Total Posts:37|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Intelligently Constructed

Mhykiel
Posts: 5,987
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2014 2:04:50 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
When we look at life and study the way it works, it becomes reasonable to presume the original or beginning life was constructed by an intelligence.

We have examples of thing that are constructed by intelligent beings. Better so is we have examples that are not all made by human hands. Common characteristics of these structures are signs something was crafted by some kind of intelligence or being and not purely natural.

Anything intelligently constructed is the result of natural processes being guided or altered by an intelligence.

The guiding and altering actions leave what can be described as tool marks upon the structure. These tool marks will be signs of confining, refining, and altering of a natural process.

Scope is taking into account the structure and it's environments.
Environment is the resting conditions of the structure.
Material Morphology is the natural shape and composition of a structure's substance.
Mutually exclusive micro-Environments is the separate environments needed to make parts of the finished structure.

Lets apply this to a simple structure a sun baked brick to discern if it is natural or intelligently constructed:

Scope: A sun-baked brick is composed of grass and mud in a dried rectangular prism shape.

Environment: The resting environment of a sun baked brick is a dry environment. If it rains or is wet the brick dissolves into it's components.

Materials morphology: The mud used in the brick naturally conforms to a container or follows gravity to form a puddle. There are no known rectangular prism cavities in nature for the brick to form in. In addition if this cavity were present it would have to removed by a process that does not destroy the brick as well. Sign for construction.

Mutually exclusive micro-environments: Water is used to make both mud and grass, so this is naturally mutually compatible. But the resting environment (dry) and the constructing environment (wet) are mutually exclusive sign for construction.

Conclusion is there are more signs the brick was constructed than there are natural means to account for the structure. Sun-baked brick is Intelligently Constructed.
Mhykiel
Posts: 5,987
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2014 2:15:27 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
A Dam of trees is found in the woods.

Scope: the dam, the river, and the woodland environment it is found in.

Environment: woodland and river.

Material Morphology: Trees grow naturally in the woods and sometimes they fall over and are swept away by flooding rivers. Each Tree in the dam has small twigs removed and the base of the trunks form cones of small hash marks. Trees do not grow with hash marks in their trucks. The hash marks are organized in a way to show repeating removal of tree trunk in a spiral line decreasing towards the center of the tree.

Small branches removed with same sized hash marks. This shows an alteration to the natural growth to trees. As sing the tree component has been constructed from trees.

The trunks are arranged in the dam with some heavy trunks interwoven with small trunks. If this were produced by flooding a consolidation of heavy and small trunks would be seen due to fluid mechanics and the brazil nut effect. The arrangement is a sign of construction.

Mutually exclusive micro-environments: Trees grow near rivers. Fallen dead trees can be in rivers. I see no mutually exclusive environments.

Conclusion: the dam (which is a beaver dam) was intelligently constructed structure.
Mhykiel
Posts: 5,987
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2014 2:17:14 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
Analyzing these characteristic of a structure can reasonably and more importantly Objectively conclude if a structure is naturally forming or intelligently constructed from natural resources.
GarretKadeDupre
Posts: 2,023
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2014 2:42:13 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
Let me try this.

Stone arrowhead found in dirt.

Scope: stone arrowhead and dirt.
Environment: Uhm, dirt?
Material Morphology: The stone is shaped roughly like an arrow and it's edges have chip marks all around them. There's no known natural process to shape a rock in the shape of an arrow by chipping it... is there?
Mutually Exclusive Micro Environments: I don't see anything mutually exclusive about rock and dirt.

What I don't understand is why in the sun dried brick example there were mutually exclusive micro environments, but not in the beaver dam example. Yet, you determined intelligence in both cases. That being the case, why does the "mutually exclusive micro environments" criterion even matter?

Also, how would a garden do with your test? Would it be determined natural or intelligently constructed? e.g. 2 rows of dirt with 6 evenly spaced watermelon sprouts in each row.
Proof that people witnessed living dinosaurs:
http://www.debate.org...
Mhykiel
Posts: 5,987
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2014 3:52:29 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/3/2014 2:42:13 AM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
Let me try this.

Stone arrowhead found in dirt.

Scope: stone arrowhead and dirt.
Environment: Uhm, dirt?
Material Morphology: The stone is shaped roughly like an arrow and it's edges have chip marks all around them. There's no known natural process to shape a rock in the shape of an arrow by chipping it... is there?
Mutually Exclusive Micro Environments: I don't see anything mutually exclusive about rock and dirt.

What I don't understand is why in the sun dried brick example there were mutually exclusive micro environments, but not in the beaver dam example. Yet, you determined intelligence in both cases. That being the case, why does the "mutually exclusive micro environments" criterion even matter?

Also, how would a garden do with your test? Would it be determined natural or intelligently constructed? e.g. 2 rows of dirt with 6 evenly spaced watermelon sprouts in each row.

I would go further that rocks do chip each other. But in the arrowhead the chips are uniform and a progression of chips in concentric lines. Natural random chipping of rocks do not form this pattern.

With micro-enviroments come into play with more complicated things. Lightbulb. The temperature to produce glass is mutually exclusive to producing the copper filament and base. Then both are arranged in an environment with air removed from the bulb, which is mutually exclusive to the rest environment.

The garden is intelligently constructed as discernible from the pattern of the rows. Plants spread seeds through fruit and wind. Naturally should produce a much more unorganized pattern than rows. In fact if a garden is allowed to progress on it's own the entropy of the rows increase. Meaning the assortment of plants become more and more scattered. So not only is the garden intelligently constructed it is intelligently maintained. Maintained being another way of saying continually constructed.
GarretKadeDupre
Posts: 2,023
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2014 3:58:33 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/3/2014 3:52:29 AM, Mhykiel wrote:
I would go further that rocks do chip each other. But in the arrowhead the chips are uniform and a progression of chips in concentric lines. Natural random chipping of rocks do not form this pattern.

With micro-enviroments come into play with more complicated things. Lightbulb. The temperature to produce glass is mutually exclusive to producing the copper filament and base. Then both are arranged in an environment with air removed from the bulb, which is mutually exclusive to the rest environment.

The garden is intelligently constructed as discernible from the pattern of the rows. Plants spread seeds through fruit and wind. Naturally should produce a much more unorganized pattern than rows. In fact if a garden is allowed to progress on it's own the entropy of the rows increase. Meaning the assortment of plants become more and more scattered. So not only is the garden intelligently constructed it is intelligently maintained. Maintained being another way of saying continually constructed.

Interesting, thanks. What if you put DNA to the test? Would it be determined intelligently constructed?
Proof that people witnessed living dinosaurs:
http://www.debate.org...
Mhykiel
Posts: 5,987
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2014 4:00:01 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/3/2014 2:42:13 AM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
Let me try this.

Stone arrowhead found in dirt.

Scope: stone arrowhead and dirt.
Environment: Uhm, dirt?
Material Morphology: The stone is shaped roughly like an arrow and it's edges have chip marks all around them. There's no known natural process to shape a rock in the shape of an arrow by chipping it... is there?
Mutually Exclusive Micro Environments: I don't see anything mutually exclusive about rock and dirt.

What I don't understand is why in the sun dried brick example there were mutually exclusive micro environments, but not in the beaver dam example. Yet, you determined intelligence in both cases. That being the case, why does the "mutually exclusive micro environments" criterion even matter?

Also, how would a garden do with your test? Would it be determined natural or intelligently constructed? e.g. 2 rows of dirt with 6 evenly spaced watermelon sprouts in each row.

Oh I should say is the characteristics of something intelligently constructed are these things. Something can have 50 points of material morphology and none in micro-enviroments, still making it intelligently constructed.

It's the points added up that matter not if all traits have points.
Mhykiel
Posts: 5,987
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2014 4:02:33 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/3/2014 3:58:33 AM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
At 6/3/2014 3:52:29 AM, Mhykiel wrote:
I would go further that rocks do chip each other. But in the arrowhead the chips are uniform and a progression of chips in concentric lines. Natural random chipping of rocks do not form this pattern.

With micro-enviroments come into play with more complicated things. Lightbulb. The temperature to produce glass is mutually exclusive to producing the copper filament and base. Then both are arranged in an environment with air removed from the bulb, which is mutually exclusive to the rest environment.

The garden is intelligently constructed as discernible from the pattern of the rows. Plants spread seeds through fruit and wind. Naturally should produce a much more unorganized pattern than rows. In fact if a garden is allowed to progress on it's own the entropy of the rows increase. Meaning the assortment of plants become more and more scattered. So not only is the garden intelligently constructed it is intelligently maintained. Maintained being another way of saying continually constructed.

Interesting, thanks. What if you put DNA to the test? Would it be determined intelligently constructed?

No. Because the scope is the DNA and it's environment. The environment includes the biological machines inside the body of the cell.

Living cells have body, metabolism, inheritable information. So when applied to a whole cell or even a protocell missing some components. The answer is intelligently constructed.
Mhykiel
Posts: 5,987
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2014 4:05:15 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
To falsify this kind of analysis, just find one known naturally occurring structure that concludes to be intelligently constructed by this method.

I have not found any.
Mineva
Posts: 336
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2014 4:15:15 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
Hi,

If I was a non-believer, I would just think about the natural things which works for mankind, the things which benefits of people and their perfect harmony. Would be enough for me to think about the presence of an intelligent designer. Cannot be a coincidence, there is no such a mathematic.
GarretKadeDupre
Posts: 2,023
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2014 4:18:29 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/3/2014 4:05:15 AM, Mhykiel wrote:
To falsify this kind of analysis, just find one known naturally occurring structure that concludes to be intelligently constructed by this method.

I have not found any.

What about Giant's Causeway? It's a natural formation of numerous interlocking stacks of hexagonal basalt prisms:

http://upload.wikimedia.org...
Proof that people witnessed living dinosaurs:
http://www.debate.org...
Mhykiel
Posts: 5,987
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2014 4:20:53 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/3/2014 4:15:15 AM, Mineva wrote:
Hi,

If I was a non-believer, I would just think about the natural things which works for mankind, the things which benefits of people and their perfect harmony. Would be enough for me to think about the presence of an intelligent designer. Cannot be a coincidence, there is no such a mathematic.

I'm sorry I have a hard time understanding you. I think if you include an intelligent being into the scope ofcourse the conclusion will be natural. But that is not a fiar analysis is it?

Second this can be converted into mathematical terms. There are formulas for finding symmetry and patterns. If these break the natural morphology (natural symmetry and pattern) then it is a point for intelligently constructed.

Again just need one KNOWN naturally occurring structure that would calculate to Intelligently Constructed to falsify this method.
Mhykiel
Posts: 5,987
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2014 4:23:40 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/3/2014 4:18:29 AM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
At 6/3/2014 4:05:15 AM, Mhykiel wrote:
To falsify this kind of analysis, just find one known naturally occurring structure that concludes to be intelligently constructed by this method.

I have not found any.

What about Giant's Causeway? It's a natural formation of numerous interlocking stacks of hexagonal basalt prisms:

http://upload.wikimedia.org...

I think it is easy to see that the natural crystallization of basalt is hexagonal. The hexagons size is determined by temperature, pressure and cooling. If an analysis of the sizes show they can occur in relatively the same temp, pressure and cooling, then it is a natural method. This Intelligently Constructed analysis would not deem it other than natural.
Mhykiel
Posts: 5,987
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2014 4:29:24 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
Such top down approaches are not new. Here is an example where the material morphology trait is looked at in detail with relation to rocks.

http://www.thenakedscientists.com...
GarretKadeDupre
Posts: 2,023
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2014 4:36:33 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/3/2014 4:23:40 AM, Mhykiel wrote:
At 6/3/2014 4:18:29 AM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
At 6/3/2014 4:05:15 AM, Mhykiel wrote:
To falsify this kind of analysis, just find one known naturally occurring structure that concludes to be intelligently constructed by this method.

I have not found any.

What about Giant's Causeway? It's a natural formation of numerous interlocking stacks of hexagonal basalt prisms:

http://upload.wikimedia.org...

I think it is easy to see that the natural crystallization of basalt is hexagonal. The hexagons size is determined by temperature, pressure and cooling. If an analysis of the sizes show they can occur in relatively the same temp, pressure and cooling, then it is a natural method. This Intelligently Constructed analysis would not deem it other than natural.

Ok thanks. Just one more: What about this cloud that looks like a chicken?

http://lh4.ggpht.com...
Proof that people witnessed living dinosaurs:
http://www.debate.org...
Mhykiel
Posts: 5,987
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2014 4:45:30 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/3/2014 4:36:33 AM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
At 6/3/2014 4:23:40 AM, Mhykiel wrote:
At 6/3/2014 4:18:29 AM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
At 6/3/2014 4:05:15 AM, Mhykiel wrote:
To falsify this kind of analysis, just find one known naturally occurring structure that concludes to be intelligently constructed by this method.

I have not found any.

What about Giant's Causeway? It's a natural formation of numerous interlocking stacks of hexagonal basalt prisms:

http://upload.wikimedia.org...

I think it is easy to see that the natural crystallization of basalt is hexagonal. The hexagons size is determined by temperature, pressure and cooling. If an analysis of the sizes show they can occur in relatively the same temp, pressure and cooling, then it is a natural method. This Intelligently Constructed analysis would not deem it other than natural.

Ok thanks. Just one more: What about this cloud that looks like a chicken?

http://lh4.ggpht.com...

Haha. Well for one the measure by which it looks like a chicken is subjective. But nothing about the formation grants points to intelligent construct. The whole thing is composed of vapor. It's outline is only from this angle. What is it's outline from all angles. If it had the proportionate volume from all angles to look like a chicken then you might be able to thinly stretch the case for one point in morphology. I say thinly because nothing about its outline is in contradiction to what could form an outline naturally.
Mhykiel
Posts: 5,987
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2014 4:55:37 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/3/2014 4:45:30 AM, Mhykiel wrote:
At 6/3/2014 4:36:33 AM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
At 6/3/2014 4:23:40 AM, Mhykiel wrote:
At 6/3/2014 4:18:29 AM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
At 6/3/2014 4:05:15 AM, Mhykiel wrote:
To falsify this kind of analysis, just find one known naturally occurring structure that concludes to be intelligently constructed by this method.

I have not found any.

What about Giant's Causeway? It's a natural formation of numerous interlocking stacks of hexagonal basalt prisms:

http://upload.wikimedia.org...

I think it is easy to see that the natural crystallization of basalt is hexagonal. The hexagons size is determined by temperature, pressure and cooling. If an analysis of the sizes show they can occur in relatively the same temp, pressure and cooling, then it is a natural method. This Intelligently Constructed analysis would not deem it other than natural.

Ok thanks. Just one more: What about this cloud that looks like a chicken?

http://lh4.ggpht.com...

Haha. Well for one the measure by which it looks like a chicken is subjective. But nothing about the formation grants points to intelligent construct. The whole thing is composed of vapor. It's outline is only from this angle. What is it's outline from all angles. If it had the proportionate volume from all angles to look like a chicken then you might be able to thinly stretch the case for one point in morphology. I say thinly because nothing about its outline is in contradiction to what could form an outline naturally.

I mean it's not line a straight line is made like a contrail. See atmospheric conditions are not so orderly to produce long lines of cylindrical vapor. See so contrail is intelligently constructed.
Floid
Posts: 751
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2014 6:52:30 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/3/2014 4:55:37 AM, Mhykiel wrote:
I mean it's not line a straight line is made like a contrail. See atmospheric conditions are not so orderly to produce long lines of cylindrical vapor. See so contrail is intelligently constructed.

Actually atmospheric conditions can produce long lines of cylindrical vapor. They are called roll clouds... http://www.gizmodo.com.au...

That is the problem when you assume natural processes can't do complex things... it is very likely you will end up wrong. You claim natural processes can't produce a brick but natural processes do transform the atomic arrangement of amorphous carbon into a very exact atomic pattern which results in the hardest substance currently known. It isn't all that hard to imagine that a brick could form naturally...
Floid
Posts: 751
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2014 6:53:59 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
Ohh and in before you claim that I am changing the subject by introducing the idea of cylindrical clouds to the discussion.
Mhykiel
Posts: 5,987
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2014 7:00:43 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/3/2014 6:52:30 AM, Floid wrote:
At 6/3/2014 4:55:37 AM, Mhykiel wrote:
I mean it's not line a straight line is made like a contrail. See atmospheric conditions are not so orderly to produce long lines of cylindrical vapor. See so contrail is intelligently constructed.

Actually atmospheric conditions can produce long lines of cylindrical vapor. They are called roll clouds... http://www.gizmodo.com.au...

That is the problem when you assume natural processes can't do complex things... it is very likely you will end up wrong. You claim natural processes can't produce a brick but natural processes do transform the atomic arrangement of amorphous carbon into a very exact atomic pattern which results in the hardest substance currently known. It isn't all that hard to imagine that a brick could form naturally...

I've seen roll clouds. Neither roll clouds or contrails are all that complex. Neither did I say they were. And with any analytical method there is a standard deviation to the results. So con trails had 1 point. Pretty close to being mistaken for natural.

Second. Yes nature is capable of making complex things. The traits don't disregard this. Crystalline structures are natural forming directly related tot he atomic structures of the substance making it fall under a natural process under the trait of material morphology. The trait is when material morphology is broken in a unnatural way it is a point for construction. So you diamond example fails.

And a sun-baked brick is simple. Why don't you explain how one can be made naturally. Rectangular prism, 2/3 mud evenly mixed with 1/3 grass stalks (no roots) dried in the sun.

I got to hear this story.
slo1
Posts: 4,361
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2014 7:41:28 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
Cool Cool... Let me try

Scope: A collection of ice chunks frozen together forming an almost perfect circle that rotates in a river.

Environment: The final environment is in a river where it is cold enough to be sustained, and the ice circle is in a position where water can flow under and around the floating ice.

Materials morphology: The circle has an infinite points from its center that are the same distance within a tolerance that gives the appearance of a perfect circle. There are no known circles of this perfection in nature that could act as a mold. The ice that congealed together to form the circle naturally flows down the river rather than collecting at a certain spots. If ice tends to collect it is at the edge or it creates an ice damn of an ambiguous form factor. Since ice is of the same material as water, just the right amount of solid state water must be in the river at the time in order to form the circle. Too much ice and it will span the river. Too little and it washes away.

Mutually exclusive micro-environments: Ice is a phase state of water so it is mutually compatible. However the final resting environment of a almost perfect of circle of ice floating in water and being held in position while slowly rotating is mutually exclusive.

The collection of water in a liquid phase state prior to its construction is mutually exclusive of its collection of liquid phase and solid phase of its final state, meaning the circle can not exist without the exact proper ratio of ice to water nor can it exist without the information required to form a circle. AKA edge equal distant from center at all points.

Conclusion is there are more signs the ice circle in the river was constructed than there are natural means to account for the structure. Ice circle in the river is Intelligently Constructed.
Adam_Godzilla
Posts: 2,487
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2014 8:26:23 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
Interesting methods of finding intelligence in construction. So the beginning of life was intelligently designed? Then who was the designer? How about humans? Can we use your method?

Scope: A biological homo-sapien body made up of Carbon, water and other minerals. Symmetrically shaped.

Environment: Tectonic plates floating above magma. Surrounding environments include forests, deserts, iceland and islands. Includes numerous minerals, plants and animals.

Materials morphology: The body contains DNA information for replication. The body is grown from a fetus requiring another body for fertilisation.

Mutually exclusive micro-environments: Water and carbon is used to make up the human body. The environment also contains natural water and carbon minerals.

Conclusion, the natural environment supports the construction of the human body and the species. The human body is naturally constructed. So then how is life intelligently constructed then?

Your method seems logical but also common sense to me. A brick and a dam are intelligently constructed of course. What are you trying to prove? That life was intelligently constructed yes? So how does your method support that?
New episode of OUTSIDERS: http://www.debate.org...
Episode 4 - They walk among us
Mhykiel
Posts: 5,987
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2014 9:03:40 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/3/2014 7:41:28 AM, slo1 wrote:
Cool Cool... Let me try

Scope: A collection of ice chunks frozen together forming an almost perfect circle that rotates in a river.

Environment: The final environment is in a river where it is cold enough to be sustained, and the ice circle is in a position where water can flow under and around the floating ice.

Materials morphology: The circle has an infinite points from its center that are the same distance within a tolerance that gives the appearance of a perfect circle. There are no known circles of this perfection in nature that could act as a mold. The ice that congealed together to form the circle naturally flows down the river rather than collecting at a certain spots. If ice tends to collect it is at the edge or it creates an ice damn of an ambiguous form factor. Since ice is of the same material as water, just the right amount of solid state water must be in the river at the time in order to form the circle. Too much ice and it will span the river. Too little and it washes away.

Mutually exclusive micro-environments: Ice is a phase state of water so it is mutually compatible. However the final resting environment of a almost perfect of circle of ice floating in water and being held in position while slowly rotating is mutually exclusive.

The collection of water in a liquid phase state prior to its construction is mutually exclusive of its collection of liquid phase and solid phase of its final state, meaning the circle can not exist without the exact proper ratio of ice to water nor can it exist without the information required to form a circle. AKA edge equal distant from center at all points.


Conclusion is there are more signs the ice circle in the river was constructed than there are natural means to account for the structure. Ice circle in the river is Intelligently Constructed.



Seems legit. I don't know how ice in water is a break it waters natural morphology. But interesting take. "Just the right amount" I have not used before. Some things will naturally find an equilibrium. So could you justify the "just a right amount" criteria of what you see as a morphology breaking arrangement?
Mhykiel
Posts: 5,987
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2014 9:10:30 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/3/2014 8:26:23 AM, Adam_Godzilla wrote:
Interesting methods of finding intelligence in construction. So the beginning of life was intelligently designed? Then who was the designer? How about humans? Can we use your method?

Scope: A biological homo-sapien body made up of Carbon, water and other minerals. Symmetrically shaped.

Environment: Tectonic plates floating above magma. Surrounding environments include forests, deserts, iceland and islands. Includes numerous minerals, plants and animals.

Materials morphology: The body contains DNA information for replication. The body is grown from a fetus requiring another body for fertilisation.

Mutually exclusive micro-environments: Water and carbon is used to make up the human body. The environment also contains natural water and carbon minerals.

Conclusion, the natural environment supports the construction of the human body and the species. The human body is naturally constructed. So then how is life intelligently constructed then?

Your method seems logical but also common sense to me. A brick and a dam are intelligently constructed of course. What are you trying to prove? That life was intelligently constructed yes? So how does your method support that?

I defined life as a cell or proto-cell. Not a whole human. You include in your environment other human's and previous humans. But using the method you speak of. A human in an environment of other humans would mean the human was naturally made NOT intelligently constructed.

I get it that some of this seems common sense. What it is trying to do is eliminate the subjective nature of labeling something natural or man-made.

Check this link out. http://www.thenakedscientists.com...

See it may be "common sense" for a dam and brick which are simple examples. But they help to establish a method, so it can be used on other things. Plus this can be drawn out on a chart like stretched Euler diagrams that pinch and merge with each other. Describing a process of fabrication. I think this method can be helpful in biomemic research.
slo1
Posts: 4,361
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2014 9:19:08 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/3/2014 9:03:40 AM, Mhykiel wrote:
At 6/3/2014 7:41:28 AM, slo1 wrote:
Cool Cool... Let me try

Scope: A collection of ice chunks frozen together forming an almost perfect circle that rotates in a river.

Environment: The final environment is in a river where it is cold enough to be sustained, and the ice circle is in a position where water can flow under and around the floating ice.

Materials morphology: The circle has an infinite points from its center that are the same distance within a tolerance that gives the appearance of a perfect circle. There are no known circles of this perfection in nature that could act as a mold. The ice that congealed together to form the circle naturally flows down the river rather than collecting at a certain spots. If ice tends to collect it is at the edge or it creates an ice damn of an ambiguous form factor. Since ice is of the same material as water, just the right amount of solid state water must be in the river at the time in order to form the circle. Too much ice and it will span the river. Too little and it washes away.

Mutually exclusive micro-environments: Ice is a phase state of water so it is mutually compatible. However the final resting environment of a almost perfect of circle of ice floating in water and being held in position while slowly rotating is mutually exclusive.

The collection of water in a liquid phase state prior to its construction is mutually exclusive of its collection of liquid phase and solid phase of its final state, meaning the circle can not exist without the exact proper ratio of ice to water nor can it exist without the information required to form a circle. AKA edge equal distant from center at all points.


Conclusion is there are more signs the ice circle in the river was constructed than there are natural means to account for the structure. Ice circle in the river is Intelligently Constructed.



Seems legit. I don't know how ice in water is a break it waters natural morphology. But interesting take. "Just the right amount" I have not used before. Some things will naturally find an equilibrium. So could you justify the "just a right amount" criteria of what you see as a morphology breaking arrangement?

No different than a wet and dry environment of a brick. One state has X amount of water and the dry state has Y amount of water where as X>Y.

The state of it being formed is even more complex in a river because the water which forms from the ice actually extremely long distances away from where the ice actually formed. The only way for it to travel from where it entered the river was to be in a liquid state, therefore in order for it to morph into its frozen state at the right time and right place to take its spot in the ice circle is short of miraculous. Since it requires change in position and change in phase state and it is in conjunction with water flowing around it, it does have a requirement to be in the right proportion of ice to water to form the circle.

Just like a brick, too much water and it will not form. Too little water and the bonds between the clay will not form and it will tend to crumble. Right proportions, right time, right place.
Mhykiel
Posts: 5,987
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2014 9:26:50 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/3/2014 9:19:08 AM, slo1 wrote:
At 6/3/2014 9:03:40 AM, Mhykiel wrote:
At 6/3/2014 7:41:28 AM, slo1 wrote:
Cool Cool... Let me try

Scope: A collection of ice chunks frozen together forming an almost perfect circle that rotates in a river.

Environment: The final environment is in a river where it is cold enough to be sustained, and the ice circle is in a position where water can flow under and around the floating ice.

Materials morphology: The circle has an infinite points from its center that are the same distance within a tolerance that gives the appearance of a perfect circle. There are no known circles of this perfection in nature that could act as a mold. The ice that congealed together to form the circle naturally flows down the river rather than collecting at a certain spots. If ice tends to collect it is at the edge or it creates an ice damn of an ambiguous form factor. Since ice is of the same material as water, just the right amount of solid state water must be in the river at the time in order to form the circle. Too much ice and it will span the river. Too little and it washes away.

Mutually exclusive micro-environments: Ice is a phase state of water so it is mutually compatible. However the final resting environment of a almost perfect of circle of ice floating in water and being held in position while slowly rotating is mutually exclusive.

The collection of water in a liquid phase state prior to its construction is mutually exclusive of its collection of liquid phase and solid phase of its final state, meaning the circle can not exist without the exact proper ratio of ice to water nor can it exist without the information required to form a circle. AKA edge equal distant from center at all points.


Conclusion is there are more signs the ice circle in the river was constructed than there are natural means to account for the structure. Ice circle in the river is Intelligently Constructed.



Seems legit. I don't know how ice in water is a break it waters natural morphology. But interesting take. "Just the right amount" I have not used before. Some things will naturally find an equilibrium. So could you justify the "just a right amount" criteria of what you see as a morphology breaking arrangement?

No different than a wet and dry environment of a brick. One state has X amount of water and the dry state has Y amount of water where as X>Y.

The state of it being formed is even more complex in a river because the water which forms from the ice actually extremely long distances away from where the ice actually formed. The only way for it to travel from where it entered the river was to be in a liquid state, therefore in order for it to morph into its frozen state at the right time and right place to take its spot in the ice circle is short of miraculous. Since it requires change in position and change in phase state and it is in conjunction with water flowing around it, it does have a requirement to be in the right proportion of ice to water to form the circle.

Just like a brick, too much water and it will not form. Too little water and the bonds between the clay will not form and it will tend to crumble. Right proportions, right time, right place.

The X and Y of the sun dried brick is not gradients of wet or dry. It is the brick has to be completely dried to less than the moisture in the atmosphere. If it is half wet it is not a brick yet.

Are you discounting fluid dynamics of water. The swirling is circular and occurs when water hits any kind of obstacle. And Ice forms in from the bottom up. It does not have to from away from water. And every method has a certain amount of error in it. If this ice circle is as you calculate 1 or 2 points towards construction and 2 points towards natural formation. Is it fair to say the method has no potential?
Mhykiel
Posts: 5,987
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2014 9:39:44 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/3/2014 8:26:23 AM, Adam_Godzilla wrote:
Interesting methods of finding intelligence in construction. So the beginning of life was intelligently designed? Then who was the designer? How about humans? Can we use your method?


Thank you, I am offering it up to see what can fall out. I think for now while it is being formulated should stay with non controversial structures. The method does not say who or what the designer is. The beaver dam could just as easily been a man.

Scope: A biological homo-sapien body made up of Carbon, water and other minerals. Symmetrically shaped.

Environment: Tectonic plates floating above magma. Surrounding environments include forests, deserts, iceland and islands. Includes numerous minerals, plants and animals.

Materials morphology: The body contains DNA information for replication. The body is grown from a fetus requiring another body for fertilisation.

Mutually exclusive micro-environments: Water and carbon is used to make up the human body. The environment also contains natural water and carbon minerals.

Conclusion, the natural environment supports the construction of the human body and the species. The human body is naturally constructed. So then how is life intelligently constructed then?

Your method seems logical but also common sense to me. A brick and a dam are intelligently constructed of course. What are you trying to prove? That life was intelligently constructed yes? So how does your method support that?

To make a method and to find recognizable patterns you start with structures you know for sure. like a brick or beaver dam. I would agree with you that if humans in the scope you assigned was tested would result in naturally formed.

I'm already seeing I should watch my language and say Intelligently constructed vs naturally formed.

honestly I'm just trying to get a method down. I think it could really help in analyzing structures and extrapolating fabrication processes from them. Biomemic research comes to mind. For instance: I've actually used this method on a peanut plant. And I got this really crazy idea of making a clock that tells time but is a plant.

I mean we should be getting closer to a day when we grow our technology.
slo1
Posts: 4,361
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2014 10:02:57 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/3/2014 9:26:50 AM, Mhykiel wrote:
At 6/3/2014 9:19:08 AM, slo1 wrote:
At 6/3/2014 9:03:40 AM, Mhykiel wrote:
At 6/3/2014 7:41:28 AM, slo1 wrote:
Cool Cool... Let me try

Scope: A collection of ice chunks frozen together forming an almost perfect circle that rotates in a river.

Environment: The final environment is in a river where it is cold enough to be sustained, and the ice circle is in a position where water can flow under and around the floating ice.

Materials morphology: The circle has an infinite points from its center that are the same distance within a tolerance that gives the appearance of a perfect circle. There are no known circles of this perfection in nature that could act as a mold. The ice that congealed together to form the circle naturally flows down the river rather than collecting at a certain spots. If ice tends to collect it is at the edge or it creates an ice damn of an ambiguous form factor. Since ice is of the same material as water, just the right amount of solid state water must be in the river at the time in order to form the circle. Too much ice and it will span the river. Too little and it washes away.

Mutually exclusive micro-environments: Ice is a phase state of water so it is mutually compatible. However the final resting environment of a almost perfect of circle of ice floating in water and being held in position while slowly rotating is mutually exclusive.

The collection of water in a liquid phase state prior to its construction is mutually exclusive of its collection of liquid phase and solid phase of its final state, meaning the circle can not exist without the exact proper ratio of ice to water nor can it exist without the information required to form a circle. AKA edge equal distant from center at all points.


Conclusion is there are more signs the ice circle in the river was constructed than there are natural means to account for the structure. Ice circle in the river is Intelligently Constructed.



Seems legit. I don't know how ice in water is a break it waters natural morphology. But interesting take. "Just the right amount" I have not used before. Some things will naturally find an equilibrium. So could you justify the "just a right amount" criteria of what you see as a morphology breaking arrangement?

No different than a wet and dry environment of a brick. One state has X amount of water and the dry state has Y amount of water where as X>Y.

The state of it being formed is even more complex in a river because the water which forms from the ice actually extremely long distances away from where the ice actually formed. The only way for it to travel from where it entered the river was to be in a liquid state, therefore in order for it to morph into its frozen state at the right time and right place to take its spot in the ice circle is short of miraculous. Since it requires change in position and change in phase state and it is in conjunction with water flowing around it, it does have a requirement to be in the right proportion of ice to water to form the circle.

Just like a brick, too much water and it will not form. Too little water and the bonds between the clay will not form and it will tend to crumble. Right proportions, right time, right place.

The X and Y of the sun dried brick is not gradients of wet or dry. It is the brick has to be completely dried to less than the moisture in the atmosphere. If it is half wet it is not a brick yet.

Sure it is gradients of wet or dry. It can't just go from wet to dry with no phase in between. Plus it is porous, even after formed it can hold water.

Are you discounting fluid dynamics of water. The swirling is circular and occurs when water hits any kind of obstacle. And Ice forms in from the bottom up. It does not have to from away from water. And every method has a certain amount of error in it. If this ice circle is as you calculate 1 or 2 points towards construction and 2 points towards natural formation. Is it fair to say the method has no potential?

I'm not discounting the fluid dynamics of water. The dynamics of the fluid movement in a river, including an eddy spot is 3 dimensional and extremely complex, so complex in fact that the odds of this ice forming in the way it did is virtually impossible

Just like a perfect brick of clay which dried out the odds of this perfect circle forming are astronomical and can only be explained by intelligent design.
Mhykiel
Posts: 5,987
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2014 10:09:55 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/3/2014 10:02:57 AM, slo1 wrote:
At 6/3/2014 9:26:50 AM, Mhykiel wrote:
At 6/3/2014 9:19:08 AM, slo1 wrote:

Just like a brick, too much water and it will not form. Too little water and the bonds between the clay will not form and it will tend to crumble. Right proportions, right time, right place.

The X and Y of the sun dried brick is not gradients of wet or dry. It is the brick has to be completely dried to less than the moisture in the atmosphere. If it is half wet it is not a brick yet.

Sure it is gradients of wet or dry. It can't just go from wet to dry with no phase in between. Plus it is porous, even after formed it can hold water.

Are you discounting fluid dynamics of water. The swirling is circular and occurs when water hits any kind of obstacle. And Ice forms in from the bottom up. It does not have to from away from water. And every method has a certain amount of error in it. If this ice circle is as you calculate 1 or 2 points towards construction and 2 points towards natural formation. Is it fair to say the method has no potential?

I'm not discounting the fluid dynamics of water. The dynamics of the fluid movement in a river, including an eddy spot is 3 dimensional and extremely complex, so complex in fact that the odds of this ice forming in the way it did is virtually impossible


odds don't have anything to do with this. It is if the environment with the material can produce the structure, and if there are any non natural characteristics of the structure that would make it intelligently constructed.

Just like a perfect brick of clay which dried out the odds of this perfect circle forming are astronomical and can only be explained by intelligent design.

good point. I should make some kind of criteria for what counts as breaking the natural morphology. The examples were simple and I did not go into detail on how to quantifiable measure the structure.

The ice circle is very interesting to this problem and I thank you for it.
Adam_Godzilla
Posts: 2,487
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2014 10:19:44 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/3/2014 9:39:44 AM, Mhykiel wrote:
At 6/3/2014 8:26:23 AM, Adam_Godzilla wrote:
Interesting methods of finding intelligence in construction. So the beginning of life was intelligently designed? Then who was the designer? How about humans? Can we use your method?


Thank you, I am offering it up to see what can fall out. I think for now while it is being formulated should stay with non controversial structures. The method does not say who or what the designer is. The beaver dam could just as easily been a man.

Scope: A biological homo-sapien body made up of Carbon, water and other minerals. Symmetrically shaped.

Environment: Tectonic plates floating above magma. Surrounding environments include forests, deserts, iceland and islands. Includes numerous minerals, plants and animals.

Materials morphology: The body contains DNA information for replication. The body is grown from a fetus requiring another body for fertilisation.

Mutually exclusive micro-environments: Water and carbon is used to make up the human body. The environment also contains natural water and carbon minerals.

Conclusion, the natural environment supports the construction of the human body and the species. The human body is naturally constructed. So then how is life intelligently constructed then?

Your method seems logical but also common sense to me. A brick and a dam are intelligently constructed of course. What are you trying to prove? That life was intelligently constructed yes? So how does your method support that?

To make a method and to find recognizable patterns you start with structures you know for sure. like a brick or beaver dam. I would agree with you that if humans in the scope you assigned was tested would result in naturally formed.

I'm already seeing I should watch my language and say Intelligently constructed vs naturally formed.

honestly I'm just trying to get a method down. I think it could really help in analyzing structures and extrapolating fabrication processes from them. Biomemic research comes to mind. For instance: I've actually used this method on a peanut plant. And I got this really crazy idea of making a clock that tells time but is a plant.

I mean we should be getting closer to a day when we grow our technology.

Thank you for the reply. This method is fascinating and that idea sounds nuts. Nuts in the good way, it sounds awesome. Are you a bio-engineer by any chance? Will you actually make this clock one day? That would be cool.

I wonder how the method could be developed to find out whether certain elements on the periodic table are man-made or natural. Such a method that can do this and also be able to identify larger objects as well could finally be used to determine if life or the very first cell was intelligently designed or naturally formed.
New episode of OUTSIDERS: http://www.debate.org...
Episode 4 - They walk among us