Founder, Discoverer, Scientist, Researcher and Author of the new Intelligent Design <id> and the dis

And so how do you explain those millions of "unintelligent designs" so necessary in order for evolution to do what it does? In order for just one new or enhanced ability or function to survive to the next generation (of ANYTHING), millions of poorly or even slightly less well adapted individuals will suffer an early demise simply because something naturens has changed, and it doesn't necessarily have anything to do with intellens, either. New viruses and other pathogens evolve continuously in the same environment and can cross over from other species to become a plague. Individuals with natural immunity will be left while entire populations with no immunity are wiped out, and this process has nothing to do with intelligence. Moving out of the plague area won't save the no immunity ones either; it will only spread the plague over a wider area. Many plagues borne by insects will not succumb to any means to control them other than measures to eradicate or reduce the insect population.

How exactly would you define "unintelligence"?

How long has malaria been a scourge on humanity? Only the sickle cell genotype offers any natural resistance to malaria, and sickle cell is something that usually kills off young adults before they can have more than about one offspring. These processes are evolution happening right before your eyes, if you are not blinded against learning about science from somewhere other than a religious text. Changing Africa from a nomadic to an agrarian culture was largely responsible for uncontrolled breeding of malaria causing mosquitos, mostly from standing pools of water in irrigation ditches. And the only ones left well enough to work in the fields and not stricken with malaria were those with sickle cell anemia.

You see how the particular way you define "intelligence" in connection with evolution is something that vanishes into insignificance because of other factors that are beyond the control of even the most intelligent individuals. Do you somehow still imagine that all of this happens by the design of a deity? Would you rather make up superstitions to explain how things like this come about, or is it more useful to use science to get a better idea about how to deal with all the nasty curve balls nature throws our way?

Victor Stenger, a particle physicist, came up with this one:

moon.jpeg

I tend to agree.
 
Dr_Toad said:
So you make up words, or redefine them to suit your silly made-up "intelligence"?

Don't you realize that an education coupled with critical reasoning ability would serve you better than continually trolling here with your silly made-up bullshit?
Click to expand...
I have science books and I am just sharing you here some important and summarize explanations...

You have no science and no science books, that is why it is good for you to shut up...
 
danshawen said:
And so how do you explain those millions of "unintelligent designs" so necessary in order for evolution to do what it does? In order for just one new or enhanced ability or function to survive to the next generation (of ANYTHING), millions of poorly or even slightly less well adapted individuals will suffer an early demise simply because something naturens has changed, and it doesn't necessarily have anything to do with intellens, either. New viruses and other pathogens evolve continuously in the same environment and can cross over from other species to become a plague. Individuals with natural immunity will be left while entire populations with no immunity are wiped out, and this process has nothing to do with intelligence. Moving out of the plague area won't save the no immunity ones either; it will only spread the plague over a wider area. Many plagues borne by insects will not succumb to any means to control them other than measures to eradicate or reduce the insect population.

How exactly would you define "unintelligence"?

How long has malaria been a scourge on humanity? Only the sickle cell genotype offers any natural resistance to malaria, and sickle cell is something that usually kills off young adults before they can have more than about one offspring. These processes are evolution happening right before your eyes, if you are not blinded against learning about science from somewhere other than a religious text. Changing Africa from a nomadic to an agrarian culture was largely responsible for uncontrolled breeding of malaria causing mosquitos, mostly from standing pools of water in irrigation ditches. And the only ones left well enough to work in the fields and not stricken with malaria were those with sickle cell anemia.

You see how the particular way you define "intelligence" in connection with evolution is something that vanishes into insignificance because of other factors that are beyond the control of even the most intelligent individuals. Do you somehow still imagine that all of this happens by the design of a deity? Would you rather make up superstitions to explain how things like this come about, or is it more useful to use science to get a better idea about how to deal with all the nasty curve balls nature throws our way?

Victor Stenger, a particle physicist, came up with this one:

View attachment 720

I tend to agree.
Click to expand...
You are talking VESTIGIAL ORGANS or BAD DESIGNS or the likes...

Well, I studied civil engineering before I discovered the real intelligence and I knew for sure how structures behave. But if we would like to apply that to Biology and all living organisms, we could find that all living organisms have no bad design or no bad engineering for if they had, they had already died after they were born instantly..

Thus, non-intelligence or vestigials is an explanation from your ignorance of reality, of engineering and of intelligence.

And the worst case from ToE's supporters is that they don't have a criteria between GOOD to BAD design...

Do they have and are you willing to use that CRITERIA in scientific debate here and crush my criteria of design from intelligence?

AND,

Intelligence flies you to the moon, Religions fly you to Hell..Christianity flies you to Heaven...
 
arfa brane said:
Intelligent Design:

Mr Postrado contends that learning and solving problems is not intelligence, or presumably what he means is that intelligence isn't involved.

Is designing something like solving a problem? If not, then intelligent design is a contradiction (oh dear).
If so, then intelligent design is like solving a problem. Which leaves the argument where exactly, what problem is solved?

I doubt Mr Postrado can offer any insight with this, because it will involve him thinking about it. Unless of course, thinking doesn't involve any intelligence, which means . . .

The HENDERSONS will all be there, late of Sancho Pablez' fair
What a scene!

Over men and horses, hoops and garters, lastly through a hogshead
of REAL FIRE!
In this way Mr K will challenge the world!!

da da da de da.

(For some reason I can't get this tune out of my head when I look at this thread, it must be a head thread).
Click to expand...
Yes, when you solve problem, you are not using intelligence.

For example, if your boss told you to bring one cup of coffee (problem) and you brought one cup of coffee (solution), you are not showing intelligence but only naturen or natural phenomenon.

Thus, I am right.
 
James R said:
MrID:


Not so I understand your definition. And you haven't done any better here.


I don't understand it.

You start with "Intelligence is a principle...". What kind of principle? Do you mean a concept, a method, a means? What?

What does "reinforcing" mean in your definition?

For example, I need to eat food to survive and exist. Does that mean food is the real intelligence? Or that food has intelligence because it reinforces my existence? Or what?

Your definition says "to survive or to exist". Does that mean that intelligence can apply to things that do not survive but exist? Can you give an example of such a thing? Would a rock be a good example of intelligence?

You say intelligence "always act on asymmetrical phenonemon".

Please explain the difference between symmetrical and asymmetrical phenomena and give me a few examples of each type of phenomenon.

Is food a symmetrical phenomenon? Is a human being a symmetrical phenomenon? What decides whether something is symmetrical or asymmetrical, according to your usage of that term?


Ok. So, let's say X = me and X' = food. Would that be correct?

Then what?


If I would like me (X) to survive, I will surely make me with additional supports to food (X') to cope with dangers (like starvation). Is that right?

So, you're saying that food is intelligent because it helps me survive. Is that right?


Me to survive against dangers (as intelen) = me + food

Correct?


intellen = starvation: me + food (one problem = starvation. two solutions, me + food)

Correct?


Ok. I need food to live and survive here on Earth. I agree.


I need a pattern of food (X') to survive as an X = human being. Ok.


All human beings (X) need food. Ok.

What do you mean by "intelligently designed"? You seem to have introduced the notion of design out of nowhere. Your definition of intelligence says nothing about design.

Are you saying food is intelligently designed? Or humans are? Or both?

Who is the designer?


Food, etc. Yes.


If there are three people (X = humans) then humans (X) are intellen and perfect intellen.

Or are you talking about the food here?

If there are three foods (X = food) then we could find to food (X) a pattern, then food is intellen and it is perfect intellen. But, since humans have 6 foods, then humans are important intellen. Or are the six foods important intellen?

I don't think I'm understanding this.

What makes something important intellen? For that matter, what makes something intellen? What does "intellen" mean?


I can't see how knowing that humans need food requires replacing the theory of evolution with a new explanation of biology. I hope you can clarify.


ToE does use the concept that animals need food.

Doesn't this fit your definition of intelligence?


Hang on. Food is intellen, and is needed for humans to exist. Fine. I get that.

But why does this mean that the ToE has no basis or foundation?

I look forward to your reply.
Click to expand...
Do you deliberately believe that food is more important to your life than your mouth?

I don't get your thought process.

Yes, intelligence is very hard to understand and I forgave your ignorance for this topic.



ToE does use the concept that animals need food.
Doesn't this fit your definition of intelligence?
ME: No, since that is only a natural phenomenon since animals need food to live. That is normal.

Please, be specific in your post. What are you trying to know from me? One at a time...
 
MrIntelligentDesign said:
Yes, when you solve problem, you are not using intelligence.

For example, if your boss told you to bring one cup of coffee (problem) and you brought one cup of coffee (solution), you are not showing intelligence but only naturen or natural phenomenon.

Thus, I am right.
Click to expand...
Thus you are coo-coo.
 
MrID:

It's a pity you were unable to answer my questions about your definition of intelligence. I guess that means you don't really have much of a theory.

MrIntelligentDesign said:
Do you deliberately believe that food is more important to your life than your mouth?
Click to expand...
I didn't mention my mouth. What are you talking about?

I don't get your thought process.[

Yes, intelligence is very hard to understand and I forgave your ignorance for this topic.
Click to expand...
So, teach me. Answer my questions!

ToE does use the concept that animals need food.
Doesn't this fit your definition of intelligence?
ME: No, since that is only a natural phenomenon since animals need food to live. That is normal.
Click to expand...
But by your definition of intelligence, food is the X' that the humans (X) need. Which makes food intellen, doesn't it?

I'm just applying your theory, as I understand it.

Please, be specific in your post. What are you trying to know from me? One at a time...
Click to expand...
I was specific. You can correct me if I went wrong anywhere.
 
There is no basis whatsoever for elevating Christianity above other religions other than to start and perpetuate Holy wars (like the crusades). If there is a diametric opposite to intelligence, Mr<id>, that would be it. Your lord and savior was Jewish, and moreover, no one self-identified as Christian for 100 years after his death. Did everyone in between go to hell? I certainly hope so. Why don't you?

I converted to Judaism from Christianity because of intolerant people like you who call themselves Christian, but haven't any idea of exactly what that is supposed to mean.

My religion does not elevate even the Torah above the status of a person. Burn all of them you wish. In fact, other religions did just that to us to the point that it had to be recreated (along with Hebrew and Aramaic) from oral tradition, from which your religious texts were translated first to Greek and then to Latin, another culture that had great difficulty counting above 5000 because they used Roman numerals to do so. Just try to write 4 billion in Roman numerals. There's yer trouble; not because of a mismatched timescale between ourselves and G-d. If you think your religion is the pure, unadulterated and inspired word of a Supreme being, why was it destroyed by his creation? Because you and people like you are idiots who know nothing but your own petty religious obsessions, and try to force them on other people and cultures who want no part of it. I've already told you exactly where you can take that.
 
Last edited:
danshawen said:
There is no basis whatsoever for elevating Christianity above other religions other than to start and perpetuate Holy wars (like the crusades). If there is a diametric opposite to intelligence, Mr<id>, that would be it. Your lord and savior was Jewish, and moreover, no one self-identified as Christian for 100 years after his death. Did everyone in between go to hell? I certainly hope so. Why don't you?

I converted to Judaism from Christianity because of intolerant people like you who call themselves Christian, but haven't any idea of exactly what that is supposed to mean.

My religion does not elevate even the Torah above the status of a person. Burn all of them you wish. In fact, other religions did just that to us to the point that it had to be recreated (along with Hebrew and Aramaic) from oral tradition, from which your religious texts were translated first to Greek and then to Latin, another culture that had great difficulty counting above 5000 because they used Roman numerals to do so. Just try to write 4 billion in Roman numerals. There's yer trouble; not because of a mismatched timescale between ourselves and G-d. If you think your religion is the pure, unadulterated and inspired word of a Supreme being, why was it destroyed by his creation? Because you and people like you are idiots who know nothing but your own petty religious obsessions, and try to force them on other people and cultures who want no part of it. I've already told you exactly where you can take that.
Click to expand...
If you know the real and universal intelligence, you will surely rethink your religion and belief so well.
 
spidergoat said:
If it's so real and universal, it shouldn't be that hard to show it exists.
Click to expand...
It is difficult to show that the property we call intelligence exists, precisely as a consequence of the simple fact that it co-exists with its diametric opposite, ignorance, in equal measure, exactly the way that there is no such thing as universal good or evil. What is good for us is mostly bad for the rest of the ecosystem of which we are only a small part. Science isn't universally good or enlightened, nor is religion universally bad or ignorant, although sometimes it may appear so.

Antibiotics and vaccinations are good news for us, bad news for both pathogenic and some beneficial microbes. Pesticides make more food for us while killing insects, and some of those, like bees, are far more important to the ecosystem than we are. They have always struggled to survive, but we are not making it easy for them. Insects as pollenators are as important as the flowering plants in this parable of the garden of Eden. Read the lease agreement again, and I'm not talking about the one that throws us out. Of course, this is nonetheless one possible outcome.

Finally, Mr<id> is the best individual example here in a short time that an obsession with religion tilts the aggregate intelligence of the human race in the general direction of ignorance. I doubt we can do very much to change that. He would have to start thinking outside of the religious dogma he has evidently been spoon fed for a long time. Not a very likely outcome, I think.
 
Last edited:
I contacted the Nobel committee and they said your ideas are not intellen the stupi.
 
Is designing something like solving a problem? If not, then intelligent design is a contradiction (oh dear).
Click to expand...
MrID said:
Yes, when you solve problem, you are not using intelligence.
Click to expand...
He thinks he answered the question!
He thinks design isn't a use of intelligence, and hasn't realised that gives the phrase "intelligent design" no meaning in his vacant logic.
MrID said:
For example, if your boss told you to bring one cup of coffee (problem) and you brought one cup of coffee (solution), you are not showing intelligence but only naturen or natural phenomenon.

Thus, I am right.
Click to expand...
Thus, if I tell my boss to get his own goddam cup of coffee, I am showing intelligence, and he will give me a raise!
 
James R said:
But by your definition of intelligence, food is the X' that the humans (X) need. Which makes food intellen, doesn't it?
Click to expand...
I think the key is that intellen is when something goes beyond the minimum needed for survival, as in the example of a secretary bringing extra paper clips preemptively.

So if someone's hungry for a salad and they eat a salad, that's not intelligence. But if I'm hungry for a salad and I eat a salad, then follow it up with 3 beers and half a pizza, that's intelligence.

... this theory is growing on me.
 
spidergoat said:
No it's not. Intelligence can solve problems quickly.
Click to expand...
Can intelligence find mistakes (sven more subtle ones) quickly? No, it takes time and considerable effort, in addition to intelligence, to sort out mistakes, AND even the process of sorting mistakes is subject to EVEN MORE MISTAKES.

More often than not, intelligence, as Mr<id> has tried to point out, is by its nature ITERATIVE, as far as we are concerned, and by that I mean: "doesn't always get things completely right on the first go round, or even the second." AND NATURE WORKS IN EXACTLY THE SAME WAY.
 
Intelligence is faster than nature at recognizing errors. That's why intelligently designed things often appear (when arranged in a continuum) to make leaps of logic that mere evolution cannot make.
 
arfa brane said:
He thinks he answered the question!
He thinks design isn't a use of intelligence, and hasn't realised that gives the phrase "intelligent design" no meaning in his vacant logic.
Thus, if I tell my boss to get his own goddam cup of coffee, I am showing intelligence, and he will give me a raise!
Click to expand...
LOL!!!

No! That is failure and you will get the phrase, "YOU'RE FIRED!"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top