Creationist guy coming to UC Davis this Fri

Darth Servo · Post by **Darth Servo** » 2005-05-01 11:14pm

DPDarkPrimus wrote:We're not perfect, but not being perfect doesn't disprove an intelligent creator.

Meanwhile, these idiots continue to claim that said creator is himself perfect.

DPDarkPrimus · Post by **DPDarkPrimus** » 2005-05-01 11:23pm

Darth Servo wrote:
DPDarkPrimus wrote:We're not perfect, but not being perfect doesn't disprove an intelligent creator.
Meanwhile, these idiots continue to claim that said creator is himself perfect.

No, they never actually say it. They're not that stupid.

wolveraptor · Post by **wolveraptor** » 2005-05-02 12:51am

tharkûn wrote:
This means that while selection always increases the fitness of the population it may not increase it to its maximum potential. Hence the sytem is not intelligently designed
And a quick response I've heard to that is along the lines that you are optimizing fitness for exactly one population; that is not necessarily congruent with global optimization. For instance if AA allows a predator to eat a poisonious species without harm, Aa means the poison is still lethal, and aa means the poison is merely toxic; then obviously AA is the most fit. However the ability of the predator to eat with impunity might not be globally optimal - without some counterbalancing force the predator might eat all the prey and collapse an entire branch in the food chain.

Mind you I know you could further pick the above crap apart, but the point is these guys have reams of handy jargon and stories that will sound legit. Face it, this wouldn't be a fair fight - it's his turf with his rules. Even if it was a fair fight his orational skills HAVE to be almost brilliant to have come thus far.

As far as I know, a species will not adjust it self such that it reaches an equilibrium with its ecosystem. If lions become faster and more powerful, and begin to reduce the cape water buffalo population, they will not suddenly become weaker and slower in order to increase the number of buffalo, thereby providing themselves with more food. Rather, the water buffalo will either adapt by becoming bigger and/or faster, or die out, and lions will then adapt to a new food source, or die out. A predator species willl not reduce its capabilities in order to sustain equilibrium. That would imply some sort of intelligent thinking behind evolution, which is unlikely. So really, the phrase "globally optimal" is utter nonsense. Predators aren't going around worrying about the survival of the dung beetle that eats their shit. Or swallows the bullshit.

Oh yeah! Roxxor pun! What now?!?!