Intelligent Design

[rossum]

I hate to be this simplistic

Then do not be simplistic if you hate it.

You are talking about “complexity”, but you are not using any standard calculable measure of complexity, such as Shannon complexity or Kolmogorov complexity. You are using your own personal measure to which nobody else has access.

By my personal standard of complexity, whales are more complex than humans because they can stay underwater for longer. Fish are even more complex because they can spend their entire lives underwater without coming up for air at all.

Neither of our personal measures of complexity are of any use to anyone else, because they are individual and personal to each of us.

If so, your entire life is an illusion.

It is. Look at the top right of my posts.

The nun Wu Jin-cang asked the Sixth Patriach Hui-neng, “I have studied the Mahaparinirvana sutra for many years, yet there are many areas I do not quite understand. Please enlighten me.”

The patriach responded, “I am illiterate. Please read out the characters to me and perhaps I will be able to explain the meaning.”

Said the nun, “You cannot even recognize the characters. How are you able then to understand the meaning?”

“Truth has nothing to do with words. Truth can be likened to the bright moon in the sky. Words, in this case, can be likened to a finger. The finger can point to the moon’s location. However, the finger is not the moon. To look at the moon, it is necessary to gaze beyond the finger, right?”

rossum

 

[The_DNA_Rose]

Then do not be simplistic if you hate it.

You are talking about “complexity”, but you are not using any standard calculable measure of complexity, such as Shannon complexity or Kolmogorov complexity. You are using your own personal measure to which nobody else has access.

By my personal standard of complexity, whales are more complex than humans because they can stay underwater for longer. Fish are even more complex because they can spend their entire lives underwater without coming up for air at all.

Neither of our personal measures of complexity are of any use to anyone else, because they are individual and personal to each of us.

It is. Look at the top right of my posts.

The nun Wu Jin-cang asked the Sixth Patriach Hui-neng, “I have studied the Mahaparinirvana sutra for many years, yet there are many areas I do not quite understand. Please enlighten me.”

The patriach responded, “I am illiterate. Please read out the characters to me and perhaps I will be able to explain the meaning.”

Said the nun, “You cannot even recognize the characters. How are you able then to understand the meaning?”

“Truth has nothing to do with words. Truth can be likened to the bright moon in the sky. Words, in this case, can be likened to a finger. The finger can point to the moon’s location. However, the finger is not the moon. To look at the moon, it is necessary to gaze beyond the finger, right?”

rossum

Look dude, you could have 20 PhD’s in every subject, this does not mean you could answer the question as, how does DNA, rearrange the elements of the Earth, into molecules and protein strings that allow for PhD’s to exist in the first place.

The human DNA molecule, is the most advanced code in the known universe, if it is shorter, than the code of an onion, the advanced nature is clear, as onions do not know that humans exist.

Your argument is that a larger code is more complex, and this does not seem to be true, in fact it demonstrates that the onion code is inefficient when compared to the human code.

However if you choose to believe that an onion can do higher mathematical calculations than some people, you might be correct.

 

[Peter_Plato]

So do onions make people soup?

If so, your entire life is an illusion.

So, for you, the metaphysical question is entirely an a posteriori one, determined by how it all shakes down in the end? If Hitler made onion soup of his opponents, then his view of things would, ipso facto, be the correct one. Truth is simply determined as a consequence of who makes onion soup out of who?

 

[CHRISTINE77]

Look dude, you could have 20 PhD’s in every subject, this does not mean you could answer the question as, how does DNA, rearrange the elements of the Earth, into molecules and protein strings that allow for PhD’s to exist in the first place.

The human DNA molecule, is the most advanced code in the known universe, if it is shorter, than the code of an onion, the advanced nature is clear, as onions do not know that humans exist.

Your argument is that a larger code is more complex, and this does not seem to be true, in fact it demonstrates that the onion code is inefficient when compared to the human code.

However if you choose to believe that an onion can do higher mathematical calculations than some people, you might be correct.

I’m with you. Certain things are self-evident and obvious, yet some people try to make a big complicated falsified mess out of them. It is obvious that human beings are the most intelligent life form on this earth, (well, except for *some *human beings!)

 

[Peter_Plato]

The human DNA molecule, is the most advanced code in the known universe, if it is shorter, than the code of an onion, the advanced nature is clear, as onions do not know that humans exist.

Perhaps onions are merely being very secretive about the knowledge they possess?

They may be just hanging back waiting for humans to build the infrastructure and then exterminate our selves before they make their move? Perhaps you underestimate onions? Clever little rascals they be.

 

[The_DNA_Rose]

So, for you, the metaphysical question is entirely an a posteriori one, determined by how it all shakes down in the end? If Hitler made onion soup of his opponents, then his view of things would, ipso facto, be the correct one. Truth is simply determined as a consequence of who makes onion soup out of who?

Ah yes, you are now evoking Godwin’s law, as you have no other rational argument, as to refute the inexplicable and Godlike complexity of human DNA.

rationalwiki.org/wiki/Godwin’s_Law

Do whatever is needed, to distract away from your aforementioned belief, that onions are more complicated than humans.

 

[The_DNA_Rose]

Perhaps onions are merely being very secretive about the knowledge they possess?

They may be just hanging back waiting for humans to build the infrastructure and then exterminate our selves before they make their move? Perhaps you underestimate onions? Clever little rascals they be.

Yes indeed, now lie back on zee couch and tell me more about your mother…

 

[Peter_Plato]

No one knows how the Pyramids were built, except that DNA did the building.

But humans are not DNA. Perhaps DNA is merely using humans as slave labour?

Since onions have more complex DNA, then my vote goes to the onions. Onions manipulate their DNA to be tasty so humans will propagate them until they can make their move. The Pyramids were built to be huge cold cellars for the storage of the vast population of onions that will eventually dominate the Earth.

 

[Bahman]

@ rossum and the_DNA_Rose

I follow your debates closely and I would like to engage to it. There are few facts that I would like to stress:

1. Size of DNA matters unless the major part of it cannot manifest itself as a separate function of the species
2. Functions related to different code give different advantage to species
3. Different species are separate with a gap so called genetic gap
4. Each species can fall in a trap so called genetic trap that the species cannot gain the huge advantage in complexity no matter how complex is its DNA

 

[Peter_Plato]

Ah yes, you are now evoking Godwin’s law, as you have no other rational argument, as to refute the inexplicable and Godlike complexity of human DNA.

You are, perhaps, missing the obvious? God.

In any case, the argument was made that onions have more complex DNA, ergo, they - according to your own argument - are more “godlike” than humans.

Call me mercenary, but my nod goes to the onions.

Humans seem to mess up a great deal. The efficiency and stealth of the onions is breathtaking.

 

[The_DNA_Rose]

But humans are not DNA. Perhaps DNA is merely using humans as slave labour?

Since onions have more complex DNA, then my vote goes to the onions. Onions manipulate their DNA to be tasty so humans will propagate them until they can make their move. The Pyramids were built to be huge cold cellars for the storage of the vast population of onions that will eventually dominate the Earth.

True, humans are not DNA, humans are the elements of the Earth, as arranged by DNA.

You are catching on…

There may be hope for you yet

remember, God forgives.

 

[The_DNA_Rose]

@ rossum and the_DNA_Rose

I follow your debates closely and I would like to engage to it. There are few facts that I would like to stress:

1. Size of DNA matters unless the major part of it cannot manifest itself as a separate function of the species
2. Functions related to different code give different advantage to species
3. Different species are separate with a gap so called genetic gap
4. Each species can fall in a trap so called genetic trap that the species cannot gain the huge advantage in complexity no matter how complex is its DNA

The size of DNA matters not at present, because only a small part of the code can understood at present. In fact a huge portion of DNA is called junk DNA, not because it is junk, but because it does not appear to be used. The analogy here is that one mans idea of junk, is another creators idea of creation.

Huh, your #4 says that an amoeba is equal to a human, or per say that an onion is more complex than a human as well.

Where does this nonsense come from?

And are there really people that believe this ****?

Sheesh, the world being 5,000 years old makes more sense than this.

u r beaten.

 

[The_DNA_Rose]

You are, perhaps, missing the obvious? God.

In any case, the argument was made that onions have more complex DNA, ergo, they - according to your own argument - are more “godlike” than humans.

Call me mercenary, but my nod goes to the onions.

Humans seem to mess up a great deal. The efficiency and stealth of the onions is breathtaking.

Again, your argument is this.

2+2=4+2=6+2=8+2=10…times one million additions, is a far more complicated equation, than E=MC2

Well this is just not true, even though the first equation is longer.

All evidence for these equations, is the product of human DNA, no onions required, except if a cheese burger with fried onions is ordered.

This is your philosophy.

 

[Bahman]

The size of DNA matters not at present, because only a small part of the code can understood at present. In fact a huge portion of DNA is called junk DNA, not because it is junk, but because it does not appear to be used. The analogy here is that one mans idea of junk, is another creators idea of creation.

There is nothing in nature which is junk. What is called junk DNA is in fact a defense for important genes codes.

Huh, your #4 says that an amoeba is equal to a human, or per say that an onion is more complex than a human as well.

That is your mistake and not mine that equate the complexity of a species to its DNA. Lets remove genes related to the sense of vision and listening from human. What you get is a poor spices that cannot sustain itself. How much information you have lost in DNA, very little. Needless to say that our genes related to vision and listening are less complex than many other animals.

Where does this nonsense come from?

It makes sense if you read it carefully.

And are there really people that believe this ****?

No offense is taken.

Sheesh, the world being 5,000 years old makes more sense than this.
u r beaten.

It doesn’t make more sense and we are not here to prove we are right but to understand what is right.

 

[Peter_Plato]

No offense is taken.

You are a true gentleman!

I know a batch of onions who will welcome you with open -]arms/-], …ah, tunics, when the fighting gets messy.

 

[rossum]

Look dude, you could have 20 PhD’s in every subject, this does not mean you could answer the question as, how does DNA, rearrange the elements of the Earth, into molecules and protein strings that allow for PhD’s to exist in the first place.

Oh dear. First, DNA is made of molecules. Second, the processes of of transcription from DNA to mRNA and of translation from mRNA to the final protein are well understood.

If you do not study the science behind this then you will not know what science already know. DNA → mRNA → protein transcription and translation are known and understood processes.

All your question here is showing is that you need to learn more biology.

Your argument is that a larger code is more complex, and this does not seem to be true, in fact it demonstrates that the onion code is inefficient when compared to the human code.

First, I explicitly said that I was using Shannon and Kolmogorov to measure complexity. Using those measures then the human genome is less complex.

Second, you are moving the goalposts. You started off talking about complexity. Having lost that argument, you try to switch to efficiency as a criterion. They are not the same thing. Unfortunately for you, I noticed your switch.

How do you measure efficiency? The human genome is inefficient compared to the onion because the onion can photosynthesise, while humans cannot. All that human DNA has zero photosynthetic efficiency. The onion can photosynthesise so its DNA is more efficient that human DNA.

However if you choose to believe that an onion can do higher mathematical calculations than some people, you might be correct.

You are right. There are people who cannot calculate a Fibonacci sequence. There are people who do not know what a Fibonacci sequence is. Plants arrange their leaves in a Fibonacci sequence. The onion does indeed win over non-mathematical humans.

If you want to discuss a scientific subject then you really need to be up to speed on the scientific background to that subject. Many of the people you will be arguing against here are up to speed on that background. You will need to be able to match them. If you can’t match them then you will lose your discussions here.

rossum

 

[Peter_Plato]

Again, your argument is this.

2+2=4+2=6+2=8+2=10…times one million additions, is a far more complicated equation, than E=MC2

Well this is just not true, even though the first equation is longer.

All evidence for these equations, is the product of human DNA, no onions required, except if a cheese burger with fried onions is ordered.

This is your philosophy.

Well, no. You missed my point. Onions are not only intellectually superior, but morally superior, as well. They are self-sacrificial and give themselves up to be eaten by humans so humans will keep them around until the day of the onions.

Humans go about killing each other off. How dumb is that? Onions are far too bright for such nonsense.

In fact, it was they who perfected the “Gentle Way” of Jiu Jitsu and taught it to the Buddhist monks. You didn’t know the monks were onion farmers?

Go ahead, make my day…

… call me an “onion head!”

 

[The_DNA_Rose]

There is nothing in nature which is junk. What is called junk DNA is in fact a defense for important genes codes.

That is your mistake and not mine that equate the complexity of a species to its DNA. Lets remove genes related to the sense of vision and listening from human. What you get is a poor spices that cannot sustain itself. How much information you have lost in DNA, very little. Needless to say that our genes related to vision and listening are less complex than many other animals.

It makes sense if you read it carefully.

No offense is taken.

It doesn’t make more sense and we are not here to prove we are right but to understand what is right.

While I agree that there is no junk DNA, I do not agree that you know what this DNA is used for. All you are doing is assuming, and presenting this assumption, as fact.

 

[The_DNA_Rose]

Well, no. You missed my point. Onions are not only intellectually superior, but morally superior, as well. They are self-sacrificial and give themselves up to be eaten by humans so humans will keep them around until the day of the onions.

Humans go about killing each other off. How dumb is that? Onions are far too bright for such nonsense.

In fact, it was they who perfected the “Gentle Way” of Jiu Jitsu and taught it to the Buddhist monks. You didn’t know the monks were onion farmers?

Go ahead, make my day…

… call me an “onion head!”

Ok look Plato, if you do not immediately, cease and desist in this onions are better than people attack, I will be forced to take the unfortunate action of agreeing with you, as you are making it perfectly clear, that onions in fact do have more intellectual value, than certain humans, who believe that onions are in fact more complicated than them. (run-on) Or in far simpler terms, my bowl of onion soup, is in fact more intelligent than you could ever be…

So you are in fact correct, and I bow to the far superior onion…head

 

[The_DNA_Rose]

I’m with you. Certain things are self-evident and obvious, yet some people try to make a big complicated falsified mess out of them. It is obvious that human beings are the most intelligent life form on this earth, (well, except for *some *human beings!)

Thanks, it’s nice to hear an encouraging word. Merry Christ-Mass