AgnosticWeb.com
Log in
Register
Search:
Back to the entry by dhw
Post reply
Reply to the message by
dhw
Name:
E-mail:
(optional, won't be displayed directly)
Leave this field empty:
Homepage:
(optional)
Leave this field empty:
Location:
(optional)
Remember me (cookie)
Category:
Introduction
The atheist delusion
Agnosticism
Evolution
The limitations of science
Origins
The nature of a 'Creator'
Where is it now?
Endings
Identity
Animals
Humans
Religion
Art
Politics
What should be taught in schools?
A mad world
General
Subject:
Formatting help
skip to input
format text bold
[b]bold text[/b]
format text italic
[i]italic text[/i]
insert hyperlink
[link=http://example.com/]link text[/link] / [link]http://example.com/[/link]
set text color
[color=#rgb]colored text[/color]
font size
[size=small]small text[/size]
[size=large]large text[/size]
insert list
[list][*]list item[/list]
insert image
[img]http://example.com/image.jpg[/img]
left: [img=left]http://example.com/image.jpg[/img]
right: [img=right]http://example.com/image.jpg[/img]
thumbnail: [img=thumbnail]http://example.com/image.jpg[/img]
thumbnail left: [img=thumbnail-left]http://example.com/image.jpg[/img]
thumbnail right: [img=thumbnail-right]http://example.com/image.jpg[/img]
:-)
;-)
:-P
:-D
:-|
:-(
Message:
> DAVID: [i]Same response. Why can't fine tuning apply to all of the problems we see in explaining how evolution works?[/i]-dhw: [i]Not really a response at all, but we can use “fine tuning” if you like. You claim that the "fine tuning" for every single innovation etc. is done by a 3.8-billion-year computer programme passed down from the microscopic first cells etc. etc., as described above, together with all the associated problems described above, but for some reason you do not see why anyone should find such a hypothesis questionable.[/i]-DAVID: [i]I understand why you find my stance questionable. You want an exact hypothesis with no loose edges. There is no real proven explanation as to why life started as one-celled organisms and ended up with humans with a giant brain and consciousness. All we see is a series of improvements. We've dismissed chance, you've dismissed design, sort of, but have introduced by the back door an IM that has design capabilities! Talk about questionable.[/i]-I don't know what you mean by the “back door”. Since there is no “real proven explanation” of why life has produced such a vast variety of organisms extant and extinct, I don't see why an unproven autonomous inventive mechanism (= the intelligent cell/cell community) - possibly invented by your unproven God - is any more “back door” than an eternal mind (the same unproven God) equipping a few microscopic cells with an unproven 3.8-billion-year computer programme for every single innovation, lifestyle and natural wonder throughout the higgledy-piggledy history of life on Earth, all for the sake of humans. I have many times acknowledged that the creative intelligence of organisms can only be a hypothesis until there is proof, but you actually believe your hypothesis which, since it does not even explain the higgledy-piggledy history, seems to me to be composed of nothing but “loose edges”! But I'm relieved to hear that you understand why I find your version of events questionable. Do you yourself agree that it is questionable?
OK - Submit
Preview