|
Author
|
Topic: John A. Davison: An Evolutionary Manifesto: A New Hypothesis For Organic Change
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
DaveScot
Member
Member # 1545
|
posted 30. November 2008 09:34
"Material" is generally defined as something that has the attribute of mass or energy and can be measured.
How much does a thought weigh, John?
IP: Logged
|
|
nosivad
Member
Member # 767
|
posted 30. November 2008 14:30
Dave "I love being right" Springer I presume.
I figured it was about time for you to surface again. How long do you plan to stay this time or was this it? Are you now, as typical, going to scuttle off to gloat over some imagined victory?
I am sure that every thought requires energy and accordingly involves some biochemical changes that theoretically could be measured. That is what I mean by material. I repeat that everything is material or it wouldn't exist.
The proper place for the supernatural was millions of years ago and that cannot be dismissed by any rational mind.
I love it so!
"A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable."
John A. Davison
IP: Logged
|
|
DaveScot
Member
Member # 1545
|
posted 30. November 2008 17:40
Hear ye, hear ye. According to John Davison supernatural immaterial things have a proper place millions of years ago but not today. And if you find that hard to believe then you're simply irrational.
Okay. I guess I gotta believe it so the men in the white coats don't come after me.
So tell me, John. What happens to immaterial supernatural stuff when it is no longer needed? Is there like an immaterial, supernatural storage area for these things after they no longer have a proper place in the material universe?
IP: Logged
|
|
nosivad
Member
Member # 767
|
posted 01. December 2008 03:24
All that was required was an initial enormous store of information coupled with a goal seeking device to sort it all out. Of course while there may have been supernatural intervention many times in the past, I see absolutely no evidence for any today. If you do - explain. Phylogeny is now finished. All that remains is extinction. It is difficult if not impossible to evaluate a mechanism no longer in operation.
Anyone who believes that the origin or origins and subsequent evolution of organisms did NOT require supernatural preparation and guidance has defined himself as a Darwinian atheist. Is that what Springer has become?
"A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable."
John A. Davison
[ 01. December 2008, 09:03: Message edited by: nosivad ]
IP: Logged
|
|
DaveScot
Member
Member # 1545
|
posted 01. December 2008 08:31
Everything I know about how living things are constructed can be accomplished without resorting to a supernatural agency. It can all be done by a material intelligence working within the laws of physics and chemistry.
What aspect of life on this planet causes you to conclude that it requires a supernatural agency?
I've asked you this question before and you have never answered it. That's because you can't answer it. Nothing about life on this planet requires a supernatural entity.
Since you can't or won't provide an answer, and no one else I've asked has given an answer, I posed the question to everyone who reads Uncommon Descent to see if any of them will step up to the plate and be the first one to point out to me what aspect of creating organic life as we know it requires supernatural capability of its creator.
[ 01. December 2008, 08:49: Message edited by: DaveScot ]
IP: Logged
|
|
nosivad
Member
Member # 767
|
posted 01. December 2008 09:01
I don't believe for a millisecond that evolving life can be created from its components. It is the most ridiculous assumption imaginable and doesn't even deserve a response.
How does that grab you? I hope it gives you the runs.
I never thought I would see the day when Springer would become an atheist Darwinian mystic. He has finally replaced God and as he now proudly proclaims -
"The Lord giveth and the Lord taketh away."
I recommend you return to Uncommon Descent and traumatize your clientele there. You bore me to tears with your arrogance.
It is hard to believe isn't it?
"A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable."
John A. Davison
[ 01. December 2008, 09:12: Message edited by: nosivad ]
IP: Logged
|
|
nosivad
Member
Member # 767
|
posted 01. December 2008 11:06
Rather than engage any further with Springer I will let one of my sources speak for me. Here is what William Bateson had to say about what Springer regards as within the capacity of experimental science to create.
"To supply themselves with food, to find it, to seize and digest it, to protect themselves from predatory enemies whether by offence or defence, to counter-balance the changes of temperature, or pressure, to provide for mechanical strains, to obtain immunity from poison and from invading organisms, to bring the sexual elements into contact, to ensure the distribution of the type; all these and many more are accomplished by organisms in a thousand most diverse and alternative methods. Those are the things that are hard to imagine as produced by any concatenation of natural events: but the suggestions that organsims had had from the beginning innate in them a power of miodifying themselves, their organs and their instincts so as to meet these multifarious requirements does not materially differ from the more overt appeals to supernatural intervention."
Problems of Genetics, page 190, 1913.
So Bateson has reminded us of the necessity to consider supernatural intervention in order to understand the several characteristics of the living state, something Springer is unwilling to concede.
It is hard to believe isn't it?
[ 02. December 2008, 05:05: Message edited by: nosivad ]
IP: Logged
|
|
Printer-friendly view of this topic
