I wasn’t trying to trick an ID person. I was trying to point to the tautology of some ID logic. They point to a pristine or complex natural geometry … and say it LOOKS Designed. Geometric arguments like these are inherently tautological.
Eddie,
I await Jonathan Burke’s explanation for his images…
As usual, Eddie, your position is merely a reflexive assertion that whatever I say has no relevancy.
a watch that develop like a flower or something. if you will see such a case you will think that its a product of design or natural process?
ok. and what about a spining motor like this one?:
http://www.veritas-ucsb.org/library/origins/GRAPHICS-CAPTIONS/Flagellum.html
None of them.
See my previous post; I look for evidence of independence from natural causation, and biological organisms are not independent of natural causation.
It’s a biological organism, so it’s not independent of natural causation. See here.
I actually remember having seen a watch evolve… Check out this YouTube video ;)…
And yes, the end results in that video were not “designed” in the human sense of the word, but the boundary conditions that allowed this clock to evolve were designed. So here we have intelligent design working through gradual processes such as evolution. We don’t need to get stuck on trying to proof that things are irreducibly complex to believe in a Creator.
hey casper.
no realy. the video start with a pendulum that can move. its need about 3-4 part for starting point. so even the starting point is irreducible complex.
now- what if you will find a self replicating watch in other planet? do you will conclude that this watch was design or evolve?
here is the problem- you believe that its true. you dont know its actually true. and we have evidence that contradict this belief.
according to this article the ttss system share some parts with the flagellum. the problem is that it doesnt prove it can evolve. why? because we can find the same parts in systems like car and airplane. they both share parts like wheels, feul tank and so on. but there is no step wise way from a car into an airplane. so there is not step wise from the ttss to the flagellum.
I already did.
In what sense? If you agree with that you should have no problem with “Darwinian” evolution.
We know it’s actually true.
Intermediaries have been found. And the car/airplane example actually shows how we can reliably deduce that the modern airplane is a technological evolution of the modern car.
Well… I certainly didn’t see THAT one coming!
I’m sorry that it’s unclear to you; when I say they weren’t designed, that means they were the result of natural processes. These structures are the product of lava cooling (specifically basalt). These structures were not designed. It’s an entirely natural process. Were you unaware of how basalt lava cools and forms these structures?