RSS 2.0 Feed

» Welcome Guest Log In :: Register

Pages: (100) < ... 94 95 96 97 98 [99] 100 >   
  Topic: FL "Debate Thread", READ FIRST POST BEFORE PARTICIPATING PLZ< Next Oldest | Next Newest >  
Erasmus, FCD



Posts: 6349
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 05 2009,11:55   

Quote (nmgirl @ Nov. 05 2009,12:45)
Help me out here guys.  i am new to posting to these boards with the IDiots but I see the same things everywhere.  Why are most of their posts cut and paste of other people's words.  Are people like FL incapable of presenting their thoughts in their own words?

ahhahahahahahahaha

incapable, who knows?

sure as hell resistant to it, definitely.  

argument by quote mine, with never an iota of independent thought or second order analysis.  

you'll do just fine!

--------------
You're obviously illiterate as hell. Peach, bro.-FtK

Finding something hard to believe based on the evidence, is science.-JoeG

the odds of getting some loathsome taint are low-- Gordon E Mullings Manjack Heights Montserrat

I work on molecular systems with pathway charts and such.-Giggles

  
dheddle



Posts: 530
Joined: Sep. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 05 2009,12:03   

Quote (Robin @ Nov. 05 2009,11:45)
 
Quote (OgreMkV @ Nov. 05 2009,11:33)

   
Quote
So, what is a testable difference between a universe that is specifically designed for us and any other universe?


And while you're at it Floyd, please explain how Gonzalez, et al, aren't question begging to when they present the argument "the conditions to support life, particularly humans, are rare and a narrow range, therefore the universe must have been fine-tuned since any deviation of that range would not have allowed us to exist." As I've noted now four times, Gonzalez does not know what parameters are "normal" for any given universe - the parameters we see could very well be 99.99999999% necessitated by having matter and energy. The writers don't know Floyd, and neither do you. To declare this a "privileged planet" is question at best and likely disingenuous.There is nothing remotely valid about Gonzalez's argument from a scientific perspective.

Again I have to disagree. In our own solar system there are ~8.5 planets and ~175 moons. And it looks like only earth supports complex life. And I don't think any of us would be surprised if it is the only orb in our solar system with any life. So the question is not really whether earth is privileged, our own solar system sets the upper level of its privileged character at ~ one in a hundred.  The question is only one of degree.

And I also disagree that none of Gonzalez's arguments are valid. I see nothing scientifically invalid, for example, in his idea of a galactic habitability zone.That is independent of whether it turns out to be correct. As a scientific concept it it is valid in the sense that it merits consideration. Whether it stands the test of time--who knows.

--------------
Mysticism is a rational enterprise. Religion is not. The mystic has recognized something about the nature of consciousness prior to thought, and this recognition is susceptible to rational discussion. The mystic has reason for what he believes, and these reasons are empirical. --Sam Harris

   
OgreMkV



Posts: 3320
Joined: Oct. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 05 2009,12:17   

Quote (dheddle @ Nov. 05 2009,12:03)
Again I have to disagree. In our own solar system there are ~8.5 planets and ~175 moons. And it looks like only earth supports complex life. And I don't think any of us would be surprised if it is the only orb in our solar system with any life. So the question is not really whether earth is privileged, our own solar system sets the upper level of its privileged character at ~ one in a hundred.  The question is only one of degree.

And I also disagree that none of Gonzalez's arguments are valid. I see nothing scientifically invalid, for example, in his idea of a galactic habitability zone.That is independent of whether it turns out to be correct. As a scientific concept it it is valid in the sense that it merits consideration. Whether it stands the test of time--who knows.

I disagree heddle.  I would be very surprised if Earth is the only body with any form of life in our solar system.  Ganymede, Europa, and Titan all look pretty good for some form of life.  Heck, comets have complex organic molecules on them.

Again, and this is the big problem (as a testable science) with the arguements as presented, we have to visit every rock (and indeed gas giant and for that matter star) and determine if life is present or not.  And, while we do that, we may have to radically change our definition of life.

I can agree... up to a point about a 'galactic habitability zone' if you include 'for humans'.  I know I wouldn't want to live a few parsecs down from the black hole(s?) in the center of the galaxy... but that's not to say that some form of life wouldn't find it very pleasant.  

Again, it's not science because it's not testable.  At best, it's logical philosophy.  Ask me again in 65,000 years or so and I may have a different answer because science may have caught up with philosophy as has happened any number of times.

--------------
Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims.

http://skepticink.com/smilodo....retreat

   
FloydLee



Posts: 577
Joined: Sep. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 05 2009,12:43   

Just curious, Ogre.  Do you have any evidence that any universe exists other than the one we see now?

And have you read the book "The Privileged Planet"?

  
midwifetoad



Posts: 3568
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 05 2009,12:47   

Quote
The question is only one of degree.


The question is one of relevance. What question is asked or answered by noting that we happen to exist in a temperate zone?

What question is asked or answered if we continue not finding extraterrestrial life?

--------------
”let’s not make a joke of ourselves.”

Pat Robertson

  
Constant Mews



Posts: 323
Joined: Sep. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 05 2009,12:54   

Quote (FloydLee @ Nov. 05 2009,08:48)
Quote
I'm enjoying the grown-up conversation now that Floyd has gone

a)  I'm not gone

b)  grown-ups don't do childish insults like that, Johnny---work on it

Be an adult. Answer my question.

  
OgreMkV



Posts: 3320
Joined: Oct. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 05 2009,12:55   

Quote (FloydLee @ Nov. 05 2009,12:43)
Just curious, Ogre.  Do you have any evidence that any universe exists other than the one we see now?

And have you read the book "The Privileged Planet"?

Do you have any evidence that this universe is the only universe?

Of course you don't and of course I don't... WHICH IS THE POINT!

It's not testable.

Now, you say that the principle that our universe (and by implication our planet, and us) are specifically designed.

What test can we do that will provide information (and what is that information) whether you or I are correct?  That is science... see the difference?

--------------
Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims.

http://skepticink.com/smilodo....retreat

   
Constant Mews



Posts: 323
Joined: Sep. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 05 2009,12:57   

Quote (FloydLee @ Nov. 05 2009,08:53)
Also need to ask something else.  Who in here has actually read "The Privileged Planet"?

I have already told you. I have.

Answer my questions, Floyd.

Be an adult.

  
FloydLee



Posts: 577
Joined: Sep. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 05 2009,13:17   

Quote
WHICH IS THE POINT!

I think the two points are that:

(1)  Very specific, empirically observable ID falsifiers have been presented by G and R.  You don't accept them, but you are unable to refute them either.  

(2)  You haven't read the book The Privileged Planet.

  
rhmc



Posts: 340
Joined: Dec. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 05 2009,13:25   

Quote (FloydLee @ Nov. 05 2009,14:17)
I think the two points are that:

you won't answer questions.  pretty funny stuff.

absolutely fascinating, though.  

your refusal to deal with the gaping logical holes poked through your shabby belief system is quite revealing as to your psychological make up.

  
Erasmus, FCD



Posts: 6349
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 05 2009,13:26   

Quote (FloydLee @ Nov. 05 2009,14:17)
Quote
WHICH IS THE POINT!

I think the two points are that:

(1)  Very specific, empirically observable ID falsifiers have been presented by G and R.  You don't accept them, but you are unable to refute them either.  

(2)  You haven't read the book The Privileged Planet.

the 2 points are

1)  You don't care about what is falsifiable and what is not
2)  You don't care that the difference has been demonstrated for you.

Now, at the end of time you tell me if vaginas grow teeth and eat the world.  That is just as scientific a hypothesis as the little PP!

--------------
You're obviously illiterate as hell. Peach, bro.-FtK

Finding something hard to believe based on the evidence, is science.-JoeG

the odds of getting some loathsome taint are low-- Gordon E Mullings Manjack Heights Montserrat

I work on molecular systems with pathway charts and such.-Giggles

  
OgreMkV



Posts: 3320
Joined: Oct. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 05 2009,13:31   

From the "privileged planet" website

Q #1: Is the fact that we can see "perfect" solar eclipses related to our existence?
A: The Earth's surface provides the best view of solar eclipses in the Solar System. The Earth's surface is also the most habitable place in the Solar System. Is this coincidence just that? In The Privileged Planet, we argue that it isn't. The conditions that make a planet habitable also make its inhabitants more likely to see solar eclipses.

The authors mistake cause and effect.  The causes of a solar ecplise somehow cause life.  At this point, this isn't testable because we don't have anything to compare our planet to.  I would however, be perfectly willing to argue that the moon of a gas giant would be even more 'safe' for any potential inhabitants than our planet.


Q #2: Is our existence related to the transparency of the atmosphere?
A: Atmospheres come in many forms, but not all allow for complex life or clear views of the wider universe. Complex life requires a certain type of atmosphere. It turns that this same type of atmosphere provides a remarkably clear view of the near and distant universe. Complex, intelligent beings are unlikely to find themselves on a planet with an opaque atmosphere or deep in a murky ocean. We explain this relationship in detail in The Privileged Planet.

Again, mistakes cause and effect.  Complex organisms surely appeared in the oceans before land.  Octopi are known as far back as 95 million years.

I would also point out that the atmosphere of the primevil Earth was pretty hostile and life changed that atmosphere.

Q #3: Can life be based on any liquid substance, or is water somehow special?
A: Water is common on Earth's surface, but one might suspect that on other planets, there are complex, intelligent beings that are not based on water, but liquid ammonia, methane, or nitrogen. But that's very unlikely. As it turns out, water is endowed with life-support capacities lacking in other substances. Together these capacities make water the most anomalous compound known to science. In The Privileged Planet, we also explain how important water has been to the rise of science.

"water is endowed with life support capacities"?  "Water is the most anomalous compound known to science"?  Why is life based on other solvents so unlikely?  Talk about an anthropomorphic view.

Q #4: Is Earth a data recorder?
A: A walk through a Redwood forest is like a walk through the Library of Congress. Trees, along with corals, polar ice, marine sediments, and lake sediments contain vast storehouses of detailed information about Earth's past climate. Is this a typical feature of planets? On the contrary, we argue in that, as planets go, Earth (or, more precisely, the Earth-Moon system) is a quite high fidelity recorder of the past.

Now, we're just getting silly.  I'm guessing that they had to add the 'Earth-Moon system' because of the huge array of historical information we can get from the moon.  Of course, Mars will have to be added because of all the info (including paleo) we get from there.  Then any planet/moon/dwarf planet with craters.  

Q #5: Is the appearance of the night sky related to our existence?
A: Not only is our atmosphere transparent, but we also enjoy dark nights. Several happy coincidences, from having a planet that rotates on its axis, to our location in the galaxy, to the age of the cosmos, conspire to make this possible. And those dark nights have been vital to many scientific discoveries, as we argue in The Privileged Planet.

So no other planets rotate on an axis?  What would be the difference if our solar system existed anywhere else?  

Q #6: Why are there so many planets in the Solar System?
A: Isn't just one planet (Earth) all we need? Doesn't it seem like a waste of space and materials to have all those other barren worlds? Well, not if those worlds are players in the games of life and scientific discovery. In The Privileged Planet, we discuss how the other planets serve as Earth's protectors while at the same time helping us in our quest to learn about the nature of the cosmos.

Again, this is just silly.  The planets in our solar system exist to protect us and teach us.  So You want to go back to worshipping Jupiter?

Q #7: Did Copernicus remove us from the center of the cosmos?
A: In most introductory astronomy textbooks and popular descriptions of the history of science, students are told that until Copernicus, the West believed that Earth and its human inhabitants viewed themselves as being in the most important place in the cosmos. Copernicus, we are told, demoted us by making Earth merely one of the planets. As it is usually presented, this popular story is mostly mythology rather than historical fact. In Pre-Copernican cosmology, the "center" of the cosmos meant something entirely different from what it is now taken to mean. We explain why in The Privileged Planet

When all else fails, change the rules of the game.  

Sigh.  I haven't read the book and I'm not going to waste processing power and memory space on it.

Again, please describe the difference between a universe specifically designed for us and one that is not.  I'll help, fill in the blanks:

If the universe is designed, then we should see ___.

While you're doing that, provide me with an ID based tool that is better than evolution at predicting results of experiments.

--------------
Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims.

http://skepticink.com/smilodo....retreat

   
FloydLee



Posts: 577
Joined: Sep. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 05 2009,13:32   

Quote
you won't answer questions.

Already answered two of Ogre's.  Can't even get him to admit he's not read the book.

How about you?  You read it?  Yes or no?

  
FloydLee



Posts: 577
Joined: Sep. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 05 2009,13:34   

Correction....I think he just owned up to not reading it.  

How about you, Rhmc?

  
OgreMkV



Posts: 3320
Joined: Oct. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 05 2009,13:47   

I don't care about the book.  Have you actually thought about this or are you just parroting something that you think supports ID?

define 'superior observational platform'
define a method to count observations
explain the paradox that if a place is hostile to life, then it has no life and therefore no observations can be made.  Alternately, if there is life, then the environment is not hostile to life.

Give me a piece of information that we would expect to see in a designed universe and why that piece is different from any other possible universe.

Oh, and how about describing an ID based tool that I can use to predict the phenotypes of my cat's kittens.

Here's one, why won't you answer the above questions?  They are necessary for the SCIENCE part of your explanation.

--------------
Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims.

http://skepticink.com/smilodo....retreat

   
rhmc



Posts: 340
Joined: Dec. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 05 2009,13:55   

Quote (FloydLee @ Nov. 05 2009,14:32)
Quote
you won't answer questions.

Already answered two of Ogre's.  Can't even get him to admit he's not read the book.

How about you?  You read it?  Yes or no?

how about the several hundred questions you've dodged in the past 98 pages?  

you answer those, i'll answer yours.

  
Chayanov



Posts: 289
Joined: Dec. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 05 2009,13:58   

Quote
Not only is our atmosphere transparent, but we also enjoy dark nights. Several happy coincidences, from having a planet that rotates on its axis, to our location in the galaxy, to the age of the cosmos, conspire to make this possible.

Before our ancestors learned how to control fire those dark nights would have been terrifying, as people huddled together for protection against large predators with much better night vision. How was that a privileged position?

--------------
Help! Marxist literary critics are following me!

  
JohnW



Posts: 2266
Joined: Aug. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 05 2009,14:10   

Quote (FloydLee @ Nov. 05 2009,11:17)
Quote
WHICH IS THE POINT!

I think the two points are that:

(1)  Very specific, empirically observable ID falsifiers have been presented by G and R.  You don't accept them, but you are unable to refute them either.  

(2)  You haven't read the book The Privileged Planet.

1.  How about telling us what these "very specific, observable ID falsifiers" are?  You've presented none so far.

2.  No, I haven't.  I don't have time to read all the good books, without wasting time on bad ones.  If you think it's a good book and worthy of my time, go ahead and try to convince me.

--------------
Math is just a language of reality. Its a waste of time to know it.
- Robert Byers

  
Erasmus, FCD



Posts: 6349
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 05 2009,14:14   

100 pages and the only thing that is firmly established is that Fold is Full Of Shit.

And most of us knew that already (except... DEADMAN bwahahahaha)

Seriously Fold I mean I think it's great and all that you are not on PT acting like a stupid ass but honestly I'd rather you were there than here if you aren't even going to pretend to attempt to answer questions or have a grown up discussion.

the itsy bitsy PP hypothesis is no more scientific than my vaginas-grow-teeth-at-the-end-the-time hypothesis.

and that's the best you have done in 100 pages.  you flunked with your big 5 fantasies because you couldn't explain WHY God is part of any required explanation.  you did manage to describe your position but not explain it.  It's OK, no one expected much of you and you didn't disappoint.

your bible based biology, well, that's about what anyone would have predicted.  stoooopit

ID=science you are doing a bang up job of beating everyone's boots to death with your face.  

just wondering if you maybe were thinking about a good time to bail and go preach to some high school kids who might still think you are kinda cool in a weird way that they will later figure out is gay.  Hint:  NOWS THE TIME OLD BUDDY.

--------------
You're obviously illiterate as hell. Peach, bro.-FtK

Finding something hard to believe based on the evidence, is science.-JoeG

the odds of getting some loathsome taint are low-- Gordon E Mullings Manjack Heights Montserrat

I work on molecular systems with pathway charts and such.-Giggles

  
Amadan



Posts: 1255
Joined: Jan. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 05 2009,14:16   

Floyd, try to remember 99 pages ago when you entered this debate. Not Gonzales or any of his chums.

Are you able to (a) state and (b) defend your argument in your own words?

If not, why not just send over your big brother to do your fighting for you instead of holding up a picture of him and saying that he's so tough he's beaten us up without our even knowing it.

--------------
"People are always looking for natural selection to generate random mutations" - Densye  4-4-2011
JoeG BTW dumbass- some variations help ensure reproductive fitness so they cannot be random wrt it.

   
FloydLee



Posts: 577
Joined: Sep. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 05 2009,14:36   

Quote
Are you able to (a) state and (b) defend your argument in your own words?


You have received sentence- or short-paragraph  summaries for all five of the Big Five Incompatibilities, and a similar short-summary of the G and R Cosmo ID hypothesis.  In my own words

IOW, you have received both "my own words" and the published statements of the professional PhD scientists and philosophers of science.  Also answered questions likewise.  Agreed?

FloydLee

  
Henry J



Posts: 4079
Joined: Mar. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 05 2009,14:44   

Quote (OgreMkV @ Nov. 05 2009,12:31)
From the "privileged planet" website

Q #1: Is the fact that we can see "perfect" solar eclipses related to our existence?
A: The Earth's surface provides the best view of solar eclipses in the Solar System. The Earth's surface is also the most habitable place in the Solar System. Is this coincidence just that? In The Privileged Planet, we argue that it isn't. The conditions that make a planet habitable also make its inhabitants more likely to see solar eclipses.

The authors mistake cause and effect.  The causes of a solar ecplise somehow cause life.  At this point, this isn't testable because we don't have anything to compare our planet to.  I would however, be perfectly willing to argue that the moon of a gas giant would be even more 'safe' for any potential inhabitants than our planet.

As I understand it, 3-4 billion years ago the moon was much closer to Earth than it is now. But that was presumably before there was anybody on the planet to care that the corona was visible only momentarily at the start and again at the end of the eclipse.

Also, the moon is still moving away, so in several million years there won't be total eclipses at all (the moon will at that point only blot out a circular piece of the sun). Will that cause Earth to become uninhabitable?

Henry

  
oldmanintheskydidntdoit



Posts: 4999
Joined: July 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 05 2009,14:46   

Quote (FloydLee @ Nov. 05 2009,14:36)
IOW, you have received both "my own words" and the published statements of the professional PhD scientists and philosophers of science.  Also answered questions likewise.  Agreed?

If the published statements of professional PhD scientists and philosophers of science are so important to you why do you choose to listen to the tiny minority that support ID?

Is it perhaps just the particular conclusion they come to that attracts you?

If not, why then?

--------------
I also mentioned that He'd have to give me a thorough explanation as to *why* I must "eat human babies".
FTK

if there are even critical flaws in Gauger’s work, the evo mat narrative cannot stand
Gordon Mullings

  
Henry J



Posts: 4079
Joined: Mar. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 05 2009,14:50   

Even if we found a way to survey all the planets in this galaxy, and found that all (or at least a large majority) of intelligent species originated on planets from which astronomical observations could be made from the ground, what exactly would that prove?

Not that this is gonna happen any time soon, of course. Plus, explorers from Earth would be likely to be biased as to what kind of planet they surveyed, so there might be a tendency to ignore other kinds of planets even if the transportation costs were to go way down.

Henry

  
OgreMkV



Posts: 3320
Joined: Oct. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 05 2009,14:54   

Quote (Henry J @ Nov. 05 2009,14:44)
As I understand it, 3-4 billion years ago the moon was much closer to Earth than it is now. But that was presumably before there was anybody on the planet to care that the corona was visible only momentarily at the start and again at the end of the eclipse.

Also, the moon is still moving away, so in several million years there won't be total eclipses at all (the moon will at that point only blot out a circular piece of the sun). Will that cause Earth to become uninhabitable?

Henry

True, I always forget about that.  I never can remember anything past about 65 million years ago.

Another point, the moon is not in a perfectly circular orbit around the Earth.  The moon wobbles a bit up and down each cycle.  So, if things were designed so perfectly, one would think that perfect ecplises should happen frequently, so as to allow the most 'teaching' to occur.

Floyd, do you really want to understand this stuff or do you just want to preach?

--------------
Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims.

http://skepticink.com/smilodo....retreat

   
Robin



Posts: 1430
Joined: Sep. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 05 2009,15:06   

Quote (nmgirl @ Nov. 05 2009,11:45)

Quote
Help me out here guys.  i am new to posting to these boards with the IDiots but I see the same things everywhere.  Why are most of their posts cut and paste of other people's words.  Are people like FL incapable of presenting their thoughts in their own words?


By and large I think it is because they think that some of the statements made by other "smart" ID folk sound intelligent and correct even if they don't understand it. Keep in mind, a lot of the slock the FL (et al) post is specifically fuzzy about a lot of the details but very straight forward about supporting the Big Tent perspective. I'm sure the FL and most other ID/Creationist types haven't a clue what 80% of the stuff they post even means and why, when really examined, it falls apart, but they don't really care because they believe it's true because it sounds good and implies what they want to hear.

--------------
we IDists rule in design for the flagellum and cilium largely because they do look designed.  Bilbo

The only reason you reject Thor is because, like a cushion, you bear the imprint of the biggest arse that sat on you. Louis

  
Constant Mews



Posts: 323
Joined: Sep. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 05 2009,15:12   

Quote (FloydLee @ Nov. 05 2009,14:36)
Quote
Are you able to (a) state and (b) defend your argument in your own words?


You have received sentence- or short-paragraph  summaries for all five of the Big Five Incompatibilities, and a similar short-summary of the G and R Cosmo ID hypothesis.  In my own words

IOW, you have received both "my own words" and the published statements of the professional PhD scientists and philosophers of science.  Also answered questions likewise.  Agreed?

FloydLee

Floyd, I have already explained that I have read their book.  They are arguing from incredulity.

And you have not answered my questions.

And adult - as you yourself pointed out - would have.

Are you a child?

  
Constant Mews



Posts: 323
Joined: Sep. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 05 2009,15:14   

Quote (FloydLee @ Nov. 05 2009,14:36)
Quote
Are you able to (a) state and (b) defend your argument in your own words?


You have received sentence- or short-paragraph  summaries for all five of the Big Five Incompatibilities, and a similar short-summary of the G and R Cosmo ID hypothesis.  In my own words

IOW, you have received both "my own words" and the published statements of the professional PhD scientists and philosophers of science.  Also answered questions likewise.  Agreed?

FloydLee

There are actually dozens of questions posed to you in good faith on this thread which you have ignored.

Answer my questions, Floyd.  And adult would answer.

Are you a child?

  
Robin



Posts: 1430
Joined: Sep. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 05 2009,15:15   

Quote (dheddle @ Nov. 05 2009,12:03)

Quote
Again I have to disagree. In our own solar system there are ~8.5 planets and ~175 moons. And it looks like only earth supports complex life. And I don't think any of us would be surprised if it is the only orb in our solar system with any life. So the question is not really whether earth is privileged, our own solar system sets the upper level of its privileged character at ~ one in a hundred.  The question is only one of degree.

And I also disagree that none of Gonzalez's arguments are valid. I see nothing scientifically invalid, for example, in his idea of a galactic habitability zone.That is independent of whether it turns out to be correct. As a scientific concept it it is valid in the sense that it merits consideration. Whether it stands the test of time--who knows.


See Ogre's post above. To add to that, as I noted earlier, how many of these 8.5 planets and 175 moons have we spent any time actually studying in any kind of detail? 2 of them? Woohoo...that presents a big area of assumption if one is going to say, "our solar system doesn't appear to have any other life." To move the goal posts and say "complext life" begs the question further - why are you presuming how to evaluate life and why are you presuming the complex is somehow an indication of something significant?

As to your statement about that you disagree that none of Gonzalez's arguments are valid, I wasn't trying to imply such - hence I used the term "argument" in singular. If I gave that impression, my apologies. The fine-tuned argument is, however, invalid and has no merit. It is question begging based on a reversal of logic and holds no place in science.

--------------
we IDists rule in design for the flagellum and cilium largely because they do look designed.  Bilbo

The only reason you reject Thor is because, like a cushion, you bear the imprint of the biggest arse that sat on you. Louis

  
Robin



Posts: 1430
Joined: Sep. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 05 2009,15:19   

Quote (FloydLee @ Nov. 05 2009,13:17)

Quote
Quote
WHICH IS THE POINT!

I think the two points are that:

(1)  Very specific, empirically observable ID falsifiers have been presented by G and R.  You don't accept them, but you are unable to refute them either.


No they haven't as I've now demonstrated 3 times and argued against an addional 2 times.

Quote
(2)  You haven't read the book The Privileged Planet.


Irrelevant to the point that the fine-tuned argument is invalid.

--------------
we IDists rule in design for the flagellum and cilium largely because they do look designed.  Bilbo

The only reason you reject Thor is because, like a cushion, you bear the imprint of the biggest arse that sat on you. Louis

  
  2975 replies since Sep. 12 2009,22:15 < Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

Pages: (100) < ... 94 95 96 97 98 [99] 100 >   


Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic

[ Read the Board Rules ] | [Useful Links] | [Evolving Designs]