Design with no designer?

  • Thread starter Thread starter coolduude
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Think_About_It said:
Only in that it’s novel. It doesn’t matter how different it seems. If you think DNA is so fascinating, you must be thrilled about how it makes people sick or retarded at birth sometimes. If DNA is a design, it’s a shabby one.
Click to expand...
By whose standards? Do you know the intention of the designer? Unless you can prove you do, this is nonsense.
 
buffalo said:
By whose standards? Do you know the intention of the designer? Unless you can prove you do, this is nonsense.
Click to expand...
You prove the designer, and I’ll prove the ineptitude. We’ll work on this problem together 🙂
 
buffalo said:
First off - all the religions cannot be true. They have contradictory points. So how does one parse through these points? Is this where you want to play today?
Click to expand...
Hinduism is just as true to a Hindu, as Catholicism is true to a Catholic, as Sikhism is true to a Sikh, as Judaism is true to a Jew… et cetera…

Surely, this reality isn’t lost on you?
 
Zatzat said:
Hinduism is just as true to a Hindu, as Catholicism is true to a Catholic, as Sikhism is true to a Sikh, as Judaism is true to a Jew… et cetera…

Surely, this reality isn’t lost on you?
Click to expand...
The reality of they cannot all be true hasn’t been lost on you?

Again, one has to embark on a journey to seek the truth wherever it leads. If you do with earnest there is only one place you will end up. In harmony with the fullness of truth. Try it out for yourself.
 
buffalo said:
Premise: Design exists and we can detect it.

Methods: Distinguish design of specific objects or features in the universe by utilizing a formula/process to determine the probability.
Click to expand...
Okay. Nature is the benchmark against which we say something is designed by human hands. What will be the benchmark against which we say something is designed by supernatural hands? We know that buildings do not appear naturally (that is without human effort) so we say it’s designed. In all that there is, we have no measuring stick against which *all that there is *appears. It’s within a closed system beyond which we cannot extrapolate.
 
buffalo said:
The reality of they cannot all be true hasn’t been lost on you?
Click to expand...
10 religions. 10 different Gods. 10 different systems of belief. 10 worshipers who sincerely believe they worship the one true God (s). 10 Gods that cannot be conclusively proven to exist or not exist…they are all equal.
buffalo said:
Again, one has to embark on a journey to seek the truth wherever it leads. If you do with earnest there is only one place you will end up. In harmony with the fullness of truth.
Click to expand...
I suspect that a Sikh or a Hindu would not reply that one would end up with Jesus.
buffalo said:
Try it out for yourself.
Click to expand...
I have. Regarding a personal God, there was nothing there.
 
Think_About_It said:
Okay. Nature is the benchmark against which we say something is designed by human hands. What will be the benchmark against which we say something is designed by supernatural hands? We know that buildings do not appear naturally (that is without human effort) so we say it’s designed. In all that there is, we have no measuring stick against which *all that there is *appears. It’s within a closed system beyond which we cannot extrapolate.
Click to expand...
We can agree then that design is distinguishable.

OK - now when we look at DNA we see the hallmarks of design - language, symbols and code. We know we did not make DNA.
 
buffalo said:
We can agree then that design is distinguishable.

OK - now when we look at DNA we see the hallmarks of design - language, symbols and code. We know we did not make DNA.
Click to expand...
Language, symbols, and code are hallmarks of human design when an artifact has language, symbols, and code. Language, symbols, and code cannot be hallmarks of supernatural design, because we have no benchmark against which to say something is, in fact supernaturally designed. See? Human designs are compared to human designs. Allegations of supernatural designs are compared to our conception of human design, which cannot tell us anything about the supernatural. You’re extrapolating beyond your means.
 
Think_About_It said:
Language, symbols, and code are hallmarks of human design when an artifact has language, symbols, and code. Language, symbols, and code cannot be hallmarks of supernatural design, because we have no benchmark against which to say something is, in fact supernaturally designed. See? Human designs are compared to human designs. Allegations of supernatural designs are compared to our conception of human design, which cannot tell us anything about the supernatural. You’re extrapolating beyond your means.
Click to expand...
That is the point ID theorists make. Philosophers have to consider the evidence.

The point I am making is we see language, symbols and code in DNA therefore we see design. Who did it? We do not know, says an ID theorist. It could be an alien, it could be God.

Now a philosopher who is not constrained by empiricism is free to extrapolate.
 
buffalo said:
That is the point ID theorists make. Philosophers have to consider the evidence.

The point I am making is we see language, symbols and code in DNA therefore we see design. Who did it? We do not know, says an ID theorist. It could be an alien, it could be God.
Click to expand...
So you take the language, symbols, and codes in the world, call them design, and then say that DNA matches that crieria.
Now a philosopher who is not constrained by empiricism is free to extrapolate.
Click to expand...
Okay, well go ahead…
 
Think_About_It said:
So you take the language, symbols, and codes in the world, call them design, and then say that DNA matches that crieria.

Okay, well go ahead…
Click to expand...
Yes.

Is your claim that language, codes and symbols exist in the rocks, the dirt etc…???
 
Zatzat said:
Is it not you ( the religious) who are making the positive claim that the world was designed by a specific supernatural creator?

Yes?

The onus to prove the premise true, does rest on the one making the positive claim.

Yes?

The reality is, there is no more or less evidence that the Christian God is responsible for creation, than there is that the Hindu or Sikh Gods are responsible…let alone any God at all.
Click to expand...
It is you who are making the positive claim that physical laws are sufficient to explain the evidence for design. The onus is on you to substantiate that claim.

There is **no evidence **that the evidence for design is the result of purposeless processes…
 
buffalo said:
Yes.

Is your claim that language, codes and symbols exist in the rocks, the dirt etc…???
Click to expand...
No, my claim is that what you call language, codes, and symbols in DNA are just patterns, all of which can be found in rocks and dirt.
 
tjm190 said:
DNA doesn’t have letters or language- we assign letters and words to the patterns we see.
Click to expand...
I was asking for an example.

In any case - we assign the letters as a code so we can make sense of it. The pattern represents a language.

Let’s compare this to English:

Regulon - Paragraph
Operon - Sentence
Gene - Word
Codon - Letter

Statistical linguistic study of DNA sequences
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top