself in the doghouse.
As usual, Tweb rules apply. If you haven't read them now would be a good time.
Forum Rules: Here
As usual, Tweb rules apply. If you haven't read them now would be a good time.
Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less
Specified complexity
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by Seeker View PostWrong. Philosophy is proven and driven by logic. And LOGIC dictates that ''no one is obliged to prove a non-existence of anything''.
eliminate
Originally posted by tabibito View PostBut no less subject to falsification than the non-existence of an intelligent designer.1Cor 15:34 Come to your senses as you ought and stop sinning; for I say to your shame, there are some who know not God.
.⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
Scripture before Tradition:
but that won't prevent others from
taking it upon themselves to deprive you
of the right to call yourself Christian.
⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
Comment
-
Originally posted by Seeker View PostThanks, but what I am asking is if this notion of ''specificity'' is a falsifable hypothesis -- i. e. has it been proven false?
The "specified" in specified complexity refers to matching an independent pattern or sequence, as in a sequence of letters, nucleotides, amino-acids, binary digits, etc.
A single letter of the alphabet is specified without being complex. A long sentence of random letters is complex without being specified. A Shakespearean sonnet is both complex and specified.
This is not related to the specificity of an enzyme. Carl Weiland appears to be confused.Jorge: Functional Complex Information is INFORMATION that is complex and functional.
MM: First of all, the Bible is a fixed document.
MM on covid-19: We're talking about an illness with a better than 99.9% rate of survival.
seer: I believe that so called 'compassion' [for starving Palestinian kids] maybe a cover for anti Semitism, ...
Comment
-
Originally posted by tabibito View PostPerhaps you are right. I will therefore rephrase:
eliminate
substitute: no less subject to falsification than the concept of the development of a universe, and of life, by wholly natural processes.
The bold above represents the fallacy of 'arguing from ignorance.'
The elephant in the room is there the possibility that a falsifiable hypothesis to support ID, and the only way is to falsify the hypothesis in part or wholly the laws of nature and natural process cannot potentially explain the nature of our physical existence including life. So far all the proposals of specified complexity, and irreducible complexity have scientific viable explanations, which explain the examples provided by the Discovery Institute.
Comment
-
Originally posted by shunyadragon View PostThe problem is the falsification of the claims of the Discovery Institute Intelligent Design. The existence of the 'Intelligent Designer' nor nonexistence of the Intelligent Designer is not falsifiable by scientific methods. You note 'wholly by natural processes' this does not address the issue, and it hints at an attempt to falsify the negative which cannot be done. The only objective verifiable evidence supports and demonstrates natural processes and the laws of nature.
The bold above represents the fallacy of 'arguing from ignorance.'
The elephant in the room is there the possibility that a falsifiable hypothesis to support ID, and the only way is to falsify the hypothesis in part or wholly the laws of nature and natural process cannot potentially explain the nature of our physical existence including life. So far all the proposals of specified complexity, and irreducible complexity have scientific viable explanations, which explain the examples provided by the Discovery Institute.1Cor 15:34 Come to your senses as you ought and stop sinning; for I say to your shame, there are some who know not God.
.⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
Scripture before Tradition:
but that won't prevent others from
taking it upon themselves to deprive you
of the right to call yourself Christian.
⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
Comment
-
Originally posted by tabibito View PostEh? The argument propounded by atheists is that the universe and life arose by wholly natural processes, or if you prefer, spontaneously. That IS a positive claim - even a bare assertion - and one that is not "falsifiable."
This is the assumption of Ontological Naturalism of atheists and not Methodological Naturalism, which cannot falsify anything beyond the nature of our physical existence. You need to read my posts carefully. I said science CANNOT falsify either the existence nor non-existence of an 'Intelligent Designer' some call God.
This is not an atheism versus theism issue.
Read again . . .
The problem is the falsification of the claims of the Discovery Institute Intelligent Design. The existence of the 'Intelligent Designer' nor nonexistence of the Intelligent Designer is not falsifiable by scientific methods. You note 'wholly by natural processes' this does not address the issue, and it hints at an attempt to falsify the negative which cannot be done. The only objective verifiable evidence supports and demonstrates natural processes and the laws of nature.
The bold above represents the fallacy of 'arguing from ignorance.'
The elephant in the room is there the possibility that a falsifiable hypothesis to support ID, and the only way is to falsify the hypothesis in part or wholly the laws of nature and natural process cannot potentially explain the nature of our physical existence including life. So far all the proposals of specified complexity, and irreducible complexity have scientific viable explanations, which explain the examples provided by the Discovery Institute.Last edited by shunyadragon; 04-09-2019, 11:48 AM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by tabibito View PostEh? The argument propounded by atheists is that the universe and life arose by wholly natural processes, or if you prefer, spontaneously. That IS a positive claim - even a bare assertion - and one that is not "falsifiable."
That the universe and life arising by wholly natural processes hasn't been falsified doesn't mean that it couldn't be falsified.Last edited by Roy; 04-09-2019, 12:01 PM.Jorge: Functional Complex Information is INFORMATION that is complex and functional.
MM: First of all, the Bible is a fixed document.
MM on covid-19: We're talking about an illness with a better than 99.9% rate of survival.
seer: I believe that so called 'compassion' [for starving Palestinian kids] maybe a cover for anti Semitism, ...
Comment
-
Originally posted by Roy View PostIt is falsifiable The Cre/ID ideas about irreducible complexity and information increase are attempts to falsify evolution. There are many other things that could falsify evolution, including a very young earth, an inability to arrange lifeforms into a tree of descent, a genetic structure that didn't mutate, or discovering a bunch of gnomes in an underground network who manufacture eggs then sneak out at night and implant them in nests and ovaries.
That the universe and life arising by wholly natural processes hasn't been falsified doesn't mean that it couldn't be falsified.
Comment
-
Originally posted by tabibito View PostIf it is a matter of mere philosophy, nothing has to be proven.
Comment
-
Originally posted by shunyadragon View PostThis is the assumption of Ontological Naturalism of atheists and not Methodological Naturalism, which cannot falsify anything beyond the nature of our physical existence. You need to read my posts carefully. I said science CANNOT falsify either the existence nor non-existence of an 'Intelligent Designer' some call God.1Cor 15:34 Come to your senses as you ought and stop sinning; for I say to your shame, there are some who know not God.
.⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
Scripture before Tradition:
but that won't prevent others from
taking it upon themselves to deprive you
of the right to call yourself Christian.
⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
Comment
-
Originally posted by tabibito View PostThat is what I said. Scientific method can't give the answer to whether the universe and life arose through Intelligent Design or spontaneously. It is a philosophical issue.
Case closed!!!Last edited by shunyadragon; 04-09-2019, 09:54 PM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by shunyadragon View PostThan Discovery Institute totally failed to demonstrate any scientific basis for Intelligent Design relying only on assumptions in philosophy, which Discovery Institute depends on theistic assumptions concerning the existence of an 'Intelligent Designer,' and not science.
Case closed!!!1Cor 15:34 Come to your senses as you ought and stop sinning; for I say to your shame, there are some who know not God.
.⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
Scripture before Tradition:
but that won't prevent others from
taking it upon themselves to deprive you
of the right to call yourself Christian.
⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
Comment
-
Originally posted by tabibito View PostThat is what I said. Scientific method can't give the answer to whether the universe and life arose through Intelligent Design or spontaneously. It is a philosophical issue.
Again . . . that negates the claim of the Discovery Institutes claim that there is scientific basis for Intelligent Design.
Comment
-
Originally posted by tabibito View PostUsing a specific case to establish a general principle? And the Discovery Institute as the specific case? Decent philosophical consideration doesn't ignore established fact. (and I make no apology for using words as they are generally understood and accepted in ordinary usage).
Comment
Related Threads
Collapse
Topics | Statistics | Last Post | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Started by shunyadragon, 05-28-2024, 01:19 PM
|
18 responses
105 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by shunyadragon
05-30-2024, 05:13 PM
|
||
Started by rogue06, 05-03-2024, 12:33 PM
|
9 responses
97 views
2 likes
|
Last Post 05-27-2024, 05:48 AM |
Comment