Friday, July 16, 2010

Evolution and the Design Illusion

What do geckos, mussels, and spiders have in common? They all have their Mercedes in the Driveway™, in their case, exquisitely designed adhesives that outperform those designed by mere humans.

"Nature has evolved a myriad of well-designed adhesives that assist in locomotion, self-defence and prey capture. Geckos use micron-sized hairs... Mussels secrete specialized proteins... Modern orb-weaving spiders use micron-sized glue droplets..."

"Well-designed". Following the requisite darwinian disclaimer, we get on to the real business -- the language of design. The designs present in the gecko, mussels, and spiders are so great, so exquisite, so useful (the Mercedes in the Driveway), we want to mimic them -- and it will take all the ingenuity of man to do so.

"This finding should significantly benefit the development of synthetic adhesives for biomedical, orthopedics and wound-healing applications. The understanding of how spiders use this unique glue will allow scientists to develop reversible adhesives that work in the presence of water..."

And yet, darwinists, back against the wall, refuse to admit that these overwhelmingly well-designed artifacts are really designed at all -- they just have the appearance of design. To the die-hard darwinist, actual design, like actual morality and actual free-will, is illusionary.

It seems to me that an hypothesis of intelligent creation and intelligently-designed organisms would have served the scientific community as well or better than the hypothesis of mindless, unintelligent processes.

In dismissing as illusionary the evidence before our senses, Darwinists are like Hindus -- they are at two polar opposite ends of a functionally illusionary universe.

"In the beginning God (an actual Agent) created the heavens and the earth. (i.e., a world that really exists)." This is such a useful piece of data and such a great place to start when processing reality.  The darwinian accepts the second part while denying the first, the Hindu denies the second while affirming (in a way at least) the first.

Reclaim reality. Rebel against the atheist machine.™


P@J said...

Your Strawman Army is building strength.

Marching in even tighter circles, never looking outward.

I wondonr why no-one is listening?

RkBall said...

If you are going to post, you should read and respond to this one:

newcenturion said...

To acknowledge a higher authority or power is unthinkable for many because that would mean being accountable to that higher power.

For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, because that which is known about God is evident within them. For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made so they are without excuse. For even though they knew God, they did not honor Him or give thanks , but the became futile in their speculations, and their foolish heart was darkened.
Professing to be wise the became fools and exchanged the glory of the incorruptible God for an image in the form of corruptible man and birds and four footed animals and crawling creatures....For they exchanged the truth of God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen Rom 1:18-25

jonathan said...

I think the bigger question here is:

Why does there need to be a god?

P@J said...

It’s the magic circular argument: Why do things exist? Thanks to God. Why does God exist? Because things exist. And to theists, that actually sounds like a solution to a problem.

Mr. Ball seems to be worried if things like math or beauty existed before humans put names on them (~7000-15,000 years ago?). Rest assured, the length of the hypotenuse has always been equal to the root of the sum of the squares of the two other sides in any right angle triangle. Even before Pythagoras was born. Remember, the Sumerians had math and written language a couple of thousand years before Sky Zombie showed up on the scene. It is hard to imagine them building the complex society they had without morals and principles, things Mr. Ball claims can only arrive courtesy a burning bush.

The much more logical conclusion is the Douglas Adams one: that most Gods came into existence shortly after the big bang, not shortly before as they usually claimed.

RkBall said...

"Mr. Ball claims can only arrive courtesy a burning bush."

Never said that. On the contrary. You either haven't been actually reading what I have written, or your comprehension skills are weak.

RkBall said...

Anyone who refers to a "Sky Zombie" has lost all credibility and should never, ever, criticize someone else of making a "strawman argument."

In doing so, you are, apparently, either unwilling or unable to retain even the conception of the Christian God in your mind. In either case, your writing is evidence of the reprobate mind referred to in Romans 1.

RkBall said...

In what exact sense do you think, under atheism, that math -- a mental process based on mental concepts -- existed prior to humans? Do you believe in a cosmic Mind?

RkBall said...

"I think the bigger question here is: Why does there need to be a god?"

I'm upping this to a fresh post. See new post.

RkBall said...

I'm working on it. Should be ready Saturday.

"... nothing intellectually compelling or challenging.. bald assertions coupled to superstition... woefully pathetic"