Page 37 of 38 < 1 2 ... 35 36 37 38 >
Topic Options
#476051 - 10/18/01 08:38 AM Re: Bill Mahrer, Marr, Mahr, ... whatever
fish Offline
Member

Registered: 03/09/01
Posts: 119
I'm trying to be good and stay out of this, but.

no one is going to call it sloppy engineering. Neither is it the "randomness" you accuse biologists of believing it to be. It's random mutation filtered through natural selection.

Top
#476052 - 10/18/01 10:57 AM Re: Bill Mahrer, Marr, Mahr, ... whatever
Charles Reece Offline
Member

Registered: 08/18/99
Posts: 10013
Loc: us of fuckin' a
Kal,

The design argument is essentially based on the determination that the probability of life in a world is more likely with a god than without. However, probability is based on the constraints (as defined by us through laws) of the universe. Therefore, the question behind the design argument is analogous to: what's the probability of a universe with probability? The question is nonsensical (and more obviously so in its more abstracted form), since the possibility of the question depends on the very thing you're questioning.

In case I've lost anyone, an example:

We can somewhat determine the probability of a lightbulb coming on with the flick of a switch, because of our knowledge of the physical laws involved as well as the actions necessary for the occurrence. What we can't do is analyze the probability of a light coming on in that context relative to its probability when none of the physical laws and actions necessary in our world obtain.

[This message has been edited by Charles Reece (edited 10-18-2001).]
_________________________
The Gospel, wherein much Truth is written.

Top
#476053 - 10/18/01 01:50 PM Re: Bill Mahrer, Marr, Mahr, ... whatever
columnist Offline
Member

Registered: 04/22/01
Posts: 360
Loc: Evanston, IL, USA
Back, for a moment, to the original topic of this thread [img]/resources/ubb/smile.gif[/img]

Now that the next wave of terrorists are no longer bravely flying planes into buildings, but cravenly sending toxic materials through the mail and not even daring to claim responsibility (or even present demands)...

Do they count as "cowardly" yet???

- Larry H

Top
#476054 - 10/18/01 03:45 PM Re: Bill Mahrer, Marr, Mahr, ... whatever
gene phillips Offline
Member

Registered: 09/30/99
Posts: 5910
Loc: Houston, TX
I would say so. Though it might be said that it takes some degree of guts to commit oneself to a kamikaze plunge, sending germs through the mail is gutless in the extreme.

Top
#476055 - 10/18/01 03:49 PM Re: Bill Mahrer, Marr, Mahr, ... whatever
gene phillips Offline
Member

Registered: 09/30/99
Posts: 5910
Loc: Houston, TX
Also:
There's a third option between the "intelligent design" theory of evolution (which doesn't account for the clumsy panda's thumb) and the "random harvest" theory of evolution (which doesn't account for how precisely some animals work out their mutations to fit Just the Right Situation).

It's called-- pardon me while I get ready to duck the brickbats--

RUPERTSHELDRAKE'SMORPHOGENETICTHEORYOFFEEDBACK!!!

Ahhhhh!!!!!!

Top
#476056 - 10/19/01 02:44 AM Re: Bill Mahrer, Marr, Mahr, ... whatever
Kal Offline
Member

Registered: 09/25/01
Posts: 113
Quote:
Originally posted by Charles Reece:
...Therefore, the question behind the design argument is analogous to: what's the probability of a universe with probability? The question is nonsensical (and more obviously so in its more abstracted form), since the possibility of the question depends on the very thing you're questioning.

In case I've lost anyone, an example:

We can somewhat determine the probability of a lightbulb coming on with the flick of a switch, because of our knowledge of the physical laws involved as well as the actions necessary for the occurrence. What we can't do is analyze the probability of a light coming on in that context relative to its probability when none of the physical laws and actions necessary in our world obtain.


Sorry Charles, you lost me somewhere around the word "Therefore".

Top
#476057 - 10/19/01 04:09 AM Re: Bill Mahrer, Marr, Mahr, ... whatever
OCM Offline
Member

Registered: 08/25/01
Posts: 959
Loc: Portland, OR
Quote:
Originally posted by columnist:
Back, for a moment, to the original topic of this thread [img]/resources/ubb/smile.gif[/img]

Now that the next wave of terrorists are no longer bravely flying planes into buildings, but cravenly sending toxic materials through the mail and not even daring to claim responsibility (or even present demands)...

Do they count as "cowardly" yet???

- Larry H



I agree with the statement that "whomever" did this is cowardly...

But never assume anything. As I've heard on the news many protesters have been known to do this Anthrax thing to doctors of abortion clinics in the past, and to protest other things. So, perhaps it could just be protesters against our attacks in Afghan.

(Not to invalidate that the scum behind the fake and the real powder senders aren't scum. I just hate assumptions. Evil doesn't always wear an obvious form! [img]/resources/ubb/frown.gif[/img] )

BTW: Does anyone know what's the longest running topic on this board is?
10 pages and counting......


[This message has been edited by OCM (edited 10-19-2001).]

Top
#476058 - 10/19/01 05:16 AM Re: Bill Mahrer, Marr, Mahr, ... whatever
Samuel Catalino Offline
Member

Registered: 04/04/99
Posts: 4447
Never fear, this thread will be shut down soon...
_________________________
"If we lose a hundred troops a week, then Dean will be our next Prez." Jack V, avid Dean supporter with no concern for the troops.

Top
#476059 - 10/19/01 10:08 AM Re: Bill Mahrer, Marr, Mahr, ... whatever
columnist Offline
Member

Registered: 04/22/01
Posts: 360
Loc: Evanston, IL, USA
Quote:
Originally posted by OCM:

BTW: Does anyone know what's the longest running topic on this board is?
10 pages and counting......


There seems to be a physical limitation on this board which causes threads to putz out after approximately twelve pages. We're getting close.

- Larry H

Top
#476060 - 10/19/01 10:15 AM Re: Bill Mahrer, Marr, Mahr, ... whatever
columnist Offline
Member

Registered: 04/22/01
Posts: 360
Loc: Evanston, IL, USA
Quote:
Originally posted by OCM:

I agree with the statement that "whomever" did this is cowardly...

But never assume anything. As I've heard on the news many protesters have been known to do this Anthrax thing to doctors of abortion clinics in the past, and to protest other things. So, perhaps it could just be protesters against our attacks in Afghan.

(Not to invalidate that the scum behind the fake and the real powder senders aren't scum. I just hate assumptions. Evil doesn't always wear an obvious form! [img]/resources/ubb/frown.gif[/img] )


I didn't mean that the current bio-terrorists are the same ones who did the WTC attacks.

But I DO think that terrorism by its nature is a cowardly way to attack. It relies on the fact that they do damage without opening themselves up to retaliation (since no one can prove who "they" are). While it could be argued that the actual perpetrators of the plane attacks exhibited some bravery, the ones who COMMISSIONED and/or SUBSIDISED such attacks stayed safely in the shadows.

Also, despite the fact that suicide attacking requires a certain level of "cajones", it also precludes retalliation. Suicide in general is often referred to as a coward's way out. So even in those cases, it's not at all clear that "coward" isn't the appropriate term.

- Larry H

Top
Page 37 of 38 < 1 2 ... 35 36 37 38 >