Then lets see if it works. Does the following sequence contain CSI?
5 Likes
funny, you think I have to guess by with eyes without applying mathematical model?
Suffice it to say that the general public will never be entirely satisfied with an “undirected unfolding of natural processes alone” in any explanation for life on earth that tries to make the OOL an unrelated and unattached or unexplained issue.
Like it or not, until that explanation is elucidated much more fully --and even afterwards, it will not persuade the vast majority that there is/was no God involved, because we need to account for how nature itself got the way it is.
In a “cosmic lottery” of a plenitude of theoretically available universes in multiverse theory, the conclusion that “we just happened to be so lucky” is the flipside of the faith statement that, given the empirical odds involved, it is even more likely that there’s a transcendent God Who ordered and maintains it all. Especially since we know the universe’s beginning was actually not all that long ago, at 13-15 billion years. My two cents.
You can apply the mathematical model. How would you go about doing that?
3 Likes
So far all you’ve done here is repeat ID-Creationist claims which were examined and thoroughly refuted and rejected by the scientific community decades ago.
If you want to revisit CSI you need to produce some real world calculations on a biological entity using it, something no one from the IDC side ever managed. But you can’t, can you?
3 Likes
Evolution is already more fully elucidated than the ID or creationist model.
2 Likes
Edgard quoted Donald Prothero as follows:
“explosion” now takes place over an 80 m.y. time framework.
And then wrote:
On Peaceful Science, we usually try to distinguish between a “gross blunder” and a “complete lie”. After all, some statement can be erroneous (including something unintentional like a typo) without it being a lie.
In any case, I’ve seen the Cambrian Explosion described in terms of various durations. I’ve never tried to research this issue in detail but I got the impression (and perhaps the experts can tell me whether my impression is right or wrong) that the duration depends in part on which key stages of the Cambrian Period are counted within the “explosion.”
It is my understanding that there were ten numbered stages which can appear in Cambrian Explosion timelines. Are scientists generally agreed now on the timeline or does the duration depend on how many stages are included in an author’s definition of the Cambrian Explosion?
1 Like
where that scientific comunity is sitting? it is a small comunity in USA?, or it is all national academies of worldwide,
Here is the list of countries, how many contries of national academies of sciences rejected ID?
How many academics overall?
A
{{ The superfluous list of countries has been deleted by a moderator. }}
Here’s a good article on some recent research on the Cambrian explosion, for those interested:
2 Likes
LOL! Your dodging of salient points is getting sillier by the post. 
Show us anywhere in the scientific literature where anyone made use of “CSI” or did a CSI calculation.
3 Likes
@Edgar_Tamarian, copy-and-pasting a long list of countries is not a useful comment. Please edit your comment to make your point while respecting the screen space of forum participants who may be working from smart-phone screens. (I actually work from a huge external computer monitor and even in my case all I see is wasted space.)
BY THE WAY: Most of the scientists in most of the world’s countries have never heard of Intelligent Design—and many who have simply don’t care about it because they don’t consider it science and therefore don’t spend time drafting any organizational statement about it.
1 Like
I know that it is bad i had to show to some that the world is not limited to USA and small federal judge within it
As someone who also does archaeology, CSI, if actually useful, would be a huge help. But no one has come close to demonstrating that it is.
1 Like
You can google this yourself:
This article covers the US, Canada, Australia and Europe. No doubt there are others.
1 Like
Since no one ever said science is limited to the US why did you make such a silly claim? Feel free to provide positive scientific evidence for ID of biological life from any country you like.
1 Like
No, it does not cover Europe, it does not cover Asia, South America, Africa,
Umm, I suggest you read again
Can you name any scientific peer reviewed papers published in any country where the authors present positive evidence for ID? From what I can tell, the ID community is avoiding the scientific community at all costs.
2 Likes
It sounds like you don’t understand (1) the purpose of Judge Jones’ ruling in the Kitzmiller vs. Dover case, and (2) that Judge Jones simply recognized (as it was his job to do) what the trial testimony and published science indicated. Despite some propaganda to the contrary, Judge Jones wasn’t issuing some sort of scientific declaration and definitions which all of the world’s scientists (and everybody else should heed). He ruled on the laws of the United States as they applied to the facts of the case. Thus, someone who refers to the Judge Jones statement is not committing a Argument from Authority fallacy. They can be referring to the legal aspects of Judge Jones’ decision or they can be referring to the voluminous scientific evidence and testimony which he cited in his opinion and in the associated trial transcripts.
And to state the obvious, many of the countries you listed have no “Academy of Science” which makes any such “position declarations”, especially not on a philosophical movement which is hardly noticeable outside of a few countries (like the USA.)
1 Like