Irreducible complexity and Evolution

a reply to: cyberjedi

So the theory of evolution puts forth that with every generation, new parts get introduced, and so, species evolve. This seems not to be the case. A case can be made for selection. Within the pool of genes, a selection is made, the genes that are most suitable for the cause get picked to serve, and so the physical appearance of the animal reflects the selection that is made.

The 'selection', the 'pick' is intrinsic. They happen by default, as the offspring of the most successful parents will have those traits as well. They are most likely to survive, and over time, they will become the majority of proliferation candidates.

a reply to: 5StarOracle

They follow those directions in the DNA/RNA which produced successfull surviving parents since a very long time ago.

How do you explain the huge amount of "junk-DNA" every cell has?
Because an intelligent designer would have introduce the minimal needed amount of complexity (huh, your argument against you?) to avoid errors.

a reply to: Akragon

Listen he came in suggesting I said something I never did his answer was pure assumption...
Or deliberate misdirection on his part...
What's funny is he whines about a personal attack for being stupid or deliberately trying to misrepresent my statement... I don't know which is worse...
Then in your stupidity... Which you once again put on full display make a personal attack on me...
lol what?
You are just a cheerleader here... give me a break...

originally posted by: cyberjedi

originally posted by: trollz
Your entire argument is thrown out the window at the acknowledgement of other creatures existing without those characteristics. There are birds that can't do what the woodpecker does. There are creatures that can't fly. There are creatures without brains or hearts. There are single-celled organisms and bacterium...
So, if you're claiming evolution can't be real because the woodpecker can't exist without its unique characteristics, I'll say you're wrong. We just don't call the other birds woodpeckers.

Different creatures have different genepools and different origins. Im not putting forth the notion that all creatures orginate from one creature, which you seem to be doing.

DNA says otherwise. It's pretty evident all animal based life has a common ancestor.

Damm Science.

a reply to: ManFromEurope

Hmm that's easy it's not understood and misrepresented as junk...

a reply to: 5StarOracle

yup... totally a cheer leader


I gladly admit i don't know much about evolution... but this is one of the only threads that's worth paying attention to on ATS lately... and i do love to watch Christians squirm

You like mostly every other one of your people follow the same tactics in religious debate... which is probably where you should keep the arguments to... because you and your fellow Christians are very clearly out of your league in this topic

carry on

thanks for reinforcing my point by the way.... typical

a reply to: Akragon

Out of my league as not a proponent of the evolutionary faith?
That's the smartest thing you ever said...
And don't be so butthurt guy you know I don't hate you we have agreed on may other things...

a reply to: 5StarOracle

its just blatantly obvious... Like i said, same stuff in religious debates

Nothing to say... insult...

Ignore whats given, more insults... standard Christian debate

And it doesn't bother me in the least... again, i enjoy watching Christians squirm when they have nothing

a reply to: Akragon

I'm the one who was insulted by him then you...
It's just tit for tat...
I apologize for my part...

a reply to: 5StarOracle

I didn't insult you...

i only reiterated the fact that this is standard "christian" procedure

a reply to: Akragon

If I have nothing... Then why has nothing I said actually been addressed instead has been misdirected and buried by several sudden posters?
Now that's typical...
And who's squirming?
If you think what I said has been disqualified then you are confused...

a reply to: 5StarOracle

Are you going to get on topic or continue with personal attacks?

a reply to: 5StarOracle

actually IF you chose to read what some of the members have said you would find that almost everything has been addressed multiple times on many many pages....

This is the problem... You and your team mates don't actually read anything that is presented to you

You ignore it... and continue ranting

again... standard... procedure

a reply to: Akragon

So then... what programmed the first cell?

originally posted by: 5StarOracle
a reply to: Akragon

I'm the one who was insulted by him then you...
It's just tit for tat...
I apologize for my part...

Oh no, it was you. May I repeat your statement? "The argument is not incomplete but your thought process is... "
That is not a very nice way to say that you think I was wrong.

Apology accepted.

a reply to: 5StarOracle

No idea... Like i said

I don't know anything compared to some of these guys.... but i watch these topics because i might learn something, and again, Christians never fail to show up spouting their nonsense

i tend to dwell in the religious/spiritual/philosophy/metaphysics sections, so i have no horse in this race

but you guys don't either... so

a reply to: ManFromEurope

Well actually you you were like I said wrong or deliberately misrepresenting what I was saying...
But none the less I have nothing against you I don't recall ever reading any of your posts before...

a reply to: Akragon

Well you are wrong there too because I'm for intelligent design... That would be my horse...see?
Didn't you already know that though?

originally posted by: 5StarOracle
a reply to: Akragon

Well you are wrong there too because I'm for intelligent design... That would be my horse...see?
Didn't you already know that though?

Well ya its pretty obvious... I am of that belief as well

Fortunately ID doesn't mean evolution isn't the way it was designed

and evolution doesn't deal with how life started... only how it ended up over millions of years

see when that special book gets in the way of science, you guys just get all frazzled... almost as if you think its inerrant

a reply to: Akragon

That argument is nonsensical because if what you said is true than it was still intelligent design which allowed for evolution...
That I have no problem with...
But that's not what evolution portrays...
Evolution believes all life stems from a single ancestor which was derived from inorganic matter...
That is in other words going directly against intelligent design and attempting to explain creation...