Bio-engineering Intelligent Design

At Evolution News: Stuart Burgess Informs Evolutionist Nathan Lents on the Design Genius of the Ankle and Wrist

Spread the love

David Klinghoffer writes:

When engineers educate evolutionists about where their theory falls short, the results can be enlightening and entertaining. Sometimes they are spectacular. That’s the case with distinguished mechanical engineer Stuart Burgess and his presentation at the recent Westminster Conference on Science and Faith. Burgess addresses some claims of forensic scientist Nathan Lents in the latter’s 2018 book, Human Errors: A Panorama of Our Glitches, from Pointless Bones to Broken Genes. As Burgess says, “It should be called Lents’s Errors.”

Professor Lents is a proponent of the “unintelligent design” hypothesis. He looks at engineering marvels like the human wrist and ankle and sees only “blunders,” “pointless bones,” “anatomical errors.” Burgess has studied those wonders of biology more closely than Lents has and explains in detail why they are, in fact, “ingenious” solutions to engineering problems that leave the genius of human engineers far behind. Burgess is simply on fire. You’ve got to watch this:

Evolution News

58 Replies to “At Evolution News: Stuart Burgess Informs Evolutionist Nathan Lents on the Design Genius of the Ankle and Wrist

  1. 1
    martin_r says:

    with evolutionists it is always the same.

    When I, as an engineer, want to learn how some crucial feature evolved, THEY NEVER KNOW …

    I might be wrong, but from what i could understand, evolutionists don’t know how bones evolved, let alone the whole skeleton or joints. (All what evolutionists do, they tell you a very, really a very absurd just-so story about some skin mineralization)

    I posted the following yesterday elsewhere:

    Could some of our dear colleagues Darwinists (Seversky, Chuck, JVL, or whoever), point me to an article about how dinosaur’s bones/skeleton evolved ? Where in the fossil record can i see the evolution of dinosaur skeleton and joints ? … i would like to see … because i, as an engineer, just can’t imagine how joints could have evolved. I just can’t.

    As we can see in this video, humans joints are pretty sophisticated, but what about dino joints?
    Dino’s joints have to withstand a pretty heavy load of several tons, especially when running (dynamic stress is much higher than a static stress).

    So please, dear Darwinists, show me the evolution of dino’s bones/joints … or a skeleton … show me anything … because all what i see are complete fully working joint/skeletons …

  2. 2
    Seversky says:

    Yet another datapoint for the Salem Hypothesis. What is it about engineering that attract people of a creationist bent? What makes them think that everything can be explained by engineering principles?

    We can all marvel at the wonders of the living world. In fairness – to provide balance – we should also take into account the less-than-wonderful parts of biology, which most ID proponents prefer to ignore or are compelled to try and explain away, usually by reference to some inscrutable purpose in the mind of said designer.

    Martin-r demands a fossil sequence which demonstrates the evolution of a dinosaur’s skeleton/joint. I will be happy to oblige when he – or Stuart Burgess – provide empirical evidence for the existence and nature of their putative designer and an explanation of how and why he/she/it accomplished their designs.

  3. 3
    zweston says:

    Sev, your “bad design” argument is irrelevant. It’s a “why did God do it that way?” You always want to talk theology instead of observable scientific data…because you know what the conclusion is. So, you try to smear God because you know you can’t escape the unescapable.

    Why not give up and surrender to the truth and be healed instead of trying to find a way to ward off your cognitive dissonance with nonsensical arguments?

    You hand wave off the reality of the absurdity of macroevolution by saying some things don’t work very well……. where is your faith? “science will likely discover why things are the way they are” as you say… ugh.

  4. 4
    relatd says:

    Seversky at 2,

    Do you think people are stupid? Have you seen a bird in flight? A hawk maneuvering to get its prey? Sorry, but your worldview has literally clouded your vision. A sparrow is an incredible piece of engineering. You have no sense of wonder. The beauty in nature was designed but you appear to prefer chaos.

  5. 5

    Seversky lays out a challenge above:
    “I will be happy to oblige when he – or Stuart Burgess – provide empirical evidence for the existence and nature of their putative designer and an explanation of how and why he/she/it accomplished their designs.”

    Let me offer such “empirical evidence” in the form of what we can observe all around us.

    What Seversky sees as “quirks and kinks, the makeshift solutions and haywire failures, of human biology,” many see as an elegant and quite magnificent design with an amazing and far-ranging menu of capabilities. Let me suggest an exercise that Seversky and others can easily accomplish, and I believe you may see my point.

    Take an evening out and partake in one of those wonderful choral and orchestra performances taking place all around the world at any given time – I would recommend Handel’s Messiah for this exercise.

    As you are watching and listing to this amazing musical performance, I would like you to notice and watch a number of things very carefully.

    First the hands – the hands and body motions of the conductor, as well as his facial expressions and body movements as he leads the choir and orchestra through this magnificent musical piece.

    Continuing with the hands — watch the hands, and in particular the fingers of the orchestra members as they travel across the various instruments – the sting section, the brass section, the woodwinds — the piano. Watch carefully as their hands precisely match the direction given by the conductor. Watch as the fingers subtly, and at times strongly tease the music from their instruments.

    And note the various musical instruments — envisioned, designed and created by many beautifully designed and created hands and fingers.

    Next the choral voices – listen as these beautiful voices blend together perfectly with the orchestra and watch the faces and mouths as they blend perfectly with the hands of the conductor and with the orchestra.

    Next listen and pay attention to your own reaction as a message from the words and music bring excitement and inspiration into your heart and soul.

    As you leave the concert hall, take time to look at the building and its architecture and artistry. Again, the hands, arms, legs and mind of those artisans designed those arches, paintings and sculptures you admire so much.

    And when you get back home in bed, ponder over the creation of the musical score of the “Messiah.” Imagine Handel hovering over his desk and the paper taking on lines and musical symbols and words. Imagine him going back and forth over that manuscript as he goes to and from the scriptures that are inspiring him. Imagine the music that is building inside his head as he creates this masterpiece.

    No – the human body is not the “quirks and kinks, the makeshift solutions and haywire failures, of human biology,” but is something far more splendid and wonderful.
    Next I would suggest a couple of sporting events for Seversky.

    First to a major league baseball game where they can witness the flawless execution of a double play. Beginning with the pitcher placing the ball across home plate at 90+ mph. We then see the batter follow that fast moving and curving baseball with his eyes, calculating where it will be as it passes into the strike zone where he can then attempt to hit it with his well hand/eye coordinated swing. Then we see the shortstop field the fast-moving ball after anticipating and calculating where it will enter his glove. He then shovels it off to the second baseman who tags the runner out while leaping over the runner, and then a quick and precise throw to the first baseman who steps on first base for the second out of the double play.

    Next we go to an NBA basketball game where we witness the continual back and forth of finely tuned, trained and coordinated athletes showcasing example after example of what these well-designed machines are capable of.

    Next we are off to an NFL football game where we witness precision in the well-designed human body of a quarterback throwing the football with precise accuracy to a fast moving and maneuvering receiver who stretches his body out to execute a fingertip catch as he passes the goal line for a touchdown.

    No – the human body is not the “quirks and kinks, the makeshift solutions and haywire failures, of human biology,” but is something far more splendid and wonderful.

    Next we travel into the applied biological science of medicine and medical research and invite Seversky to read and study the extensive articles that a Dr. Howard Glicksman has compiled on the intricacies and design of many aspects of the human body. We see this compilation of science reporting at http://www.evolutionnews.org/c.....signed_bo/

    This series contains at least a half dozen articles on blood pressure alone, and how it is controlled within the human body.
    Note that this science reporting by Dr. Glicksman is seen in the Discovery Institute web site http://www.evolutionnews.org – an ID site – and not on the pages of the National Center for Science Education. I have been following the NCSE site as well as the Discovery site and others for years now, and what I find is that good science reporting like I describe above is found often and on a regular basis there, whereas seldom – approaching never – is an any science reported by NCSE. I find that very interesting and troubling, and thus would offer a caution to teachers to view NCSE with a great deal of skepticism, and especially the book of Professor Nathan Lents in his book, “Human Errors: A Panorama of Our Glitches, from Pointless Bones to Broken Genes” which is little more than a hit piece on those of us who differ with the Atheistic stance and mission of NCSE.

    No – the human body is not the “quirks and kinks, the makeshift solutions and haywire failures, of human biology,” but is something far more splendid and wonderful.

    So what say you Seversky? Are you willing to take a good look at this sort of “empirical evidence” that you yourself can delve into?

    My original post on this is at:
    https://ayearningforpublius.wordpress.com/2016/08/05/the-not-so-intelligent-designer/

  6. 6
    relatd says:

    Human beings have been given their creativity from God. I saw photos a friend took while in Ireland. The architectural ornamentation on a gate, for example. A national identity in wrought metal. I saw the heart and soul of a country.

    Yet here, I see evidence of cold, dead hearts. Of eyes that don’t see, or that see only what they want to see.

    John 3:19

    “And this is the judgment: the light has come into the world, and people loved the darkness rather than the light because their works were evil.”

  7. 7
    Blastus says:

    Excellent comment Publius @ 5.

    You could continue in your examples. For example there is the US space program at NASA. I am certain there are countless other examples in countless other fields.

    Related @ 6 raises a valid point as well. I would add:

    2 Corinthians 4:4 KJV
    … the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them.

  8. 8

    Thanks, Blastus
    It seems that so often at our young and inquiring stages of life, typically in college, we take on a veneer, a thin veneer that colors our view of life. In my own case it was the influence of a somewhat influential future brother-in-law that had me reading books by Bertrand Russell and other atheist thinkers and influencers of the day.
    Others come away with this veneer and go off to great success by creating Paper Mache models of mountains and offer this to countless naive students as proof of what Darwin had to say about life – Dawkins.

  9. 9
    asauber says:

    “watch the hands, and in particular the fingers of the orchestra members as they travel across the various instruments”

    Indeed. I’m a guitar player and I love watching other guitarists perform, no matter what the style. Guitarists have always been doing amazing things with hands and fingers and wrists, but some of the kids today…wow.

    Andrew

  10. 10
    doubter says:

    Ayearningforpublius@5

    Thanks for an impressive partial revelation of the miracles of design in the human body and brain and mind that most people take for granted, and that many jaundiced mentally handicapped materialists routinely dismiss. Of course there is much much more.

  11. 11
    JVL says:

    Asauber: Guitarists have always been doing amazing things with hands and fingers and wrists

    And some bass players; thinking of John Entwistle in particular.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yd6S0BrI9zw

    (bass solo starts about 5 min in)

  12. 12
    asauber says:

    JVL,

    Cool. I once saw Stu Hamm live play ‘Linus and Lucy’ on his bass. He tapped the lower notes with his left hand and the melody with his right. I was duly impressed.

    Andrew

  13. 13
    JVL says:

    Asauber: I once saw Stu Hamm live play ‘Linus and Lucy’ on his bass. He tapped the lower notes with his left hand and the melody with his right. I was duly impressed.k

    You were very lucky. I wish bass players were more recognised. But, then again, there are fewer great ones than guitarists.

    So, who’s on your list off all time great guitarists? Someone I normally wouldn’t even think about but just burned the stage live was Bonnie Raitt. Well, at least once in Seattle. I’m a bit of a Richard Thompson fan to be honest. But I wouldn’t put him in the top 10 (or maybe 20) of all time).

    Phil Manzanera is sadly under appreciated.

  14. 14
    chuckdarwin says:

    The insult de jour is “jaundiced mentally handicapped materialists” generously provided by “Doubter” @ 10……..
    BTW, the best bassist of all time was Chris Squire of Yes…..

  15. 15
    asauber says:

    “So, who’s on your list off all time great guitarists?”

    JVL,

    There are so many great guitarists out there… I like to narrow it down to a handful of guys I would call my Guitar Heroes because they are the ones who directly inspire(d) me the most with the music they (and their bands) made and their skill. I’m a Prog Rocker at heart, sooooo…

    Steve Howe and Trevor Rabin of Yes
    Alex Lifeson of Rush
    Ty Tabor of King’s X
    Eric Johnson (solo artist)

    Honorable mentions: Greg Lake, Dave Murray, Adrian Smith, Joe Satriani, Steve Hackett, Andy Summers…

    I could go on. How ’bout you? Top Five?

    Andrew

  16. 16
    asauber says:

    “BTW, the best bassist of all time was Chris Squire of Yes…..”

    CD,

    This is the first and prolly only time we’re in agreement on anything. 😉

    Andrew

  17. 17
    JVL says:

    Asauber: I’m a Prog Rocker at heart

    Yeah, me too . . . except for The Who and Led Zeppelin.

    Steve Howe and Trevor Rabin of Yes

    Damn good choices. What was that tune from Steve Howe’s solo album about Agatha Christie?

    Alex Lifeson of Rush

    Can’t argue with that. Great band.

    Ty Tabor of King’s X
    Eric Johnson (solo artist)

    Not sure I know them. I will look them up.

    Greg Lake, Dave Murray, Adrian Smith, Joe Satriani, Steve Hackett, Andy Summers…

    Actually, it might have been Steve Hackett I was referring to above . . .

    No Robert Fripp? Adrian Belew? 🙂

    I could go on. How ’bout you? Top Five?

    Eric Clapton. Brian May . . . more for feel than for technique. Same with Pete Townshend. Love the man and his tunes though. Carlos Santana? I appreciate Jimi Hendrix but hardly listen to him. What’s his name from The Band . . . sorry, just getting dinner ready and trying to quickly respond . . . Robbie Robertson!

    My choices aren’t so much great guitar players as they are just great team players. Waddy Watchel? When he was in his prime Rick Derringer could sing.

    Okay, okay, . . . the guy from Little Feat . . . Lowell George. Again, more for feel and songwriting.

    I’ll have a think. Back later. Good discussion.

  18. 18
    relatd says:

    I saw Robert Fripp at a record store. A friend called and we were on our way. After we all came in, the doors were closed. Mr. Fripp requested no recording devices be turned on. It was very, very good.

  19. 19
    Viola Lee says:

    Victor Wooten and Jaco Pastorius. 🙂 Different genres than what you guys are talking about.

  20. 20
    bornagain77 says:

    Further comment from ENV: “He (Burgess) is one of the leading engineers in the UK.,,,

    Burgess: Claims of “Poor Design” in Skeletal Joints Are Based on Critics’ Lack of Training in Engineering
    Brian Miller – September 14, 2022
    Excerpt: As an engineering professor at Bristol University and Cambridge, Stuart Burgess has researched biomechanics for nearly thirty years. He is one of the leading engineers in the UK.,,,
    https://evolutionnews.org/2022/09/burgess-claims-of-poor-design-in-skeletal-joints-are-based-on-critics-lack-of-training-in-engineering/

    As a top engineer in the UK, perhaps Dr. Burgess just might have a clue what he is talking about when he says that “Human Skeletal Joints Are Masterpieces of Engineering”,

    Why Human Skeletal Joints Are Masterpieces of Engineering
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EmXjK4HiM4M

    Professor Stuart Burgess
    B.Sc., Ph.D.(Brun.), C.Eng., F.I.Mech.E.
    Current positions
    Professor of Engineering Design
    Department of Mechanical Engineering
    https://www.bristol.ac.uk/people/person/Stuart-Burgess-d9aa408b-265a-46e0-9446-b3d77d3477dc/

  21. 21
    JVL says:

    Relatd: I saw Robert Fripp at a record store. A friend called and we were on our way. After we all came in, the doors were closed. Mr. Fripp requested no recording devices be turned on. It was very, very good.

    Amazing. How lucky are you?

  22. 22
    JVL says:

    Viola Lee: Victor Wooten and Jaco Pastorius. ? Different genres than what you guys are talking about.

    Good stuff! I’d love to have seen them.

  23. 23
    JVL says:

    You know, if I wanted someone playing for my soul I just might pick Duane Allman. Just listen to Layla by Derek and the Dominoes or Live at the Fillmore East by The Allman Brothers. Fantastic stuff.

  24. 24
    relatd says:

    Without getting too technical, the hip and knee are built to fine tolerances. That means in order to function correctly, each component must be the precise shape and size required. Attempts to replace hip bones and knees have become possible but the fit must be precise. This is man’s attempt to replace a design that required no machining to grow into place correctly.

  25. 25
    Viola Lee says:

    I saw Victor Wooden several times, including once at a small demo lesson/concert for bass players. Also, I’m a Duane Allman/Dickie Betts fan. And I’m a deadhead, so Garcia.

  26. 26
    vividbleau says:

    “So, who’s on your list off all time great guitarists?”

    Randy Rhoads

    Vivid

  27. 27

    Doubter @ 10
    Thanks. Now I am waiting (but not holding my breath) for Sev’s reply.

  28. 28

    I think Sev is out looking for a concert … or a baseball game.

  29. 29
  30. 30
    asauber says:

    BA77 @ 29

    I’ve never seen a guitar with those diagonal frets. Too weird and cool.

    JVL,

    “No Robert Fripp? Adrian Belew?”

    King Crimson didn’t capture me back in the day. I should probably give them some listening time now, though.

    Andrew

  31. 31
    Blastus says:

    A master guitarist does show off the hands, the fingers and the wrists.

    Yet a favorite of mine to show off the human body and it’s coordination is the Argentine tango. You just won’t see two prokaryotes moving like this. Enjoy:

    https://youtu.be/JaEsttvrXkY

  32. 32
    Peter says:

    How appropriate that such an excellent video receives a strong response.

    There is no point in responding to Seversky. He will never understand no matter how many facts he is presented with.

    Has anyone noticed how every fossil is of a 100% functional creature? Not at all what you would expect from a random process. If it were truly random most would be non-functioning carcasses. Think of the damage of only having an limb in the wrong position. It would be catastrophic. Yet this is never the case in the fossil record. Just image a factory that produces something with its parts randomly located. The product would never work. To me this is the strongest refutation of evolution – a 100% functional fossil record. I would enjoy seeing an article here on this subject.

  33. 33
    Alan Fox says:

    There is no point in responding to Seversky. He will never understand no matter how many facts he is presented with.

    How do you know that? Nobody’s yet presented the facts of “Intelligent Design”.

    Has anyone noticed how every fossil is of a 100% functional creature?

    Do you mean that all fossils are remains of creatures that were once alive? I guess there is no intermediate state for an organism between life and death. Seeds, now. I guess they are 100% functional. Viruses? Animals in deep hibernation? All alive till they’re dead, I guess.

    Not at all what you would expect from a random process.

    Selection is not random

    If it were truly random most would be non-functioning carcasses.

    Selection is not random..

    It amazes me how blithely ignorant folks here are of the non-random process of natural selection.

  34. 34
    jerry says:

    Nobody’s yet presented the facts of “Intelligent Design”.

    One of the stupidest comments ever made on UD.

    Aside: Seversky has been commenting here for over 13 years.

    He has never responded to the answers he receives. This means he acquiesces to these answers. This does not however, prevent him from asking the same question over and over and receive the same answer.

    Is that the definition of something?

    It amazes me how blithely ignorant folks here are of the non-random process of natural selection.

    It’s not natural selection that is thought random, but variation.

    But even variations may not be random as nothing is truly random. However, natural selection never produces anything but trivial changes that have never real built anything new of consequence in Evolution. Natural Selection leads to dead ends because it leads to loss of gene variation.

  35. 35
    Sir Giles says:

    One of the stupidest comments ever made on UD.

    One of a countless number.

  36. 36
    Alan Fox says:

    Come on, Jerry. I can’t compete with you.

    Refute my claim with some “Intelligent Design” facts. I dare you! 😉

  37. 37
    WitnessFTP says:

    AF @33
    Selection is not random
    It most certainly is. The vast majority of life is made up of random events. Survival is all about randomness.

    Having certain traits (all randomly mutated by the way) can help increase the chance of survival but cannot guarantee survival.

    This observation is certainly true about life: “The swift do not always win the race, nor do the mighty win the battle, nor do the wise always have the food, nor do the intelligent always have the riches, nor do those with knowledge always have success, because time and unexpected events overtake them all.”—Eccl. 9:11.

  38. 38
    jerry says:

    Refute my claim with some “Intelligent Design” facts. I dare you! ?

    The best fact is that no one who is anti ID has ever produced a fact to support an alternative.

    You certainly haven’t nor has anyone in the world. I wonder why?

    Aside: As far as pro ID, start with all the fine tunings. There are literally books on it and lots of videos for the reading impaired. As I said, the claim is one of the stupidest ever made on UD. That’s a fact we all can agree on.

  39. 39
    Alan Fox says:

    Oh dear!

    Jerry acknowledges that selection is non-random (but limited) but WitnessFTP says selection is random.

    Get your stories straight, guys, and get back to me.

  40. 40
    Lieutenant Commander Data says:

    🙂 Life responds the same as an autopilot. Even if an observer can have the(false) impression of randomness actually nothing is happening randomnly . All life forms ( from simple forms to humans )constitute very complex cybernetic systems that have a preseted purpose and can’t survive responding randomnly to random stimuli.

    PS: darwinists can’t talk about non-randomness(“Selection is not random.”) :))
    Antonyms for random : methodical (also methodic), organized, regular, systematic, systematized

  41. 41
    Alan Fox says:

    The best fact is that no one who is anti ID has ever produced a fact to support an alternative.

    The theory of evolution by random variation and natural selection? Not heard of that, Jerry? It’s evolved since Darwin. Evolved since Dawkins. ID is not an alternative. It’s a cargo cult.

  42. 42
    Sir Giles says:

    Having certain traits (all randomly mutated by the way) can help increase the chance of survival but cannot guarantee survival.

    Which is an excellent example of selection being non-random.

  43. 43
    Alan Fox says:

    Life responds the same as an autopilot.

    Nope. Life learns. Play the game of life or die.

  44. 44
    Lieutenant Commander Data says:

    Life learns

    😆 Learning is an intelligent action performed by an intelligence.

    to learn= to gain knowledge or understanding of or skill in by study, instruction, or experience.

    What life do is to execute complex layers of instructions (already written by an intelligence as functional information). Executing different algorithms is not learning but an automated response to different stimuli . All algorithms are already written and sleeping until the moment of triggering when will be switched on .

  45. 45
    Alan Fox says:

    All algorithms are already written and sleeping until the moment of triggering when will be switched on.

    That raises a few questions. Where are these algorithms written and stored until needed? What is the trigger? What does the switching?

  46. 46
    Sir Giles says:

    That raises a few questions. Where are these algorithms written and stored until needed? What is the trigger? What does the switching?

    And wouldn’t that suggest that all possible environments were pre-determined?

  47. 47
    Paxx says:

    Alan Fox: Life learns. Play the game of life or die.

    I’ve been think about this lately, and I have a few questions:

    How did life acquire this property of the ability to learn?

    How was life able to not die prior to acquiring this property?

    Does the Darwin paradigm describe a Turing Complete environment?

    What does the Darwin paradigm offer by way of making predictions when initial conditions are known?

  48. 48
    WitnessFTP says:

    Having certain traits (all randomly mutated by the way) can help increase the chance of survival but cannot guarantee survival.

    Which is an excellent example of selection being non-random.

    No, that is an excellent example of selection being random – the key word is chance. So, increasing the chances of survival means decreasing the randomness, but the randomness cannot be entirely eliminated or guaranteed.

    Life responds the same as an autopilot. Even if an observer can have the(false) impression of randomness actually nothing is happening randomnly . All life forms ( from simple forms to humans )constitute very complex cybernetic systems that have a preseted purpose and can’t survive responding randomly to random stimuli.

    I’m not saying that life responds randomly to random stimuli nor am I saying that all survival is 100% random. I’m saying that random events certainly influence, to a greater or lesser degree, survival. For example: humans can adapt to random events by making conscious decisions (free will). This reduces the random influence but cannot eliminate it. So, despite using our brains, experience, and knowledge, random events (anticipated or unanticipated) can and do thwart our best laid plans.

  49. 49
    Alan Fox says:

    How did life acquire this property of the ability to learn?

    There’s a starting assumption (also an observation) for the theory of evolution that entities exist that are capable of self-sustaining (temporarily resisting entropy by using an energy source) and self-replicating. The learning is the modifications that result from imperfect replication and differential reproduction. Genomes store, copy and pass on that learning.

    How was life able to not die prior to acquiring this property?

    Evolutionary theory does not address where the first self-sustaining self-replicators came from. That is the “origin of life” question, as yet unanswered.

    Does the Darwin paradigm describe a Turing Complete environment?

    Not familiar with Turing completeness but I would guess not.

    What does the Darwin paradigm offer by way of making predictions when initial conditions are known?

    Not sure what you are asking. I don’t think strict determinism holds for our reality; not for evolution nor for anything else. Unless extinction happens, evolution is a continuous process where change is dependent on the immediate niche.

  50. 50
    jerry says:

    The theory of evolution by random variation and natural selection? Not heard of that

    Doubling down on stupidity by adding even more nonsense.

    Proposes a theory that ID supports for genetics but is inconsequential for Evolution. Even more support for ID.

    Still no facts

    But there’s more.

    Cargo cult

    Resort to ad hominems is final support for ID. From the person who wanted a reasonable discussion.

    QED

  51. 51
    Lieutenant Commander Data says:

    Alan Fox
    That raises a few questions. Where are these algorithms written and stored until needed? What is the trigger? What does the switching?

    🙂 What I said is not even something new .All processes are already taking place in the cell. It’s time for you to learn something new even you probably are 80 years old but you are still young . 😉
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cell_signaling
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Receptor_(biochemistry)
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molecular_switch
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G_protein-coupled_receptor
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Signal_transduction
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_signalling_pathways
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gene_silencing
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gene_expression

    Well, raising questions is the best path to knowledge than to assert nonsense phrases like you did:

    Life learns. Play the game of life or die.

    Your assertion (“Life learns”) explains everything and doesn’t rise any question ,right? but my assertion (Layers of preseted algorithms turnes on/off ) rise questions?

  52. 52
    hnorman42 says:

    AF @ 49
    “Immediate niche…” I think that’s an absolutely tautologous concept. There’s an interesting chapter in the book “What Darwin Got Wrong” you might like. It’s called “Did the Dodo Lose its Niche? Or Was it the Other Way Around?” It’s the only chapter that I did not find horrendously opaque. The whole book certainly stimulated thought though.

  53. 53
    Lieutenant Commander Data says:

    WitnessFTP

    AF @33
    Selection is not random

    It most certainly is. The vast majority of life is made up of random events. Survival is all about randomness.

    Not really. You confound randomness with stochastic https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aY0d5HTLIBk&t=2120s

    Having certain traits (all randomly mutated by the way) can help increase the chance of survival but cannot guarantee survival

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aY0d5HTLIBk&t=2505s

  54. 54
    Alan Fox says:

    All processes are already taking place in the cell.

    What does your labelling some cellular processes as “algorithmic” add to understanding of those processes?

  55. 55
    BobSinclair says:

    Universe from nothing, boom ID defeated 😉 https://bigthink.com/starts-with-a-bang/something-from-nothing/

  56. 56
    Lieutenant Commander Data says:

    BobSinclair
    Universe from nothing, boom ID defeated ? https://bigthink.com/starts-with-a-bang/something-from-nothing/

    😆

    “With electrons and positrons (or “holes”) being created out of literally nothing, just ripped out of the quantum vacuum by electric fields themselves, it’s yet another way that the Universe demonstrates the seemingly impossible: we really can make something from absolutely nothing!”

    Boom , nonsense no. 124654356 of atheists that say that quantum vacuum and electric field is “literally nothing”.
    We wait for the next nonsense. I bet will come soon. 😆

  57. 57
    kairosfocus says:

    AF,

    First, it is not empty labelling but recognition of character, stepwise, goal directed finite process.

    But then, you have yet to cogently explain your attempt to dismiss recognition of codes in this process, as say Lehninger notes:

    “The information in DNA is encoded in its linear (one-dimensional) sequence of deoxyribonucleotide subunits . . . . A linear sequence of deoxyribonucleotides in DNA codes (through an intermediary, RNA) for the production of a protein with a corresponding linear sequence of amino acids . . . Although the final shape of the folded protein is dictated by its amino acid sequence, the folding of many proteins is aided by “molecular chaperones” . . . The precise three-dimensional structure, or native conformation, of the protein is crucial to its function.” [Principles of Biochemistry, 8th Edn, 2021, pp 194 – 5. Now authored by Nelson, Cox et al, Lehninger having passed on in 1986. Attempts to rhetorically pretend on claimed superior knowledge of Biochemistry, that D/RNA does not contain coded information expressing algorithms using string data structures, collapse. We now have to address the implications of language, goal directed stepwise processes and underlying sophisticated polymer chemistry and molecular nanotech in the heart of cellular metabolism and replication.]

    KF

  58. 58
    kairosfocus says:

    AF, acknowledgement of evident fact is not mere arbitrary labelling. Protein synthesis involves use of coded mRNA, to direct start, elongation and stop for AA chains that go on to form the proteins of life. That you are desperate to belittle or dismiss that is strong reason to recognise its powerful significance. KF

Leave a Reply