Skip to comments.Powerhouse of Scientists Refute Evolution, Part Two
Posted on 06/17/2014 8:31:55 AM PDT by fishtank
Powerhouse of Scientists Refute Evolution, Part Two
by Brian Thomas, M.S. *
In 2011, 29 leading design scientists held a Biological Information symposium in which they compared the standard Darwinian explanation of origins to amazing new discoveries about biological languages. The second major theme among the groups presentations dealt with Difficulties in Creating Biological Information. In essence, they tried to re-engineer aspects of creating information. What did they uncover?
Geneticist John Sanford, lead organizer of the Biological Information symposium, helpfully summarized the technical proceedings in a document titled, Biological Information: New Perspectives. A Synopsis and Limited Commentary.1 The document summarized evaluations of evolutionists digital attempts to envision natural selection generating information, for example with the software program Tierra.
In one paper, Dr. Ewert, an electrical and computer engineer, along with mathematician and philosopher William Dembski and computer engineer Robert Marks II, showed that Tierra failed to evolve information in computer simulations, even though its programmer placed unrealistic, evolution-friendly parameters into the software.
(Excerpt) Read more at icr.org ...
ICR article image.
More crap from the Institute for Creative Research. Good people who are totally clueless.
> More crap from the Institute for Creative Research. Good
> people who are totally clueless.
Do lay evolutionists have any arguments other than ad hominem?
maybe not relevant here, but I read an article recently in a Physics journal (well...read the portion of it I could understand) which talked about how even what we used to think of as physics (such as a cup of coffee becoming room temp) is really “particles” exchanging information with each other and causing “equilibrium”. The point being, it is not really “movement” at all, but the flow of information between, ahem, the minds of the molecules.
Apparently a famous physicist proposed this back in the day as a grad student, and no one liked it, but now it is starting to get a hearing.
I suppose the point here being, evolution simply does not give an account for how information moves through the universe. But a Mind sort of directing the universe actually starts to explain it......
(I know that is not a very good scientific post. I beg the forgiveness and mercy of all scientists here. To me this is a philosophical and theological issue, and I know that the hard science is very rapidly out of my league).
“I know that is not a very good scientific post.”
And your qualifications for making such a comment are...?
29 Design Scientists conclude that God did it.
What is a ‘design scientist’?
You are wrong on AT LEAST two counts.
(1) The ICR article is a summary of work from ANOTHER organization.
(2) Not all of the ‘BINR’ authors agree with all of ICR’s positions.
** By the way, do you have anything of substance to add?
When you can pass philosophy 101, give me a holler and we can go from there.....
“When you can pass philosophy 101, give me a holler and we can go from there.....”
I passed philosophy 101.
This argument is as boring as ever. Let’s hear your views on the latest political contretemps.
Stop this crap. Evolution, science and God all exist together. This is not an either-or mutually exclusive topic. We can, and have both.
Not according to the ICR.
“This argument ...”
"Survival of the fittest," interpreted as "survival of the most ruthless," is a falsehood, the only way the Devil can get his foot in the door.
I believe that. THEY don’t.
Thanks for the post, fishtank. Both creation and evolution are faith-based belief systems.
Heb 11:1 Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.
Heb 11:2 For by it the elders obtained a good report.
Heb 11:3 Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear.
Rom 12:2 And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God.
Rev 14:6 And I saw another angel fly in the midst of heaven, having the everlasting gospel to preach unto them that dwell on the earth, and to every nation, and kindred, and tongue, and people,
Rev 14:7 Saying with a loud voice, Fear God, and give glory to him; for the hour of his judgment is come: and worship him that made heaven, and earth, and the sea, and the fountains of waters.
God created the heaven and the earth. That’s what He said happened. We can either have faith that He told the truth, or we can call Him a liar.
Can’t wait to see when God destroys this creation and we get to watch the new one being created. All knowledge will pass away...So why argue about it?
Yes, if it is such “crap”, refute it fishtank, instead of just making yourself look like a sourpuss who can’t handle someone having a different opinion than you.
Oops, my previous post should have been directed to ZULU, sorry about that.
The geological and paleontological makes it apparent that species evolve.
The Bible is a religious text designed to inform people about God, how to live a decent life, to predict the arrival of a Saviour, his life,suffering and death for our sins and the promise of redemption
It contains some biology but is not a biology text.
It contains history but is not a history text. It is full of symbolism amd allegory as in Christ’s parables.
You CAN believe it is the word of God AND in evolution.
You can believe in the Bible as the word of God and on evolution.
I think this thread is a good example of people commenting without reading the article.
A time-honored FR tradition, I suppose.....
haha .... yeah that was confusing.
By the way, I know at least one of the authors. Before he retired, we were in a book discussion group that focused on Christian worldviews issues.
“The Bible is a religious text designed to inform people about God, how to live a decent life, to predict the arrival of a Saviour,”
“his life,suffering and death for our sins and the promise of redemption”
What is life? What is Death? What is sin? Who brought sin into the world?
“It contains some biology but is not a biology text.”
Is Biblical biology true?
“It contains history but is not a history text.”
Is Biblical history true?
“It is full of symbolism amd allegory as in Christs parables.”
How do you really know the Bible talks about life, death and sin? How do you know? You are forced to make epistemological assumptions that are only answered by information theory. An information creator (intelligence) sends a message to an information receiver (intelligence).
“You CAN believe it is the word of God AND in evolution. I do.”
Respectfully, you can only believe that by using a set of illogical presuppositions. (For example, was Jesus using allegory and parables when he mentioned Adam and Noah in his discourses? I don’t think that’s consistent in the narrative.)
“You can believe in the Bible as the word of God and on evolution. I do.”
May God bless you, I have answered because you certainly seem to be a brother (or sister) in Christ, and I thought you should know I bear you no ill will.
“The geological and paleontological makes it apparent that species evolve.”
Then why is always that you seem to attack anti-evolutionists with vitriol instead of just presenting this “apparent” evidence?
Anyway, what you say isn’t even a question that anti-evolutionists take issue with. Nobody disagrees that species change over time, or evolve. To say that is in dispute is just a straw man. The real dispute is with the bigger picture that evolutionists infer: that natural selection and other unguided processes can account for the full diversity of life, starting from one simple ancestor.