I am a Christian theist, and I am inviting atheists to talk with me about the nose in our face.

I read this text in your website:

[quote] Think Atheist is your safe place to come out and learn how to have a dialog with friends, family, and strangers about your belief that the world was not created but is in its current state because of complicated and beautifully unguided processes. [/quote]

You are saying that the nose came about by unguided processes?


Pachomius

Views: 381

Replies are closed for this discussion.

Replies to This Discussion

You are saying that the nose came about by unguided processes?

 

Nope. Other way around. Nose go first, me always follow nose. Nose is guide. Nosito, ergo sum.

Please don't waste bandwidth with so much materials which are not relevant to the topic; it also slows down the downloading of your messages, over taxing the computer's resources.

 

I will always now write after the last post in this thread, even though it does not in fact address the concern of the author there; just that my post will be the last one of the thread after I posted it.

 

 

Now, forgive me for reproducing my immediately previous post, so that your attention should be to go to the message there.

Reply by Pancake Croissant 1 hour ago

[quote] Think Atheist is your safe place to come out and learn how to have a dialog with friends, family, and strangers about your belief that the world was not created but is in its current state because of complicated and beautifully unguided processes. [/quote]

You are saying that the nose came about by unguided processes?



---------------------


Okay, everyone, don't stray away from our nose in our face.



You say the nose is the result of unguided processes.



And you bring in evolution as the foundation of the unguided processes that results in the nose in our face.



Now suppose you give all the writings of all the scientists on evolution to engineers and technicians and builders of all kinds, and tell them to read all that literature, then proceed to follow what they learn from all that literature on evolution in order to bring about a nose among living things without any nose.



Will they succeed?



You can assure them that it all takes millions of years.



What will they think of you?



Pancake Croissant 



 

Please pay attention to the text above in bold. 


Now, add mathematicians to help the engineers and technicians and builders of all kinds to use all the ideas of evolution and bring about among organisms without a nose a number with a nose.

Because if the appearance of the nose in our face is due to evolution and evolution is a scientific explanation for the rise of new species of life from old species, then the engineers, technicians, builders, and now assisted by mathematicians, should be able to effect the rise of organisms with nose in their face from among organisms without.


All it takes is just random mutation and natural selection and millions of years.

No need for any guided processes.

So the engineers and technicians and builders and mathematicians just have to rig up an environmet of random mutation and natural selection and calculate how many millions of years for the organisms with a nose in their face to appear.

If in fact it will take millions of years for them to wait as for you, then if I am not mistaken they can resort to computer simulation.


[ I don't know how this message will come out, but I hope it will be readable nonetheless, because I am still trying to experiment with the formatting codes of the forum software here.]



Pancake Croissant

Earlier, Adrianna posted this:

 

"OK, OK I'll be serious now:

Vertebrate evolution: the nose


Vertebrate evolution: In the nose

The origin of the internal nostril or 'choana' of land vertebrates, the opening from the nasal sac to the roof of the mouth, is the subject of heated debate. Some claim that it represents a displaced external nostril, others that this is implausible as it would imply a breaking and rejoining of the maxillary–premaxillary dental arcade. New fossil material of Kenichthys, a 395-million-year-old fish from China, finally resolves this dispute. Kenichthys has a unique nasal region intermediate between the choanate and non-choanate conditions, providing direct evidence that the choana is indeed a displaced external nostril. During a brief transitional stage illustrated by Kenichthys, the choana was in the tooth row, between maxilla and premaxilla. On a more speculative note, it's possible that a 'fossil' of this evolutionary event can be seen in tetrapod development to this day in the form of the common birth defect known as cleft lip and palate.

letters to nature
The origin of the internal nostril of tetrapods
MIN ZHU & PER E. AHLBERG
Nature 432, 94–97 (2004); doi:10.1038/nature02843
| First Paragraph | Full Text (HTML / PDF) |


The choana is the posterior nasal opening.

So the answer is: fish!"

I'm sorry - the point of this post was what? Did you have a question or are you recapping what you think people have said?

I think there is a significant element of time wasting here. The poster is not listening nor will he because he does not want an answer he wants to leave thinking he is right. I will answer anyway though.

 

As numerous others have said the nose evolved in small increments over time, each generation being acted upon by the environmental pressures of their time. Fast forward to now and we have noses. They are not more amazing than eyes or brains or feet or even athletes foot fungus. Surely the poster can see that small incremental change is more logical than a bearded dude building something out of magic? There is no evidence of creator nor is their a need for a creator.

To the gentleman who seeks to explain how a computer simulation can be done to produce by evolution, i.e. by random mutation and natural selection, the nose in organisms which did not have a nose previously, namely, so that now they exhibit a nose...

 

You do have to produce a program don't you?

 

 

So at least in computer simulation the nose arrives owing to programmed instructions, which is not what evolution is all about, namely, random mutation and natural selection.

 

 

Now if you consider the computer simulation to be nature undergoing evolution, then that nature is a programmed nature, not any nature without any programming; and programming is an antithesis to unguided processes, which unguided processes are what evolution according to atheist evolutionists is all -- without any programming whatsoever.

 

Pancake Croissant

Reply by Michel Poisson 3 minutes ago

 
"You do have to produce a program don't you?"

No. You just start with simple instructions: Adapt or Die.

----------------


That computer you are using is a programmed machine, yes? no?

You work on the computer according to a program, yes? no?

Or you just pound on the computer with your eyes closed, yes? no?

Tell me what you understand by a computer simulation.

Tell me about this text in the Think Atheist website:

------------------

http://www.thinkatheistseed.com/about/

Think Atheist is your safe place to come out and learn how to have a dialog with friends, family, and strangers about your belief that the world was not created but is in its current state because of complicated and beautifully unguided processes.

-------------------

Does that text above come forth and stay stable all in the midst of unguided processes, yes? no?


Lastly, assuming that you are driving a car, is that car a guided machine or not, and is the traffic system of streets you are traveling in following guided processes, yes? no?

 

Just one more point, granting though not conceding that the world you are living in came about by unguided processes,  is it now operating according to guided processes, and you are dependent on these guided processes as you guide yourself to get to your destination locations of homes, office buildings, shops, and leisure places, which were raised up on guided processes, yes? no?

 

You see, you think you are so smart to use concepts and words or abuse concepts and words to appear so smart to yourselves and your fellow smart atheists that the world today came about by unguided processes, see if you can survive one split second if the world is not existing and operating on guided processes as you read this post.

 


One last last thing for you to think about if you do think:

 

If the world came about to be an assemblage of guided processes from unguided processes, by way of random mutation and natural selection, isn't that double-talk saying that things are random and then saying that they are selected, how can you have selection unless you there is guidance to the selection.

 

You guys are always into double-talk.

 

Pancake Croissant


Lastly, assuming that you are driving a car, is that car a guided machine or not, and is the traffic system of streets you are traveling in following guided processes, yes? no?

 

You guys are always into double-talk.

 

Double Talk? We are talking about the world, biology, and processes that occur and you want to talk about items where we can point not only to a designer but an engineers stamp? You are reasoning your way through this and not providing evidence or comparing apples to apples.

 

You are asking for new features. How about people with 6 fingers on each hand? For this to hold on all that we need is a benefit for this that causes people to make more money as a result of this mutation then it becomes characterized as beauty. Isolate this trait geographically and eventually (yeah, millions of years) and you'll see speciation due to compounding mutations.  But of course, this won't fly I'm sure. 

 

You are really looking for new information. How about a whole extra Chromosome? Down Syndrome does that, but of course you don't see how that could ever be beneficial so you'll discount it. The point is that it not only can happen, but does. Mix in a little time, chance.. but you were looking for an example.

 

Nylonase becoming able to eat petroleum products. A bacteria that developed between 1935 and 1975 due to a frame shift mutation. Certainly it's new and beneficial.

 

On the contrary to the guided question, one could return the question and ask why a designer would have the laryngeal Nerve run from the brain, around the heart, and back to the larynx. The list would go on and on like the Appendix getting clogged and potentially killing you. I'm sure that you've heard these so I'll save it. 

 

If you want to see an unguided process of evolution, Avida. The short is that we can't demonstrate evolution beyond showing DNA, Fossils, Predictions (there may be a few other ways that aren't striking me). So Avida was developed to test out evolution sped up in a digital world with. Set the parameters of the world as it exists, and let the digital world demonstrate if it's even feasible simply based on the data, sans potential personal desires for outcomes. 

 

I can't make you accept evolution. I don't want to either. You can choose to ignore it, but you'll want to thank Jonas Saulk for studying it and applying that knowledge. You'll want to thank Pharmaceutical's for their application of evolutionary theory into understanding how to turn gene's off and on in gene therapies, and what each is meant to do... even the ones shutdown but still present as information. Why would a designer put relic DNA in me when I was simply formed from the dust of the Earth? Shouldn't I have my own unique DNA straight from Adam through to me with no Animal DNA included? 

 

 

"If the world came about to be an assemblage of guided processes from unguided processes, by way of random mutation and natural selection, isn't that double-talk saying that things are random and then saying
that they are selected, how can you have selection unless you there is
guidance to the selection."

 

I think that part of the problem here is that you don't understand (or refuse to try and understand) natural selection. It is not RANDOM in the way you seem to think it is. I.e. one day you wake up and you have grown a nose out of nowhere. Instead it is the ACCUMULATION of random genetic events. So you have somewhere between 3 and 4 genetic mutations which do not exist in either of your parents, this happens because the processes of genetic combination and replication are imperfect. If one of these mutations were beneficial to your survivial and ability to reproduce they would be passed on to your children conveying the same advantage and so on and so on through the generations. So yes mutation is random but selection is not. We may not always be able to predict on the basis of what environmental pressures a trait will be beneficial (although we have a pretty good idea) but we know that they do and there is evidence for such. Antibiotic resistant bacterial strains come to mind. On the subject of computer simulation, a paper published in nature a few years ago showed that by programming for adapt or die and letting the program run that complex biological strcutures (such as bacterial flagella, a classic intelligent design refuge) will eventually come about. I will try to find this paper since for the life of me i cant remember the title.

Just stick to the nose in our face, is that the result of unguided processes?

 

No need to use so many concepts and words, just answer yes or no.

 

 

You bring in evolution of the atheist brand which is unguided.

 

And you define it as random mutation and natural selection.

 

If the nose is the result of unguided processes, tell me why it is still in our nose?

 

Now, think about your definition of evolution of the atheist brand, unguided processes which consist in random mutation and natural selection.

 

The point is that when you describe a process as consisting of randomness and then of selection (by nature hahaha), you are slipping in by the back door what you keep out at the front door.

 

So don't describe the whole business as unguided processes, it is all guided because the guided part and phase is the one that stays stable, and the random mutation part is just without any meaning, except to fill up your credulous mind with the assurance that there is randomness that is the beginning of selection.

 

----------------

 

If you want me to answer to your post here, please reproduce it in your edit box and in a few words, and I will reply to you.

 


I can't see you because I always go to the last page of the thread.

 

The system here is just the way the authors of the forum software have guided it to operate the way it does operate.

 

I am more used to softwares that give posters the option to have all messages arranged according to time succession with the latest at the top or the latest at the bottom.

 

-----------------

 

You see, I bring up the nose because that is the thing that is so close to all of us, and we cannot otherwise than see it to be a guided product of guided process(es).

 

You can of course bring in concepts and words and go high up to far far in outer space or inside the more profound of inner and deeper space of the atom whatever, to come to the specious conclusion that everything is due to unguided processes; or some people are so smart they say that it is all illusions of guided processes.

 

In which case, I challenge them to smash their nose with a quick hard blow on their nose using a sledge hammer, no worry and hesitation, to prove that their nose is all illusion of guided processes.

 

Will they dare accept my challenge?

 

Of course if they will, I have to put forth a disclaimer that any injury suffered by the self-illusionist is totally owing to his own conviction, that his nose is all an illusion and he wanted to prove 'scientifically' to himself  that it is so, namely, it is all illusion -- I will not be answerable whatever for his smashed up nose.

 

-----------------

 

If you care to know the virtue of few words, here is why:

 

When you are holding to the string of few words all the time to keep to the sharpest focus of the issue, like the nose in our face whether it is the result of guided processes or of unguided processes, you will never get lost; unlike when you want to go into extravagant complications to project your labyrinthine gimmick of an unthinking non-system (and congratulate yourself as being oh so smart), you get more and more entangled and baffled in all kinds and manners of nitpicks that you cannot anymore be mindful of the string of few words, by which you must always keep in touch and on hold with to get back to sanity; otherwise in such a kind of a dire situation you cannot but feel so lost as to conclude in surrender that everything is all unguided processes.

 

 

Pancake Croissant

No need to use so many concepts and words, just answer yes or no.

 

Are you a joke?  You must be.  I've been following this from a distance and I get the biggest kick out your labeling of posts as "frivolous" because it either A) didn't begin with a certain phrase that you like which frames the question in a manner favorable to some asinine point you are trying to make...or B) uses WAY too many words and concepts for your admirably "focused" mind to grasp...or C) the fact that your questions and arguments have been addressed and dismantled already, yet you seem oblivious to it because of your rules about word counts and embedded videos.

 

This is why it is better to drown pancakes in syrup and eat them rather than debate them.  Damn, I'm ready for a late night breakfast!

RSS

© 2018   Created by Rebel.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service