Joined: July 2006
|Quote (Alan Fox @ Feb. 06 2011,03:24)|
|In case anyone is still following silent banninations at UD, aiguy, who was tying the usual suspect in knots in this thread (his last comment) reports elsewhere being put in perpetual moderation. |
|I posted a couple times over at uncommondescent, but apparently offended somebody and now I'm on banished to interminable "hold for moderation" purgatory.|
aiguy not only tied them up in knots but then proceeded to skewer the lot of em.
|The fact that the code of life is globally optimal (given plausible pre-biotic conditions), along with the fact that it hasn't changed significantly in 4 billion years (it's hard to improve upon a global optimum) tells us that the designer of life either got really lucky right off the bat or had learned how to design an optimal code. Evolution is not in the business of making a globally optimal anything.|
I think you are looking at the problem as a designer rather than a forensic investigator. 4 billion years into the program we are looking for traces and clues, not hard examples of the designer in action. Or as Mike Gene says, "the faint echoes of teleology".
Yet only the other day Gordon was arguing that cows could not have evolved. So hardly "the faint echoes of teleology".
This wiki page on Aurochs says the designer must have been fiddling round in the plains with them not very long ago at all. Like Gordon says
| Others might want to point out that the body plan involved is well beyond the FSCO/I threshold, so there is a serious question whether we have a mechanism per Darwinist evolutionary theory, that would substantiate that claim, much less observed evidence that would make it conclusive as “fact.”|
Or is it still "just a cow"?
It's all so confusing! That's the thing about ID. You can study at one school but beware should you transfer just before the exams! Same answers written down, but you fail because you changed schools!
It's a shame that there's no central venue where they can all make their case, support with evidence and then all agree to get behind the party that makes the best case and follow that evidence to where it leads.
Oh, er. Um. Yes.
EDIT: Cross posted to here. http://www.antievolution.org/cgi-bin....y182728
I also mentioned that He'd have to give me a thorough explanation as to *why* I must "eat human babies".
if there are even critical flaws in Gauger’s work, the evo mat narrative cannot stand