Intelligent Reasoning

Promoting, advancing and defending Intelligent Design via data, logic and Intelligent Reasoning and exposing the alleged theory of evolution as the nonsense it is. I also educate evotards about ID and the alleged theory of evolution one tard at a time and sometimes in groups

Thursday, March 28, 2024

A Scientific Theory of Evolution?


For many years people have been discussing whether evolution is a fact or a theory. Some people say that it is both. But is that true?

Evolution, as in a change of allele frequency over time, is definitely a fact. Heck, even young Earth Creationists accept speciation! Speciation is evolution.

However, there isn't any scientific theory of evolution that explains how the diversity of life arose. The main reason for that is because there are any naturalistic mechanisms capable of producing the diversity of life. A scientific theory of evolution is supposed to explain, scientifically, how the diversity of life arose. Yet, no one knows!

Any mechanisms pertaining to genetics cannot get the job done. Changes to genomes can only produce changes to proteins or how genes are regulated, at best. No one has ever demonstrated those changes can produce the transformations required to produce the diversity of life.

At best, evolution is a theory in a very general sense in that it has a narrative and no evidentiary support. The people pushing the claim of a scientific theory of evolution are scientifically illiterate and liars.

Thursday, March 14, 2024

Shared mistakes as evidence of common ancestry?


From Peaceful Science:

"Shared mistakes as evidence of common ancestry"

Really? DNA doesn't determine biological form. Meaning that DNA doesn't determine the type of organism that will develop. So, using DNA to judge relationships between organisms that are not from the same Genus, is a fool's errand.

Who would think that a mistake would remain unchanged through generations of genetic changes? Where is that prediction? 

The alleged fusion of human chromosome 2 has been alleged to be an end-to-end chromosomal fusion. That would mean thousands of base pairs of 2 telomere sequences should be found somewhere in the newly formed HC2. Do we see that? No! We see a very degenerate telomere looking sequence there. Degenerate in the form of mere hundreds of base pairs. And this happened in fewer generations than we are talking about with these alleged shared mistakes.

What claims of universal common ancestry needs, but doesn't have, are mechanisms that can account for the anatomical and physiological DIFFERENCES observed between two allegedly related species such as chimps and humans.

Shared mistakes as evidence for common ancestry is nothing more than wishful thinking and confirmation bias.

Tuesday, March 12, 2024

Too Funny! What a Coward!


A couple days ago I challenged someone to a debate on science, biology and evolution. The response was to run to blogger and cry about harassment!

Evolutionists are the biggest cowards ever.

Thursday, May 12, 2022

More Cluelessness at The Skeptical Zone- Richard Saunders is just dumb


Seriously, what the fuck, Richard?

Similarly, when people with backgrounds in computer science look at genetic codes, they see a code in the same sense that computer languages are codes. Whereas molecular biologists see “the genetic code” as a metaphor for chemical affinity between nucleotide sequences and amino acid chains.

Only the willfully ignorant say it is a metaphor, though. There isn't any chemical affinity between nucleotide sequences and amino acid chains. mRNA codons REPRESENT amino acids. That is the epitome of a code. Even Larry Moran says the genetic code is a real code in the same sense as Morse.

Even Richard Dawkins gave us:

The machine code of the genes is uncannily computer-like. Apart from differences in jargon, the pages of a molecular biology journal might be interchanged with those of a computer engineering journal.

Saunders doesn't understand biology.

Next, he spews:

For me, organisms don’t appear to be designed because they are heterogeneous: no two individuals of any species are exactly alike. Whereas manufactured things are overwhelmingly homogeneous — and they become more homogeneous as manufacturing processes become more controlled over time.

That has to be the stupidest form of denialism. Manufactured things evolve, as in they change over time. The cars of today do not resemble the original cars, for example. The computers of today do not resemble the earliest computers. So, what the fuck is this clueless twit rambling about?


Saturday, May 07, 2022

Robin is another Ignorant Coward Humping a Strawman


The people who rail against ID are some of the most willfully ignorant losers, ever.

I haven’t seen much press on this lately, but back in the late 1980s, Creationists – a slice of Christians who hold that the creation of the universe, Earth, and all living things on Earth were created by God exactly as described in the Christian Bible and that the Earth is roughly 10,000 years old…tops – tried an end around to the 1987 Supreme Court decision (Edwards v. Aguillard) barring the teaching of Creation Science in public schools. The attempted end-around was called Intelligent Design (ID).

Total bullshit. ID traces back to the ancient Greeks and their telic thinking.

ID, boiled down, is essentially a dressed up version of William Paley’s The Watch and The Watchmaker argument for the existence of God, or rather, a slightly gussied up Teleological Argument for the Existence of God. 

ID doesn't require God.

All Teleological Arguments rely on the same basic argument: certain features and functions of the world exhibit complexity that appears far too harmonious and intricate to have occurred by accident and thus must have been intelligently designed.

More bullshit. All teleological arguments rely on our KNOWLEDGE of cause-and-effect relationships in accordance with Newton's four rules of scientific reasoning. 

First and foremost, technically there is no actual argument in the teleological approach to the existence of God as it’s simply a tautology and thus question begging.

ID doesn't require God. And the arguments are the same as used for archaeology and forensics. Are they are tautology too? Or are you just an ignorant ass? 

If your philosophy’s premise assumes that all things have purpose and goals, using that philosophy to argue for a goal-oriented and purpose-creating designer is simply restating your premise’s assumptions.

Hump that strawman! ID doesn't say that all things have purposes and goals. What is wrong with you?

 Intelligent Design tries to dress the argument up a bit by focusing on complexity vs purpose and goals, but the issue remains the same.

 Wrong again. ID doesn't focus on mere complexity. Grow up.

In ID, the argument is changed slightly to certain biological and informational features of living things are too complex to be the result of natural selection (or natural processes) and therefore must be the result of intentional and rational (intelligent) design requiring an intelligent designer. 

Fuck you. You are a pathetic piece of shit. The explanatory filter proves the design inference is more than that.

 A false dichotomy is a logical fallacy wherein someone argues that some condition has only two alternatives when in fact there are more. 

Dumbass! Designed or not sweeps the field. There isn't anything else, dipshit.

 The bottom line is that it’s a rather large (and unrealistic) stretch to assume the only way to get biological complexity is either evolution or God.

The bottom line is you are a willfully ignorant, strawman humper! Designed or not is all there is.

Lastly, as noted above, we don’t infer design from complexity so much as we infer design from indications of manufacturing

ID doesn't infer design from mere complexity. And coded information processing systems, such as the one involved in genetic code, is an indication of manufacturing. 

I’ve never found the ID arguments for the design of biological organisms all that compelling for a number of reasons.

 You are ignorant of ID. And you don't have a scientific explanation for our existence.

All man-made objects – every single one – are either designed specifically to be replaced or have components that are designed specifically to be replaced. Why? Because tool users and manufacturers learn really quick that tools and/or certain parts of tools wear out. So as designers, we anticipate the need for maintenance.

Reproduction. Genetic engineering. Transplants. Yup, we have it covered.

Look, you ignorant ass. Intelligent Design is NOT anti-evolution. You are an equivocating shit muncher.

Intelligent Design can be falsified by demonstrating that nature can produce life and coded information processing systems. DNA based life requires an existing suite of specific, specialized proteins and a functional coded information processing system. DNA has to code for the very proteins that keep it as a viable information carrier!

The only way you can argue against ID is to be ignorant of ID and science. Enter Robin and the losers of the skeptical zone







Alan Fox is Upset!


Alan Fox is upset with me because of my post or posts on Steve Story after Steve had died in a car accident on September 11, 2021. Everything I said in both posts were facts. But facts and the truth can be very upsetting, sometimes. Deal with it.

Sunday, May 01, 2022

Kevin Middlebrook has an Uncontrollable Mental Pathology


Kevin Middlebrook, aka Acartia, Acartia blowTARD, William Spearshake, William dickshaker, etc., has finally admitted that it has a mental pathology that is well beyond its control. I have known that for years Kevin has been struggling with dementia and the inability to grasp reality. But hopefully Kevin is getting the help it needs. Although, truthfully, Kevin is too far gone for any help to have any effect.

Kevin Middlebrook has always been a pathological liar and coward. He actually thinks that ice and water are the same. That ice is made up OF water not that ice is made FROM water. He also said there was a code that turned water into ice! But what do you expect from someone who sniffs little boys' underwear?

Wednesday, January 19, 2022

Intelligent Design: The ONLY Scientific Explanation for our Existence!


Alan Fox and the evoTARD minions can kiss my ass. They are too chickenshit to ante up and debate anyone on which side has the science and which side has the bullshit. That is because all they have is bullshit. They are the coward's cowards.

Alan Fox runs his mouth as if he is some sort of authority. Yet his posts prove that he is just another cowardly evoTARD. Helpless to do anything but bluff, equivocate and bloviate. That is why Alan had to ban me from TSZ- I kept exposing him as the ignorant ass that he is.

Living organisms are ruled by coded information processing systems. There isn't any evidence that nature can produce coded information processing systems. And there isn't even a way to test the claim that nature can. Christopher Hitchens said that we can dismiss such claims. As a matter of fact, Hitchens applies to just about all of the claims made by evolution by means of blind and mindless processes, such as natural selection and drift. There isn't any evidence to support them and there isn't even a way to test them. Science mandates the claims being made not only be testable but they must be tested! ID is the only venue that offers testability.