Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Good that I did not call them a science then is it not? I am aware of the differences between them, but I also aware of the analogous similarities between them which allows the analogy to work.
Suffice to say without the analogies that give you so much trouble: Direct observation of something is not the gold standard by which science works. We can conclude much by inference and deduction AS WELL AS direct observation. And huge swaths of science are based on this including both the conclusions you arbitrary cherry pick to accept, and the ones you equally arbitrarily cherry pick to reject.
No I did not ask for "evidence of an intelligent agent" I asked for "evidence of an intelligent agent behind the entire processes of evolution". Or behind the creation and / or subsequent maintenance of our universe if you like.
So if you willfully ignore half of what I say, you only end up replying to positions I never remotely espoused. And the art of discourse is much prettier when people answer what the other person actually said.
Unbelievable. YOU make the analogy of juries and science and then have the chutzbah to lecture me about analogies. Do you know the meaning of chutzbah?
Not only did I give you direct observable evidence of Intelligence but I also gave direct observable evidence of Intelligence evolving, i.e. Learning. By far the most direct and observable evidence that anyone has provided about Evolution. And, I'll tell you why. Because THAT IS evolution staring at you right in your face.
Unbelievable. You entirely misunderstood the analogy and then have the chutzbah to get all uppity when I help you out by correcting the error. I made an analogy between the two things. I did not call one the other as you suggested. Do zou know the meaning of error?
Yes you pointed to an intelligence, but that has nothing to do with the process of evolution which produced that intelligence in the first place. We and our intelligence appear to have evolved. But MY point, which is not addressed by your example, is that we have seen no evidence at all to suggest an intelligence behind the process that first produced us and our intelligence.
Unbelievable. You entirely misunderstood the analogy and then have the chutzbah to get all uppity when I help you out by correcting the error. I made an analogy between the two things. I did not call one the other as you suggested. Do zou know the meaning of error?
Yes you pointed to an intelligence, but that has nothing to do with the process of evolution which produced that intelligence in the first place. We and our intelligence appear to have evolved. But MY point, which is not addressed by your example, is that we have seen no evidence at all to suggest an intelligence behind the process that first produced us and our intelligence.
Lol. LEARNING is EVOLUTION.
Everything is learning (e.g. cellular memory) and as it learns it creates new constructs which is Evolution. You don't get it because it is so obvious. You are so busy looking for Evolution in dead DNA matter that you completely miss the obvious Intelligence that is learning and evolving at all levels, quanta being the most granular.
The only reason scientists are looking for Evolution in dead DNA (how the heck does dead matter evolve without some mysterious force behind it such as "Natural Selection"?) is because of the obvious materialist bias of science. Science is not an unbiased source of knowledge, it is extraordinarily biased toward materialism AND money and this bias warps the information it produces.
The answer to Evolution is literally staring at you right in your face.
The finch uses sticks to dig out insects, but it will take many years of evolution before... to write a book.
The illogical logica of humans is based on a driven and manipolated vision of the world around him, it must be aligned to the universal conscience
. one blood cell said to another blood cell. "there is not one shred of evidence that there is an agent behind what we are, oh right, we have to take the next left.”
The only reason scientists are looking for Evolution in dead DNA (how the heck does dead matter evolve without some mysterious force behind it such as "Natural Selection"?)
Scientists are not looking for Evolution.
Evolution exists and therefore does not need to be looked for.
Are you asking how does DNA, BTW which does not have the attribute of being dead or alive (it's a molecule not an organism) can be used to study evolution?
DNA is a fairly stable molecule and is a useful tool in comparative genomics.
The only reason scientists are looking for Evolution in dead DNA (how the heck does dead matter evolve without some mysterious force behind it such as "Natural Selection"?) is because of the obvious materialist bias of science. Science is not an unbiased source of knowledge, it is extraordinarily biased toward materialism AND money and this bias warps the information it produces.
The answer to Evolution is literally staring at you right in your face.
yeah, we all get that. we just don't understand what's staring at us yet.
I think what you are saying is that you want to include "inside" the things we are calling atoms and molecules. In fact you are going inside of the things inside atoms, like quarks, leptons and the force carriers like gluons, photons, and other guage bozo'z. At that point we are at "pure energy". Know body no's what that stuff is. So now what do we do now? Around we go again. make sit up?
let me try one on fer size. I think we will look so far "out" we will see a big eye looking at us and call it "god". Or we will look so far "in" we see the back of a head of a man that turns around and looks up at us. I must need coffee, that reminded me of a donut. and the 'power o Now" foofy foof.
yeah, we all get that. we just don't understand what's staring at us yet.
I think what you are saying is that you want to include "inside" the things we are calling atoms and molecules. In fact you are going inside of the things inside atoms, like quarks, leptons and the force carriers like gluons, photons, and other guage bozo'z. At that point we are at "pure energy". Know body no's what that stuff is. So now what do we do now? Around we go again. make sit up?
let me try one on fer size. I think we will look so far "out" we will see a big eye looking at us and call it "god". Or we will look so far "in" we see the back of a head of a man that turns around and looks up at us. I must need coffee, that reminded me of a donut. and the 'power o Now" foofy foof.
Exactly. When you dig down far enough what you are left with its a philosophical question (I.e. quantum interpretation) and not a scientific one, and since the topic of Evolution is entirely a philosophical one and should be approached with philosophical toools, e.g. observations, pattern recognition, clue solving. And it should be approached from many vantage points in order to find the fulcrum. For me, the fulcrum is Creative Intelligence it what Bergson called Elan Vital.
Science cannot and should not be involved with nature of Evolution. It can only observe it and provide clues. It cannot pose answers. Only philosophers are in a position to provide possible answers.
Go back and read what I said and don't move my period. Thanks.
Perhaps you need to listen to your own advice? You completely missed the answer to the question you posed.
I will answer it again in more detail.
Are you asking how does DNA, BTW which does not have the attribute of being dead or alive (it's a molecule not an organism), be used to study evolution?
DNA is a fairly stable molecule and is a useful tool in comparative genomics especially in large-scale studies of vertebrate genome evolution, as well as comparative and human medicine.
Quote:
In this review, we give examples of evolutionary analysis using a wide variety of time frames—from the comparison of populations within a species to the comparison of species separated by at least 300 million years. Furthermore, we anticipate discoveries related to evolutionary mechanisms, adaptation, and disease to quickly accelerate in the coming years.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
and the 'power o Now" foofy foof.