Post reply

Reply to the message by David Turell

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:

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:

> > [b]Human evolution: HARs[/b]
> > 
> > DAVID: [i]Wow. This moment should be enshrined.[/i]
> > 
> > dhw: [i]I have never ever questioned the specialness of our brain. Do you agree with me that the article lays emphasis on the fact that our brain is a development of former brains, and that it’s not clear why ANY live organ or organism should exist?[/i]
> > 
> > DAVID: [i]Yes.[/i]
> > 
> > dhw: An important agreement. The evolution of our special brain is no more and no less of a mystery than the existence of life itself.
> 
> A designer mind explains it.
> > 
> > [b]Chirality[/b]
> > 
> > DAVID: [i]chirality seems to be the key to everything. That specificity seems designed. Since both handedness types are naturally available why does biochemistry make such choices?[/i]
> > 
> > dhw: […] [i]if your answer is unequivocally that chirality proves the existence of your God, perhaps you can also explain to me why so many scientists remain atheists. [/i]
> > 
> > DAVID: [i]Open or closed minded to the evidence is the reason.[/i]
> > 
> > dhw: [i]Do you regard your own mind as open or closed?[/i]
> > 
> > DAVID: [i]Open to science studies with design implications, most of them.[/i]
> > 
> > dhw: This is tantamount to saying that your mind is only open to scientific views that agree with your own. I’m afraid that means your mind is closed. I don’t know what “most of them” refers to. I’m sure you don’t mean that most scientific articles support the design theory.
> 
> I think most biochemical studies show a designer at work, 
> >   
> > [b]New oxygen research[/b]
> > 
> > DAVID: [i]Why should oxygen be generated at all? The study is best understood in the teleology of a designed process planning for future use by newly evolved organisms.[/i]
> > 
> > dhw: Your questions and answers are mere pinpoints in the grand scheme of things. What is the teleology behind the billions of heavenly bodies without oxygen?  Even if there is unevolved bacterial life elsewhere in the universe, what purpose would it serve? All questions ultimately go back to the unsolvable problem of “first cause”: a sourceless form of almighty consciousness, or a sourceless form of matter and energy forever producing different combinations, just one of which happened to produce Earth and life on Earth.
> 
> Your faith in combinatorial progress by chance is irrational. It is now for you to drag in millions upon millions of years of mindless directionless combinations.