In a message dated 9/14/2000 7:27:35 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
nalonso@megatribe.com writes:
<< Ralph:
If you mean actually, physically, build it--no, I couldn't do that. But
it is even more beyond me, or any one else, I think, to build it
simultaneously, as you say an IC system *must* be built. If, as you
say, natural pathways to IC systems are not possible, then are we
beginning to zero in on your concept of what or who the Intelligent
Designer must be? 1.non-natural 2.more intelligent (and/or capable)
than us.
Nelson:
I think you misunderstood me and I apologize if I was vague. However, when I
say "you cannot build it step by step through functional precursors" >>
How did you reach this conclusion though? Is that not what you have to show
rather than assert?
I
<< really mean "you cannot build this system by mimicing natural processes".
>>
Again, something you have to show rather than assert.
H<< owever, you are an intelligent agent, and therefore, you may build it by
adding multiple parts together, with foresight, and future usefulness. You
are natural selection with eyes.
>>
True but that does not prove your point. It merely shows that a designer
could also do it and perhaps better.
T<< hese give some clues as to who the designer is, namely, an intelligent
agent with at least human intelligence.
>>
Not really. It shows that humans with intelligence can do certain things. Is
true intelligence required? Perhaps but that needs to be shown not asserted
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Sep 15 2000 - 01:27:18 EDT