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, December 23, 2021

For Alan Fox: Other Ways of Knowing


Alan Fox doubts there are other ways of knowing:

Are there other ways of knowing, other than experimenting, learning, being told, imitating.

Can internal reflection, meditation, revelation provide us with other or additional information and broaden our knowledge?

Einstein, Tesla and Ramanujan , to name 3, all credit revelation for their broadened knowledge. And each of them have helped advance our knowledge through their revelations!

EvoTARDs use revelation all of the time. It's just that their "revelations" are merely biased bullshit. There aren't any experiments that show chimps and humans share a common ancestor. There aren't any experiments that show blind and mindless processes can produce any bacterial flagellum.

Alan Fox is a Clueless Dolt


Yup. Alan Fox is a clueless dolt. He doesn't know jack about science and it shows.

Hypotheses and data, observing and experimenting to find better explanations with more predictive power, that is what science is always in the process of doing. 

There aren't any testable hypotheses with respect to evolution by means of blind and mindless processes. There aren't any experiments that support the claims of evolution by means of blind and mindless processes. The only predictions borne from evolution by means of blind and mindless processes are genetic diseases and deformities.

Next Alan proves he is ignorant of genetics:

Lamark was a bona fide scientist who did not have information about genetics and inheritance that we have today. Had he possessed that information (or some inkling of it) he could have been the icon we look back to rather than Charles Darwin.

All of the information we possess about genetics says it is impossible for differential accumulations of genetic mutations to produce the diversity of life. Had Darwin and Lamarck knew what we now know, they would have NEVER suggested what they did.

EvoTARDs are ignorant of genetics. They will NEVER say how a process that produces polypeptides also determines biological form. Yet that is their stupid belief.

Everything we now know about genetics and inheritance says that universal common descent is total bullshit. You just cannot get the diversity of life by tinkering with polypeptides. That process doesn't even determine cell type.

Alan Fox is proud to be an ignoramus.

Monday, December 20, 2021

16 Years since the Dover Fiasco and ID Still Offers the Only Scientific Explanation for our existence


16 years ago, a scientifically illiterate judge was fooled by lies and a literature bluff. This moron of a judge rules that ID is unscientific! Unfortunately, ID offers the only scientific explanation for our existence!

As Dr. Behe said in his response to judge jones: 

The Court’s reasoning in section E-4 is premised on: a cramped view of science; the conflation of intelligent design with creationism; an incapacity to distinguish the implications of a theory from the theory itself; a failure to differentiate evolution from Darwinism; and strawman arguments against ID. The Court has accepted the most tendentious and shopworn excuses for Darwinism with great charity and impatiently dismissed evidence-based arguments for design. 

All of that is regrettable, but in the end does not impact the realities of biology, which are not amenable to adjudication. On the day after the judge’s opinion, December 21, 2005, as before, the cell is run by amazingly complex, functional machinery that in any other context would immediately be recognized as designed. On December 21, 2005, as before, there are no non-design explanations for the molecular machinery of life, only wishful speculations and Just-So stories.

The 58 references for the alleged evolution immune system have been proven to be a bluff as not one of those 58 supported evolution by means of blind and mindless processes. That one was on the school board's defense. They should have objected and forced the plaintiff's attorney to prove his point. He would have choked.

It's a good thing the decision is only meaningful in one insignificant school district.

Thursday, December 09, 2021

SteveStory is Dead. But his Lies and Cowardice Live on!


SteveStory is dead. But when he was alive, he was just another liar and equivocating punk. He lies and equivocations appear to still be alive.

Look, asshole evos- ID is NOT anti-evolution. That means peer-reviewed papers on mere "evolution" do not mean they support evolution by means of blind and mindless processes. According to Judge Jones if it doesn't explicitly say it, it doesn't support it.

What evos do, dishonestly, is to compare papers on mere evolution to papers on intelligent design. What they do NOT ever do is compare papers that support blind watchmaker evolution to papers that support ID. And the reason for that is the only papers that support blind watchmaker evolution are the papers on genetic diseases and physical deformities.

SteveStory may be dead. But his lies and equivocating cowardice are still going strong.

Wednesday, December 08, 2021

The Strongest Evidence for Evolution by Means of Blind and Mindless Processes?


What is the strongest evidence, that anyone is aware of for evolution by means of blind and mindless processes?

I will go first:

1- Genetic diseases

2- Physical deformities

That's it! That is the only evidence for evolution by means of blind and mindless processes that I am aware of. And no one can demonstrate otherwise.

Tuesday, December 07, 2021

DNA- What does it do?


DNA- What does it do?

DNA is basically an inert macromolecule. DNA doesn't do anything, but fall apart, without an existing suite of specific, specialized proteins and a coded information processing system.

In that system and with those proteins, DNA acts as a template for replicating itself and for transcribing different RNAs. DNA doesn't even have a say in how the mRNA is processed. It's the processed mRNA that holds the source code for the polypeptide sequence.

DNA does not tell the protein how to fold. Chaperones do that. DNA doesn't tell the proteins where to go nor how to assemble. No one knows how the proteins "know" to for ATP synthase, for example. Evos baldly and falsely claim self-assembly. Too bad they don't have any evidence for that. And they can't seem to get it to work in a lab.

DNA to proteins is NOT the type of process that can determine biological form/ body plans. Genes influence TRAITs. A trait is eye color, hair/ fur color, skin color- the things that make individuals in the same population different. Genes determine the variation within a population. DNA does not determine the body plan of the species within the population. It can't. As Dr. Denton said:

To understand the challenge to the “superwatch” model by the erosion of the gene-centric view of nature, it is necessary to recall August Weismann’s seminal insight more than a century ago regarding the need for genetic determinants to specify organic form. As Weismann saw so clearly, in order to account for the unerring transmission through time with precise reduplication, for each generation of “complex contingent assemblages of matter” (superwatches), it is necessary to propose the existence of stable abstract genetic blueprints or programs in the genes- he called them “determinants”- sequestered safely in the germ plasm, away from the ever varying and destabilizing influences of the extra-genetic environment.
Such carefully isolated determinants would theoretically be capable of reliably transmitting contingent order through time and specifying it reliably each generation. Thus, the modern “gene-centric” view of life was born, and with it the heroic twentieth century effort to identify Weismann’s determinants, supposed to be capable of reliably specifying in precise detail all the contingent order of the phenotype. Weismann was correct in this: the contingent view of form and indeed the entire mechanistic conception of life- the superwatch model- is critically dependent on showing that all or at least the vast majority of organic form is specified in precise detail in the genes.
Yet by the late 1980s it was becoming obvious to most genetic researchers, including myself, since my own main research interest in the ‘80s and ‘90s was human genetics, that the heroic effort to find information specifying life’s order in the genes had failed. There was no longer the slightest justification for believing there exists anything in the genome remotely resembling a program capable of specifying in detail all the complex order of the phenotype. The emerging picture made it increasingly difficult to see genes as Weismann’s “unambiguous bearers of information” or view them as the sole source of the durability and stability of organic form. It is true that genes influence every aspect of development, but influencing something is not the same as determining it. Only a small fraction of all known genes, such as the developmental fate switching genes, can be imputed to have any sort of directing or controlling influence on form generation. From being “isolated directors” of a one-way game of life, genes are now considered to be interactive players in a dynamic two-way dance of almost unfathomable complexity, as described by Keller in The Century of The GeneMichael Denton “An Anti-Darwinian Intellectual Journey”, Uncommon Dissent (2004), pages 171-2 

It's too funny that evos don't even understand basic biology. And their ignorance leads them to make nonsensical and untestable claims. And they ignore that, too.

Friday, December 03, 2021

Alan Fox: Stupid or Ignorant?


Alan Fox likes to pretend that is is some sort of authority. He may be but at what no one knows. On TSZ Charlie made a point. That point is correct. Alan responded with his ignorance:

A fruit fly will only grow a leg where its antenna should be if its genes have been interfered with.

That’s not really correct. The homeobox (hox) genes, via the protein switches they code for, are pivotal in embryological development.

Wrong again, Alan.  

What Charlie said is absolutely correct. HOX genes are still genes. And messing with those genes is what caused the leg to move where the antennae should be.

Alan also said:

You began as a fertilized ovum. Half your genes came from your biological father. Human sperm only contribute genes – nothing else. Yet there tends to be resemblance from father to child.

Yes, because genes influence TRAITS. And TRAITS are what allows one of the species to look like another. Only a fool would think that means DNA determines form.

Alan clearly has not read the paper "On the Problem of Biological Form". No one knows what determines biological form. But scientists know it cannot be DNA.