quote:

ORIGINAL: Method
“What this research shows is that 400 million years ago there was already a complex eye

quote:


, and one that was an intermediate form between jawless and jawed vertebrates,” Dr Young says. “This means that we’re able to add one more piece to the puzzle of how the human eye came to be.”

quote:


Another bit of evidence for the creationists to ignore.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bettawrekonize
Yes, ID advocates have long been saying that "early life" is more complex than evolutionists once thought. If anything, this is more evidence against UCD.

quote:

More speculation.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Method
How can this be "early life" when they existed only 6,000 years ago?

quote:


I guess that makes me a prophet.

"Another bit of evidence for the creationists to ignore."--Method, post #1

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bettawrekonize
It is not the evidence I am ignoring, it is the speculation I am ignoring. There is a difference between evidence and speculation.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Method
THere is no speculation that this eye structure is intermediate between modern complex eyes and earlier less complex eyes. That much is fact.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bettawrekonize

quote:

ORIGINAL: Method
THere is no speculation that this eye structure is intermediate between modern complex eyes and earlier less complex eyes. That much is fact.

Just because you label it an intermediate does not make it so.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Method
A five foot pole is intermediate between a four foot pole and a six foot pole. Intermediacy does not indicate ancestry. However, the theory of evolution predicts that one should find this eye intermediate in the fossil record. An accurate prediction is considered evidence for a theory, is it not?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bettawrekonize
In terms of height, the pole maybe an intermediate.

quote:

They are saying that this eye is an intermediate form in terms of evolution and that's just speculation.

quote:

There is no reason to believe that evolution predicts that we should find any such thing.

quote:

Labeling it an intermediate does not make it so. Just because it had, "a different arrangement of muscles and nerves supporting the eyeball" does not mean that it's an "intermediate stage."

quote:

ORIGINAL: Method
See the quote above. It has a mixture of characteristics which makes it's intermediate status a fact, a fact that the theory of evolution predicted we should discover.

quote:


“The vertebrate eye is the best example of structural perfection – as used by proponents of intelligent design to claim that something so complex couldn’t possibly have evolved,” Dr Young said.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bettawrekonize

quote:


“The vertebrate eye is the best example of structural perfection – as used by proponents of intelligent design to claim that something so complex couldn’t possibly have evolved,” Dr Young said.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/01/080101193317.htm

It's amazing how these peer review journals allow people to attack ID and creationism and they don't allow anyone to attack evolution or defend ID or creationism. I guess it's because they know that evolution can't defend itself while ID can.

Behe even had to respond to one critic of ID who published in a peer review journal in his blog because the peer review journal won't publish Behe's response. Behe destroyed the argument that was made in the journal though.

quote:

ORIGINAL: ianz
See I find this response really confusing.

Why do you support Behe/ID? ID accepts common ancestry, and accepts an old Earth, so presumably Behe will agree that this evidence has been correctly interpreted. Where Behe differs is in saying that it's possible the eye didn't result through adaptation alone, but was guided.

In what way is Behe's argument analogous to YEC?

Regards, Ian

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bettawrekonize
I can agree with Behe on some things without agreeing with him on everything.

ID does not necessarily accept common ancestry nor an old Earth. ID says nothing about common ancestry and it says nothing about the age of the Earth. ID is compatible with OEC, YEC, and UCD.

quote:

2. Is intelligent design theory incompatible with evolution?

It depends on what one means by the word "evolution." If one simply means "change over time," or even that living things are related by common ancestry, then there is no inherent conflict between evolutionary theory and intelligent design theory.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bettawrekonize
Not really. Punctuated equilibrium would be happy without such alleged intermediates, so evolution does not predict any such thing.

quote:

ORIGINAL: gluadys
Not true. PE does not propose that intermediate forms do not occur. It only suggests that they can occur in relatively short bursts of evolutionary activity that punctuate longer periods of stasis. Gould and Eldredge would not be happy at all without intermediates during one of these punctuation episodes. They would predict that intermediates would be found in this situation.

quote:

ORIGINAL: ianz
2. Is intelligent design theory incompatible with evolution?

It depends on what one means by the word "evolution." If one simply means "change over time," or even that living things are related by common ancestry, then there is no inherent conflict between evolutionary theory and intelligent design theory.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bettawrekonize

quote:

ORIGINAL: gluadys
Not true. PE does not propose that intermediate forms do not occur. It only suggests that they can occur in relatively short bursts of evolutionary activity that punctuate longer periods of stasis. Gould and Eldredge would not be happy at all without intermediates during one of these punctuation episodes. They would predict that intermediates would be found in this situation.

Not true. Even Darwin himself was content with a lack of alleged intermediates, blaming it on geological factors. Evolution has no problems with a lack of intermediates and it never has in the past.

quote:

ORIGINAL: gluadys
No, Darwin was not at all content with a lack of intermediates, since his theory required them. He considered the geological record as it was known in his time one of the serious obstacles to accepting his theory. He predicted that further exploration of the geological record would turn up many of the missing intermediates. Subsequent paleontological studies have amply verified his prediction.

quote:


Geology would lead us to believe that almost every continent has been broken up into islands even during the later tertiary periods; and in such islands distinct species might have been separately formed without the possibility of intermediate varieties existing in the intermediate zones.
...
Now, if we may trust these facts and inferences, and therefore conclude that varieties linking two other varieties together have generally existed in lesser numbers than the forms which they connect, then, I think, we can understand why intermediate varieties should not endure for very long periods; why as a general rule they should be exterminated and disappear, sooner than the forms which they originally linked together.

quote:


It is just possible by my theory, that one of two living forms might have descended from the other; for instance, a horse from a tapir; and in this case direct intermediate links will have existed between them. But such a case would imply that one form had remained for a very long period unaltered, whilst its descendants had undergone a vast amount of change; and the principle of competition between organism and organism, between child and parent, will render this a very rare event; for in all cases the new and improved forms of life will tend to supplant the old and unimproved.
...
Along the whole west coast, which is inhabited by a peculiar marine fauna, tertiary beds are so scantily developed, that no record of several successive and peculiar marine faunas will probably be preserved to a distant age.
...
This could be effected only by the future geologist discovering in a fossil state numerous intermediate gradations; and such success seems to me improbable in the highest degree.

quote:


We should not be able to recognise a species as the parent of any one or more species if we were to examine them ever so closely, unless we likewise possessed many of the intermediate links between their past or parent and present states; and these many links we could hardly ever expect to discover, owing to the imperfection of the geological record.
...
Widely ranging species vary most, and varieties are often at first local, -- both causes rendering the discovery of intermediate links less likely.

quote:


In the peripheral region itself, we might find direct evidence of speciation, but such good fortune would be rare indeed because the event occurs so rapidly in such a small population. Thus, the fossil record is a faithful rendering of what evolutionary theory predicts, not a pitiful vestige of a once bountiful tale.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bettawrekonize

quote:

ORIGINAL: gluadys
No, Darwin was not at all content with a lack of intermediates, since his theory required them. He considered the geological record as it was known in his time one of the serious obstacles to accepting his theory. He predicted that further exploration of the geological record would turn up many of the missing intermediates. Subsequent paleontological studies have amply verified his prediction.

Darwin was content with a lack in intermediaries.

quote:


Geology would lead us to believe that almost every continent has been broken up into islands even during the later tertiary periods; and in such islands distinct species might have been separately formed without the possibility of intermediate varieties existing in the intermediate zones.
...
Now, if we may trust these facts and inferences, and therefore conclude that varieties linking two other varieties together have generally existed in lesser numbers than the forms which they connect, then, I think, we can understand why intermediate varieties should not endure for very long periods; why as a general rule they should be exterminated and disappear, sooner than the forms which they originally linked together.

http://www.literature.org/authors/darwin-charles/the-origin-of-species/chapter-06.html

quote:


It is just possible by my theory, that one of two living forms might have descended from the other; for instance, a horse from a tapir; and in this case direct intermediate links will have existed between them. But such a case would imply that one form had remained for a very long period unaltered, whilst its descendants had undergone a vast amount of change; and the principle of competition between organism and organism, between child and parent, will render this a very rare event; for in all cases the new and improved forms of life will tend to supplant the old and unimproved.
...
Along the whole west coast, which is inhabited by a peculiar marine fauna, tertiary beds are so scantily developed, that no record of several successive and peculiar marine faunas will probably be preserved to a distant age.
...
This could be effected only by the future geologist discovering in a fossil state numerous intermediate gradations; and such success seems to me improbable in the highest degree.

http://www.literature.org/authors/darwin-charles/the-origin-of-species/chapter-09.html

quote:


We should not be able to recognise a species as the parent of any one or more species if we were to examine them ever so closely, unless we likewise possessed many of the intermediate links between their past or parent and present states; and these many links we could hardly ever expect to discover, owing to the imperfection of the geological record.
...
Widely ranging species vary most, and varieties are often at first local, -- both causes rendering the discovery of intermediate links less likely.

http://www.literature.org/authors/darwin-charles/the-origin-of-species/chapter-14.html

Gould was/is also content with a lack of intermediates.

quote:


In the peripheral region itself, we might find direct evidence of speciation, but such good fortune would be rare indeed because the event occurs so rapidly in such a small population. Thus, the fossil record is a faithful rendering of what evolutionary theory predicts, not a pitiful vestige of a once bountiful tale.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Punctuated_equilibrium

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bettawrekonize

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/01/080101193317.htm

It's amazing how these peer review journals allow people to attack ID and creationism and they don't allow anyone to attack evolution or defend ID or creationism.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bettawrekonize

quote:

ORIGINAL: ianz
2. Is intelligent design theory incompatible with evolution?

It depends on what one means by the word "evolution." If one simply means "change over time," or even that living things are related by common ancestry, then there is no inherent conflict between evolutionary theory and intelligent design theory.

Nothing you quoted contradicts anything I said. I thought you were a creationist? It's usually atheistic or agnostic evolutionists or evolutionists that think design can't be detected (or perhaps evolutionists posing as creationists or ID advocates) that suffer from sever misinterpretation of the facts (and that apply poor logic to argue for their often naturalistic religion).

quote:

ORIGINAL: essentialsaltes
Science Daily is not a peer review journal. It aggregates scientific press releases.

quote:

ORIGINAL: ianz
No I'm more or less atheist. (I've openly stated this a number of times.)

quote:


How does "ID accepts common ancestry" not contradict YEC?

quote:


BTW I've never come across an atheist posing as a creationist on this forum,

quote:


except perhaps the odd troll.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bettawrekonize
I mean, the position that naturalistic philosophies (ie: UCD) and only naturalistic philosophies should be taught at the expense of tax dollars while the strongest non - strawman criticisms and opposing views should be censored is an unscientific and dishonest position. It makes me question the integrity of the secular community.