Originally posted by twhiteheadFine, if left alone except for all the forces of the universe affecting
Please give one example of something in the universe that is 'left alone'. ie not subject to the force of gravity or any other outside influence. If not please stop making the statement as it is misleading as it is a well known fact that it does not apply to anything in the universe and is thus a false statement.
it. As has been pointed out, you can get order by allowing
gravity helps shift material in water that; however, does not build
a living system from all the products in the area. Things wear down,
they break down because of those forces, they don't fall neatly
together to mold themselves into something functionally complex
as life. We don't see new life springing up all everywhere where
there wasn’t life before, unless of course life moved into that area,
life that is already up and running completely formed without the
process of having to form take place out of previously dead material.
Kelly
1 edit
Originally posted by XanthosNZLet's give an example. Erosion. Does it have a direction (other than the comical downward)? Does it have boundaries? Does it have a purpose? Who controls it?
Direction? There isn't one. Why does there have to be one?
Boundaries? The laws of physics.
Purpose? To survive long enough to pass one's genetic material on to the next generation and hopefully to have a bit of fun while doing so.
Control? Why does there need to be control?
So it's in the exactly the same boat as Evolution. I guess God must be in charge of Erosion too.
Originally posted by sonhouseNo problem, I said it was a good design. No gripe here! There
What is your gripe here? Its a design process that exceeded the abilities of humans to come up with yet it was not intelligent. I guess you have a problem with that.
was a plan, purpose, and design and things happened.
Kelly
Originally posted by XanthosNZDirection, you want to take a universe where processes tend to
Direction? There isn't one. Why does there have to be one?
Boundaries? The laws of physics.
Purpose? To survive long enough to pass one's genetic material on to the next generation and hopefully to have a bit of fun while doing so.
Control? Why does there need to be control?
break down more times and not, and have one that does just
opposite, and that is mold non-living material into life, and more
than that, cause that life to become more and more complex!
Why? Why people say it must become more and more complex,
to fit into the universe better than it did before. That is a huge
piece of direction, but of course as you point out there really
isn't one, because a purposeful direction to become more and
more complex to fit better into the universe is a purpose, and
you cannot have purpose unless there is a will.
Are you aware of any law in physics saying life must become
more and more complex to fit into the universe? Outside of the
evolutionist belief system, I have never heard of one. I’ll wait
with bated breath when you bring one to my attention that is
not a matter of faith on your part.
You think life has a purpose, to survive long enough to pass
one’s genetic material on to the next generation…seems like
that requires desire and a plan. How many billions of years
of life were required for that thought to reach the consciousness
of life in your opinion?
If control isn’t exercised while one is doing something complex
you can forget getting good results. The evolutionary belief system
would have everyone believing that things as complex as the
human brain is just result of favorable changes in DNA without
any controlling mechanism in place guiding the minute details
of that process along. Unless you want to count natual selection
as a guiding force which has all the control of gravity pulling
a objects to earth. If you want to believe it can be done over
billions of years a little bit at a time, again nothing but faith not
facts in that statement.
Quite a leap of faith buying into that belief system!
Kelly
Originally posted by KellyJayNow you are changing your statement completely. At first you said they never get more complex. Now you are saying that they never get "as complex as life". That is a completely different statement.
Fine, if left alone except for all the forces of the universe affecting
it. As has been pointed out, you can get order by allowing
gravity helps shift material in water that; however, does not build
a living system from all the products in the area. Things wear down,
they break down because of those forces, they don't fall neatly
together to mold thems ...[text shortened]... rmed without the
process of having to form take place out of previously dead material.
Kelly
No do you have a way of measureing complexity? I would agree that systems as complex as life are not common and do not generally form except via the processes of evolution, but your popular statements that "things if left alone get less complex" is totally and utterly false when applied to both life and non-life.
How life and non-lifes complexity changes over time is based on different processes and in general the processes affecting life produce higher levels of complexity.
Originally posted by KellyJayNatural selection as a guiding force is much more powerfull in terms of achieving complexity than gravity is. As to whether the basic process behind natural selection works in say a lab or computer program environment should not be under dispute as it is mathematically proovable that it not only works but that the probability of achieving greater complexity is very high.
Unless you want to count natual selection as a guiding force which has all the control of gravity pulling a objects to earth. If you want to believe it can be done over billions of years a little bit at a time, again nothing but faith not facts in that statement.
Quite a leap of faith buying into that belief system!
Kelly
The only thing that may be at question by you should be whether or not natural selection is responsible for lifes vast variety.
And please stop making this rediculus statement :"a universe where processes tend to break down more times than not" unless you are prepared to back it up with something other than your opinion.
Originally posted by twhiteheadNatural selection is a guiding force able to work out the details of
Natural selection as a guiding force is much more powerfull in terms of achieving complexity than gravity is. As to whether the basic process behind natural selection works in say a lab or computer program environment should not be under dispute as it is mathematically proovable that it not only works but that the probability of achieving greater complexi ...[text shortened]... times than not" unless you are prepared to back it up with something other than your opinion.
making brains with the sophistication of that of human, down to the
lowest level of creature with a brains? No, I would not give natural
selection that much credit. Forces are what they are, but you could
also call a tornado a guiding force, the issue isn't that there isn't
some level of power and contol with force, but can those things
do what is being claimed, which is work out the necessary details of
writing code within DNA to achieve what is here today?
Natural selection can populate niches well, such as making sure that
whatever is at a certain location fit the location better, but to suggest
that it can guide along random mutations so that life becomes more
and more functionally complex in a universe that tends to break down
processes doesn’t seem to be seen anywhere except again in the
minds of the evolutionary believers. There are forces within the
universe they have limitation on what they can and cannot do, and
simply making the claim that with enough time and energy it can
occur is again faith, since not everything can and will occur given
plenty of energy and time. The necessary material, in proper
quanities, and a host of other things all must be in play, control is
necessary to do something as create something with high levels of
functional complexity.
Kelly
1 edit
Originally posted by twhiteheadI'm not changing the subject I'm staying on subject. I don't believe
Now you are changing your statement completely. At first you said they never get more complex. Now you are saying that they never get "as complex as life". That is a completely different statement.
No do you have a way of measureing complexity? I would agree that systems as complex as life are not common and do not generally form except via the processes t processes and in general the processes affecting life produce higher levels of complexity.
I said that nothing gets more complex, but more functionally
complex. That to is a little different, if you want to squabble verbiage
at least stick to that which was written.
You don't see things breaking down and wearing out in the universe?
You don't see processes also coming apart after time? You saying
that life is complex and doesn't generally form except via the process
of evolution is faith, it isn't an observed phenomenon, except in the
minds of evolutionary believers who say it is occurring so slow it would
take billions of years to see. I can point out processes and things that
do wear out, break down and so on.
Kelly