Search results

Stu wrote: Are you claiming that molecular machines reproduce? They don't. They are created within the cell. The cell is a factory that contains an elaborate network of interlocking assembly lines where machines are put together part by part. Stu wrote: Wrong. The ATP synthase is a...

If this discussion wasn't occurring within the context of Darwinian evolution then no one on this thread would be arguing that the molecular machines found in nature are not literal machines. The Darwinists here are evidently afraid that if literal machines exist in nature the design inference...

drtomaso wrote: It was a Darwinist that coined the term "molecular machine". As far as I know, Darwinian scientists accept that the molecular machines found in nature are literal machines. But they don't think they were created by an intelligent agent. They claim that the designer of these...

Powerfade wrote: No one has given me a good reason to think that molecular machines are not literal machines. No one has given me any good reason to think a machine can originate via sheer dumb luck. I therefore suspect design. If you have any evidence to thwart my suspicion, let's hear it.

drtomaso said: Consider the F-ATP synthase, where Science News reported "With parts that resemble pistons and a drive shaft, the enzyme F1-ATPase looks suspiciously like a tiny engine. Indeed, a new study demonstrates that's exactly what it is." Science News vol 151, p173 In fact, an...

Drtomaso says: Wrong. The ID perspective is: this is a motor. ID makes no necessary claims that anything must be designed. But design is the prima facie interpretation when confronted with a machine.

Principled (not Rhetorical) Reasons Why ID Doesn’t Identify the Designer (Part 1) Mike Gene recently posted on Telic Thoughts http://telicthoughts.com/they-love-to-smear-us/ responding to professor James F. McGrath, who accuses intelligent design (ID) proponents of being dishonest when they...

New Report Exposes Sham of Academic Freedom at Baylor University Today’s edition of the student newspaper at Baylor University carries a devastating investigative report http://www.baylor.edu/lariat/news.php?action=story&story=48260 exposing new details of the university’s shameful...

Paul Davies says: "The key to existence will be found not in primordial sludge, but in the nanotechnology of the living cell."

Stu wrote: ID is investigating whether geo-chemical processes or bioengineering best accounts for the origin of life on earth. If it could be determined that bioengineering best accounts for the origin of life on earth that would be a huge achievement. The magnitude of this achievement would...

Stu wrote: Irrelevant. All that matters is who would be able to discover the true history of how life got started on the planet in question. Persons like you would be searching forever for a geo-chemical answer. Only the IDers would stand a chance of discovering the truth.

Stu wrote: What are you talking about? Those on this planet like me would be investigating the possibility that life on the planet was seeded by bioengineers. Your group would be investigating a geo-chemical origin of life. Since life on this hypothetical planet originated via...

Stu wrote: There is no good reason to doubt that a 1000 years from now human scientists will be able to seed distant planets with microbes designed to evolve. Later when these microbes have evolved into intelligent beings there will be among them those like Stu that will insist life...

Is Intelligent Design Such a Dangerous Idea That It Must Not Be Thought? Robert Crowther October 5, 2007 When it comes to teaching intelligent design in social studies classes, not science classes, mind you, but social studies, ID critics were for it before they were against it...

Baylor University Denies Research Scientist's Academic Freedom by Anika Smith on September 6, 2007 “Baylor University has proven yet again that academic freedom has been thrown off campus and academic persecution is now the norm,” said Discovery Institute’s Casey Luskin in reaction...

Stu wrote: So you can never infer design in any case? You don't think this post is the result of a teleological process? I guess you think it best to stop the regress of explanation at the computer screen itself.

Stu wrote: No, your argument is silly. Design is design. How does fairy design differ from human-like design? While there is an obvious connection between intelligent engineers and things like machines, I don’t see the connection between fairies and machines. Unless of course, you want to...

Stu wrote: You're confusing your scenario with mine. In my scenario the detective makes an initial inference to teleological causation which 99.9% of the time would be correct. But this is not the final conclusion. This is the beginning of an investigation. I never said a design inference...

Yes, and notice that Stu refuses to give us his definition of creationist.

Stu wrote: It is your contention that Behe is a creationist. It is my contention that Behe and Crick both posit that intelligence was behind the origin of life on earth. If positing that intelligence was behind the origin of life on earth makes one a creatioist then Crick was a creationist...