I love the title.
Some people find me hard to pin down and I think that’s just fine. I try not to be too dogmatic and to be open to changing my mind and willing to admit that there is so much that I do not know and that it’s fine to not have full certainty. That’s life.
I am a Christian. I grew up in a Christian home and grew up believing I was a Christian but God convinced me otherwise which led to a “born again” experience. If there is one thing I am dogmatic about it is that God changed my life through Christ.
I do accept common descent. I do think it provides the best explanation for the patterns we see in the distribution of shared and different characters.
I don’t see any conflict between Scripture and common descent. I have no problem if humans evolved from some other species. I don’t believe God literally formed Adam from dirt is if he molded a clay figure the way a sculptor does and then brought that clay figure to life by blowing into its nostrils.
If I question arguments for common descent it’s not because I doubt common descent it’s because I want to understand the argument and it’s strength and weaknesses.
I take the same approach to ID. The arguments need to be compelling. As far as specific ID arguments there are too many out there but if someone wants to be more specific I will do my best to say what I think. I mentioned previously an argument advanced at UD by Eric:
In medieval language this missing meaning is called function. Function cannot emerge from atoms in motion. It cannot emerge from shaking the Lego box. This claim can be proven mathematically. In information theory, function is a kind of mutual information. Mutual information is subject to the law of information non-increase, which means mutual information and thus function cannot be created by natural processes. Thus, without an organizing force, matter is functionless and void, and there is no meaning.
To me that is just so much word salad. Perhaps it’s due to my own ignorance. Such arguments are unconvincing. Generally speaking if I would not make the argument myself I don’t find it compelling.
I do agree with a certain amount of their rhetoric. For sure.
I’ve only recently been given moderator status at TSZ so I would not make too much of that.
I remain anonymous because I have had some pretty nasty things said about me on the internet and prefer to not expose my actual identity to anyone and everyone to trash. I am more than happy to share my real identity to you if you desire.
I have no college education. I am just an avid reader on multiple topics who has been engaged in debating on the internet for many years (going back to newsgroups).
I appreciate the dialogue. Thank you.