Irreducible complexity and Evolution

a reply to: kennyb72

Oh and I've often read Nexus and New Dawn, I know who Lars Adelskogh is. A kook is a kook, PDF or not. He is a Holocaust denier, and thus scum.

a reply to: Noinden

I can't leave that unanswered as that is the epitome of a straw-man. Lars Adelskogh is the translator of Henry T Laurency, the author of the works The Philosophers Stone, The knowledge of life and The Way of Man. It is a law of life to not bear false witness, and karma is universal.

Now, however much you try to be insulting, it has no affect on me, because you are my brother, and you are still learning.

Intellectual masturbation, is all I ever see on this forum, so I thought that was the correct way to address you all.

So yes,

May your God bless you.

originally posted by: whereislogic
Really, that's the arg. ad hominem you wanna go with? He doesn't believe in evolution? That might work amongst fans of evolutionary philosophies who will burn anyone who doesn't want to jump on their bandwagon at the stake of public opinion but for me it only provides more reasons for what I mentioned before:

Lol. That isn't an ad hominem argument. He really is a surgeon. I'm not sure you even know what an ad hominem fallacy is. Also, I'm not bandwagoning anything. I know why evolutionary theory is sound. My point on medical science is only just a buffer to the scientific evidence that proves it true.

I think someone who is a professor of neurosurgery, working and teaching at a medical school, does brain research and performed over 4000 brain operations is quite capable and qualified for speaking on the subject of whether "evolutionary biology" is important to modern medicine or not, using Michael Egnor's terminology in for example his conclusion:

And I think that a singular doctor, surgeon at that (a doctor that does operations instead of research cutting edge medicine), is a mix of an appeal to authority fallacy with a sum to all fallacy. One person's opinion isn't indicative of truth. You only think he is credible because he agrees with you, but you don't understand any of the science to explain why. Hence why your argument is one big fallacy.

But it's not like he's the only one or that those making money on evolutionary philosophies promoted and marketed as "evolutionary biology" or "evolutionary theory" aren't acknowledging the same thing in other words with their unreasonable bias still shining through in the way they say things about this or related subjects...

No one gives a # about your biased creation website link. I notice your link doesn't acknowledge the MANY MANY MANY MANY MANY MANY conferences and doctors that say the exact opposite, but hey anything to sell a message to the gullible (that's an ad hominem btw).

Just the amazing complexity we continue to keep discovering in cells and their smaller components is mind boggling and raises serious questions on how evolution could have ever happened.

a reply to: kennyb72

He is a kook. HE is a nationalist. I am not bearing false witness, I am describing him.

Karma is a hindu concept that you are misrepresenting here too.

Lastly I am not your brother. You are not of my tribe, and I call you an outsider.

May the Morrigan feast on your liver

originally posted by: jjkenobi
Just the amazing complexity we continue to keep discovering in cells and their smaller components is mind boggling and raises serious questions on how evolution could have ever happened.

Questions like what?

a reply to: jjkenobi

Are these questions you can not grok? OR are they actual questions regarding evolution The two things are different

a reply to: Noinden

I wont defend myself against measly words, because they are meaningless, I will however defend the author of this work who's brilliance is unquestionable, a level of intellect not seen on these boards.

Your personal opinion of another human being is your opinion only and you really shouldn't spread rumours or malicious gossip or misrepresentation because that does have a karmic affect. I understand the law of karma just fine, it is a law of life.

I haven't studied Lars Adelskogh, as he is NOT the author of this knowledge. I do know however, that he is a philosopher who leaves mental midgets in the dust.

Your MO goes like this.
In the event that anybody does not agree with us we must:
Discredit the source
Discredit the OP
Slander people
Be abusive
Gang up and attempt to destroy the enemy TRUTH (Which apparently science has no interest in LOL)
Behave in a child like manner until the offender becomes bored. (this is a very affective technique)
Generally bring our science into disrespect through appearing to be amateurs and making posts that generally display a lack of basic education. (I really wonder how people make it through uni these days)

Do you really expect people to take your seriously?

Laurency's work deserves critical acclaim as a superb piece of classical literature and I am not really surprised that it is beyond your comprehension level.

May the Morrigan feast on your liver

Well Brother, when Morrigan comes around for dinner, I will get him to take a doggie bag home for you. Quite nice with onions apparently.

I will remind you all, that this is the Origins and Creationism forum, and my Pseudoscience, is equally as valid as yours.

I find it astounding that there are still so little awareness around, but evolution is what it is.

You wear your dogma like a crown Noinden (which means, no indentation btw, lol), as do many of you, it give you a false sense of superiority.

I alway adjust my writing style to match the tone that I experience, and as you have witnessed by my responses, your attitude is inappropriate, uncalled for and unjustified.

It grates on you because you don't like people telling you that your beliefs are incorrect.

This is what YOU ALL do when a new seeker comes into the forum. You star each other regardless of content and a silly little piece of sarcasm can net you a whole truck load of stars LOL, how exciting, but it just encourages your lower selves to dominate.

I think it is perfectly obvious to most intelligent people, that the complexity we observe in life is no accident of nature and that Irreducible complexity provides solid evidence for that. You have taken your concept of evolution as far as is possible with the evidence you have now and you have hit a wall.

Each subsequent claim is becoming less and less believable because they are obviously fictitious and conclusions drawn defy basic common sense.

Cya brother, catch up for a chat in the spirit world. Don't feel too bad, we are all still learning.

My warmest regards to you all.

a reply to: kennyb72

Ahh so unquestionable brilliance? That sounds a bit culty. Hubbard would feel threatened if he was alive I am sure

Truth is subjective. It is based on human judgment.

I reiterate, I've read Lars Adelskogh in Nexus (and probably New Dawn). He did not impress. He publishes in a Nationalistic (really National Socialist) media including Folkets Nyheter. He is a holocaust denier. Thus he is not worthy of consideration.

I say this because it shows his faulty mind.

You are now defending your Pseudoscience, as "its OK to have that here", with out showing it is valid is not a defense. You've provided no evidence to show that it is valid.

It comes down to the fact, you can't actually argue against science.

Now you have come to the ad hominem portion of your argument.

My "Beliefs" I am guessing would be science? Because we've not discussed my beliefs here. I have bad news for you. I have not had to defend them, because you avoid everything I've written, and try to go esoteric (then run when I start talking about that too). Science is not a belief set. Sorry. It is a fact based philosophy which allows things to be tested. It is eídein. Beliefs are gnoses. They are not testable.

You have yet to back up your "perfectly obvious" suppositions. You engage in fallacy, and deception, and avoid discussion.

As you thus have gone to the ad hominiem. I will assume you are bowing out.
Oh and An Morrigan, is a woman. So much for being an "expert" in all things esoteric neighbour.

Off you go bee boy.

Gabh Transna Ort Fhéin

a reply to: Noinden

Truth is subjective. It is based on human judgment.

You really do display a lack of awareness and logical reasoning.

Truth is absolute, devoid of any conscious opinion and it is what science attempts to discover.

Once the truth is established beyond reasonable doubt it does not need to be further tested by science and becomes a priori, which as a scientist I am certain you understand.

The scientific method is designed to establish the truth period.

I recommend you go through your old school books and do a little revision before making yourself appear foolish. Your appeal to authority will break down if you continue to make such fundamental mistakes in reasoning.

Oh! and your religion is not esoterics, though it encompasses some aspects, the knowledge presented by Laurency is META knowledge and your gods are subject to the same laws of life as we mere mortals.

Gabh Transna Ort Fhéin

If you are going to swear and be abusive, at least do it in English so everyone gets the opportunity to witness it, as it speaks very loudly of you.

Actually if I could I probably would, lol

a reply to: kennyb72

There are no absolutes in Science neighbour. That is the point. The goal of the scientific method is greater understanding or utility that can be verified in some way. You can't verify something is absolute (you can't sample the entire of creation).

You don't understand science.

You are not the expert at things esoteric either.

You don't understand my faith if you've taken offense (which you did) at that statment in Irish.

here let me try Gaulish for you My thanks to Chrigel Glanzmann for a wonderful prayer.

Retomos trei clounis
Selgamos trei nanta
Uaitos beruat in ueitibi
Sterca are toutin atriiinpe
Laxscit in cridiiobi

Immos nertaci
Immos exobni
Immos riii
Immos segi

Retomos trei clounis
Selgamos trei nanta
Sterca are toutin atriiinpe
Laxscit in criðiiobi

Immos nertaci
Immos exobni
Immos riii
Immos segi
Immos nertaci
Immos exobni
Immos riii
Immos segi

Retomos trei clounis
Selgamos trei nanta
Sterca are toutin atriiinpe
Laxscit in criðiiobi

Catvrix iððu
Catvrix uxu
Catvrix abisnis
Catvrix con snus
Catvrix in dubnei
etic au nemesi
Catvrix con snus
Catvrix
Catvrix
Catvrix

Catvrix iððu
Catvrix uxu
Catvrix abisnis
Catvrix con snus
Catvrix in dubnei
etic au nemesi
Catvrix con snus
Catvrix
Catvrix
Catvrix

Immos
Catvrix

a reply to: Noinden

You don't understand my faith if you've taken offense (which you did) at that statment in Irish.

Well go !$#@$ yourself sideways, is obviously a bit of sound esoteric advice, I guess

you are not the expert at things esoteric either.

I never claimed to be, No indentation. I just stated that I apparently know much more about it than you do.

Your religions are false, no indentation, both of them.

Study the esoteric before you comment on things you have no awareness of.

a reply to: kennyb72

Oh and yet you did claim it

originally posted by: kennyb72
a reply to: Noinden

Neighbour, you seem to be having the mental blocks. I'm an occultist and a Scientist.

You however are just throwing some pop words around, and trying to seem as if you are an expert in these things.

So no matter how much you try to make it about me. The fact remains, you do not understand that ID, and CI are not things. They are pseudosciences.

I have done more than "quick one liners" to debunk you. You did not address those points, hence I will not engage in depth.

I just see ego, and hard earned ego at that, I won't bother to communicate with you again unless YOU do some research.

At least we will be on the same page . You may be an occultist but you know nothing about esoterics and yes compared to your knowledge of it, I am an expert.

Knowledge always goes from general to specific, you are very good with specifics, its just that your general is incorrect.

Science is not a “belief system” but a process and methodology for seeking an objective reality. You are falling into typical ID/Creationist dogma there neigbour.

You already claimed you know nothing about my spiritual path viz

originally posted by: kennyb72
a reply to: Noinden

Without studying your religion (I have enough fictions to contend with) I think I can safely say that it bears the hall mark of all religions, It is watered down ancient knowledge, philosophies and ritual. All of which originated from the same source. There is only ONE reality of life and if you devoted the time to study it you will see perfectly how your occult beliefs fit into that framework and more importantly why.

You can not thus make claims to my religions validity. Not honestly.

I'm pretty sure I am better verrsed in the esoteric than you are.

You do New Age Sewage well however

a reply to: Noinden

yes compared to your knowledge of it, I am an expert.

Twisting the truth is something you excel at and the record is there for anybody to see.

All religion is falsified truth, as it is all distorted by the human need for power and control.

Esoterics is the TRUTH devoid of opinions, your silly argument regarding the truth means that science will have to go back to the drawing board and any presumptions of a priori must be dismissed and re-evaluated according to your interpretation.

You can not thus make claims to my religions validity. Not honestly.

I really can!, I know who your gods are, what they are, and what their function is in the reality of life.

Meta knowledge can do that for you. You could learn this too , if you had the curiosity as a scientist to examine it.

a reply to: kennyb72

Neighbour, you just dodged evidence that you are speaking from an orifice different to that which evolution gave us to use

You made a claim, based on zero evidence.

What are the functions of my gods? Go for it. I like a good laugh.

Start listing what my relgion beleives too

You dodged the esoteric bits we started on.

As for your so called meta knowledge is not demonstrated.

Basically you quote a kook, and expect everyone to kiss your rear as an esoteric master.

You've yet to demonstrate the point of this thread: Irreducible complexity.

a reply to: Noinden

There is little point in discussing esoterics with you, because you have no idea what it is, which is obvious by your posts.

Your gods are either collective consciousness, that exists beyond the causal plain who impart true divine knowledge or alternatively they are elementals beings who belong to the lower astral realms, they are very mischievous. They just love to fool the foolish.

If you summons them through invocation, then it is most certainly the latter.

There was a report on NPR this past week that spoke to these issues.

www.npr.org...

SIEGEL: At the heart of your book and your conversion, I guess, is the growth in recent decades of an understanding of convergence as a principle in evolution. Can you define convergence for us?

LOSOS: Well, convergent evolution is when two species independently evolve to be similar.

SIEGEL: And the best example that you give that I can recall is the remains of an aquatic dinosaur, a dolphin and a shark. They all developed dorsal fins, flippers, sleek bodies, but they didn't all develop from the same set of accidents that were happening randomly.

LOSOS: That's absolutely true. They evolved from three very different ancestors, and yet they ended up looking almost identical. They're all streamlined animals with a powerful tail for propulsion, two flippers for steering and a dorsal fin for stability. So the animals, if you saw one, you might - people mistake sharks for dolphins and the other way around. And so they have convergently evolved to be very similar. Now, the reason they've done that is that they have evolved a body form that is very optimally designed for moving quickly through water. And so in fact, if engineers were designing an animal to do that, that's pretty much the body shape they would pick.

SIEGEL: So the idea of convergent evolution is that common environmental factors would drive evolutionary change in some common directions. It's not all haphazard and accidental in that sense.

LOSOS: Yes, exactly. Convergent evolution most commonly occurs when species adapt to the same environmental circumstance in the same way.

SIEGEL: That's amazing. So in effect, biologists at the University of British Columbia are creating evolution.

LOSOS: Yes. Yes. That's exactly it. To my mind, this is the most exciting advance in evolutionary biology - perhaps one of the most exciting advances in all of science - in the last few years, the realization that evolutionary change can occur not only very rapidly, but so rapidly that you can actually do experiments and expect to see an outcome in three to four years. This is something that Darwin got completely wrong.

I mean, Darwin was right about so many things. It is amazing. But he was completely wrong on the pace of evolution. He thought that evolution occurred so glacially slowly that it would take thousands of years to be able to detect it at all. Well, now that we know that evolution can occur very quickly, we can actually go out and do experiments in nature to test our ideas. And some of the experiments going on now are just extraordinary and providing incredible insight about the evolutionary process.

a reply to: kennyb72

Come now bee boy. It is as if you can't actually speak to the thing you injected here. I can speak to esoteric things just fine, you are refusing to do so. I start to do so, and you ran a mile. IF your supposition of "all paths are the same" it should not matter that I used a frame work you don't know.

Your comments about my gods are a dodge. I don't summon my Gods. I invite them in. They are beings, they are real. Prove me wrong.

a reply to: Noinden

Your comments about my gods are a dodge. I don't summon my Gods. I invite them in. They are beings, they are real. Prove me wrong.

I know they are beings and I know they are real, it is where they reside that makes the difference. When we die we don't suddenly acquire causal knowledge.

If your religion teaches love, compassion, and understanding, then it is valuable and correct, and I don't care particularly where they reside. You exhibit non of those qualities, although I know they are within you.

All true paths share a common destination and that is through the will to unity.

If your religion doesn't adhere to the laws of life, then it is anti life and is destructive.

I honestly don't believe you have read a single thing I have explained, you just react, as is your habit, by scanning for something you can refute based on nonsense and then waisting a little bit of cyber space defending the untenable.