Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Aristotle

Id Vs. Evolution In Public Schools

Recommended Posts

Unguided evolution is like burying a paperclip in sand and hoping that after a few million years it will turn into a Athlon64 4000+.

 

I hope this is a joke. It is a very poor argument because it only displays complete ignorance of simple Evolutionary events. A paperclip does nothing. Most likely its molecular structure will break down and cause rust to form. It may perhaps influence the organisms around it or it may develop into an organism itself. No one can really be sure; however, I can guarantee you that it will not become something as complex and artifical as a CPU.

 

KB: Please avoid direct, personal attacks.

LoArmistead: Please keep political labels out of this.

 

These behaviors are OT and do not, in any way, benefit the discussion. Present ideas, not labels. If need be, present the ideas that are usually associated with the labels.

 

P.S. -- Pasture=dinner :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The argument is merely an appeal to ignorance and is not even entirely accurate in its construction.  Anaerobic organisms are the oldest kinds of bacteria on Earth with clostridium tetani (tetanus) as an example.  Most of the first organisms (bacteria) survived only on gas and light as sustenance.  This violates your original premise that the first organism must first be able to "2) discriminate as to what food it takes in (else it would poison itself)".  The standard of when an organism is actually considered an organism is also arbitrary, existing on a contiuum; however, Evolution does not concern itself with such topics.  Science approaches this subject through a study known as Abiogenesis.

554715[/snapback]

Actually, I never (or rarely) appeal to ignorance. It's not my style. I love the truth; 'it will set us free.' I try to stimulate thinking and the exchange of ideas hoping that all parties to the discussion will learn something from each other.

 

The organism, clostridium tetanii, that you propose as an example supporting your argument, actually supports mine much more strongly. Your putting a 'face' on a life form allows me to layout a description of some of the VERY, VERY, VERY COMPLEX structures and processes that exists in even the "simplest" life form:

Cytoplasmic Membrane - A layer of phospholipids and proteins, called the cytoplasmic membrane, encloses the interior of the bacterium, regulating the flow of materials in and out of the cell. This is a structural trait bacteria share with all other living cells; a barrier that allows them to selectively interact with their environment. Membranes are highly organized and asymmetric having two sides, each side with a different surface and different functions. Membranes are also dynamic, constantly adapting to different conditions.

Cell Wall - Each bacterium is enclosed by a rigid cell wall composed of peptidoglycan, a protein-sugar (polysaccharide) molecule. The wall gives the cell its shape and surrounds the cytoplasmic membrane, protecting it from the environment.

Ribosomes are microscopic "factories" found in all cells, including bacteria. They translate the genetic code from the molecular language of nucleic acid to that of amino acids

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm ending this here as I can tell what thespin is trying to do. He is merely taking whatever he can find on the web and citing the information, although he has no idea what it even means or what purpose it even serves to the discussion, in order to attempt to reduce my answers to a subject, event, or entity that I, or possibly even science, can not yet explain. He will then attempt to appeal to ignorance claiming that since there is something I, or science, can't explain which he will then claim as a sign of Design. This is merely a troll tactic that I will not tolerate. Unless thespin has something to contribute to the discussion of whether ID is a science or not, his posts are merely grasps at straws with no real knowledge of the subject he is refering to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I hope this is a joke.  It is a very poor argument because it only displays complete ignorance of simple Evolutionary events.  A paperclip does nothing.  Most likely its molecular structure will break down and cause rust to form.  It may perhaps influence the organisms around it or it may develop into an organism itself.  No one can really be sure; however, I can guarantee you that it will not become something as complex and artifical as a CPU.

555099[/snapback]

Yes, it is a joke, but it's a joke with a point, which you grasped, but conveniently did not apply. And please notice I said unguided evolution.

 

Let's go back shall we? I'll lay out a scenario for you. In a time where there is NO life, no plants, no bacteria, just inanimate objects that make up the earth. Think rock and water. Everything is made of the same 92 naturally occuring elements correct? You are saying that somehow, by chance, these non-living elements combined to create some small bacteria from which everything else evolved correct? My suggestion that a paperclip (a metal) and sand (essentially silicon) can combine to form a complex NON-LIVING object is FAR more likely to occur than incredibly complex combinations of many elements combining to form life. But of course, you immediately dismiss my suggestion. Why? You understand that a processor may only come together in ONE way to function as a processor, yet refuse to acknowledge that life is same way, but is made of even more complex and delicate combinations. I don't see how life could NOT be designed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

×