William Paley and the watchmaker

Jun 16, 2012 | Posted by: roboblogger | Full story: Daily Kos

First, some background: William Paley was a 19th century theologian and philosopher who is best known for using the parable of finding a watch on the ground and wondering about its origin.

Comments (Page 2)

Showing posts 21 - 40 of69
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#21
Jun 20, 2012
 
ChicBowdrie wrote:
<quoted text>
Why? Where did the O2 come from that the animals breathed? And what did they eat?
The first life was bacterial and was probably poisoned by free O2 (as many bacteria are today). About 2 billion years ago, the ability to process glucose all the way to CO2 and H2O developed, which produced free O2 as a by-product. At that point, we see the red band iron formations, which were formed when the oxygen level became high enough to precipitate the iron ores. It was only later that animals developed.

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#22
Jun 20, 2012
 
ChicBowdrie wrote:
<quoted text>
<quoted text>
Whether it's a watch, a rose, or an egg, I see a master designer behind it. How do you see it?
Depends on which you are referring to. But tell me, how do you know that the watch is made by human hands?
ChicBowdrie

Bethlehem, PA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#23
Jun 20, 2012
 
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
You really dropped out of elementary school, huh?
45% of today's oxygen comes from algae, algae lives in ... wait for it ... wait for it ... water! Algae is one of the oldest plant life we have, but it doesn't fossilize well so it may be much older. Roses are land plants, not aquatic plants, land plants evolved after land animals, or flying ones, forget the precise order off hand.
Please bear with me, I'm more of a physical science guy. I watched some Land Before Time movies though. lol

Algae may be older than land animals, but you're not sure? Why? And how long did land animals go hungry before the land plants evolved?

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#24
Jun 20, 2012
 
ChicBowdrie wrote:
<quoted text>
Please bear with me, I'm more of a physical science guy. I watched some Land Before Time movies though. lol
Algae may be older than land animals, but you're not sure? Why? And how long did land animals go hungry before the land plants evolved?
You need to go to school, open a textbook on biological evolution, and start reading. You are asking third grade level questions here, and if you're that stupid then you should not be on the internet, otherwise you are being a Poe.
ChicBowdrie

Bethlehem, PA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#25
Jun 20, 2012
 
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
Depends on which you are referring to. But tell me, how do you know that the watch is made by human hands?
Name anything. An atom, a black hole, a water molecule at 4 deg C. How did it get there? I think that's more difficult to understand than how a neanderthal evolved into a homo sapien.

The watch is only an analogy. This will date me, but have you seen "The God's must be Crazy?" A coke bottle falls out of an airplane and falls into a remote area in Africa where no one has seen anything like it. To you or me it's just a piece of glass. But the tribe of the one that found it was prepared to believe it was a gift from God. Whether the watch or the coke bottle was made by human hands is not the point. In essence, everything is miraculous just by the fact that it exists. But as I said first off, what is most amazing is how things know to reproduce.

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#26
Jun 20, 2012
 
ChicBowdrie wrote:
<quoted text>
Name anything. An atom, a black hole, a water molecule at 4 deg C. How did it get there? I think that's more difficult to understand than how a neanderthal evolved into a homo sapien.
The watch is only an analogy. This will date me, but have you seen "The God's must be Crazy?" A coke bottle falls out of an airplane and falls into a remote area in Africa where no one has seen anything like it. To you or me it's just a piece of glass. But the tribe of the one that found it was prepared to believe it was a gift from God. Whether the watch or the coke bottle was made by human hands is not the point. In essence, everything is miraculous just by the fact that it exists. But as I said first off, what is most amazing is how things know to reproduce.
It's rather ironic that you can see how silly it is to think that the coke bottle is something divine yet you cannot see how that applies to natural phenomenon. Then you break into a simplified version of the Kalam argument which has been debunked by so many people, so many ties, it's redundant and old. Existence only proves existence.

Now answer the watch question, exactly how do you know the watch was made by human hands?

The answer to this question explains a lot about how science works, but most importantly, it shows that religion inserts an unreasonable presupposition that leads to no answers.
ChicBowdrie

Bethlehem, PA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#27
Jun 20, 2012
 
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
You really dropped out of elementary school, huh?
45% of today's oxygen comes from algae, algae lives in ... wait for it ... wait for it ... water! Algae is one of the oldest plant life we have, but it doesn't fossilize well so it may be much older. Roses are land plants, not aquatic plants, land plants evolved after land animals, or flying ones, forget the precise order off hand.
If these are third grade questions, you shouldn't have trouble.

Are algae older than land animals?

If plants came after land animals, how long after? What did animals eat before the plants appeared?

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#28
Jun 20, 2012
 
ChicBowdrie wrote:
<quoted text>
If these are third grade questions, you shouldn't have trouble.
Are algae older than land animals?
If plants came after land animals, how long after? What did animals eat before the plants appeared?
Stop bearing false witness. I stated land plants specifically, rose is a land plant, not a marine plant. Marine life came before everything, that is where life started.
Maccoat

Erie, PA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#29
Jun 20, 2012
 
ChicBowdrie wrote:
<quoted text>
First, you said eggs and chickens evolved at the same time. Now, eggs don't evolve. How did eggs first appear?
From early fish
Maccoat

Erie, PA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#30
Jun 20, 2012
 
ChicBowdrie wrote:
<quoted text>
Eaten by who? There are no animals yet.
Dafuq, the rose is an angiosperm. The top of the plants and the last ones to evolve. By the time they appear there were dinosaurs
Maccoat

Erie, PA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#31
Jun 20, 2012
 
ChicBowdrie wrote:
<quoted text>
Why? Where did the O2 come from that the animals breathed? And what did they eat?
O2 came from primordial bacterial colonies like stromatolites.
Maccoat

Erie, PA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#32
Jun 20, 2012
 
ChicBowdrie wrote:
<quoted text>
<quoted text>
Whether it's a watch, a rose, or an egg, I see a master designer behind it. How do you see it?
Why do I have autism then? Isnt the all perfect lord would have his all perfect code (DNA) immune to genetic mutations like the one that cause Ausberers?
Maccoat

Erie, PA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#33
Jun 20, 2012
 
ChicBowdrie wrote:
<quoted text>
Please bear with me, I'm more of a physical science guy. I watched some Land Before Time movies though. lol
Algae may be older than land animals, but you're not sure? Why? And how long did land animals go hungry before the land plants evolved?
There are canovores out there.
Maccoat

Erie, PA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#34
Jun 20, 2012
 
ChicBowdrie wrote:
<quoted text>
Name anything. An atom, a black hole, a water molecule at 4 deg C. How did it get there? I think that's more difficult to understand than how a neanderthal evolved into a homo sapien
Atom - when proton and electron meets
Black Hole - when a star that is at least 10x solar mass runs out of energy
Water - H2 meets O and form an awkward threesome

Ps. Neaterthals didn't evolve into us, instead we were more adapted and they died off
ChicBowdrie

Bethlehem, PA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#35
Jun 20, 2012
 
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
The first life was bacterial and was probably poisoned by free O2 (as many bacteria are today). About 2 billion years ago, the ability to process glucose all the way to CO2 and H2O developed, which produced free O2 as a by-product. At that point, we see the red band iron formations, which were formed when the oxygen level became high enough to precipitate the iron ores. It was only later that animals developed.
In earlier comments, you asserted the simplicity of a watch suggests intelligence, but the complexity of a propogating plant implies a natural process, one without intelligent intervention. Also you say Paley's watch analogy fails, because a watch is obviously intelligently inspired. Whereas knowing that nature propogates life, that living things change with time, and that the earth's chemical properties are known--you conclude that life is a natural process?

Are you not curious where nature comes from?

“Maccullochella macquariensis”

Since: May 08

Melbourne, Australia

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#36
Jun 20, 2012
 
ChicBowdrie wrote:
<quoted text>
In earlier comments, you asserted the simplicity of a watch suggests intelligence, but the complexity of a propogating plant implies a natural process, one without intelligent intervention. Also you say Paley's watch analogy fails, because a watch is obviously intelligently inspired. Whereas knowing that nature propogates life, that living things change with time, and that the earth's chemical properties are known--you conclude that life is a natural process?
Are you not curious where nature comes from?
==> Meaning content = nil
ChicBowdrie

Bethlehem, PA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#37
Jun 20, 2012
 
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
It's rather ironic that you can see how silly it is to think that the coke bottle is something divine yet you cannot see how that applies to natural phenomenon. Then you break into a simplified version of the Kalam argument which has been debunked by so many people, so many ties, it's redundant and old. Existence only proves existence./QUOTE]

You misunderstood. I do not think it is silly to consider a coke bottle divine. Idol worship was and probably still is prevalent in some cultures. The watch and the coke bottle are analogously similar. I don't understand how you can look at natural phenomenon and not consider it something other than a series of amazing coincidences. I never heard of the Kalam argument before, but existence of the universe doesn't explain its evolution. What does?

[QUOTE who="KittenKoder"]
Now answer the watch question, exactly how do you know the watch was made by human hands?/QUOTE]

I never assumed the watch was made by human hands. The watch is an analogy. Somebody walking along, found a watch on the ground, and asked "how could this come to be?" The conclusion is not simply that the watch must be man-made. Some exploration into the complexity of the device is assumed for the discover to recognize the creative purpose, design, and construction. The main point of the analogy is to realize how much more complex nature is and, therefore, how much more awesome its creator must be.

[QUOTE who="KittenKoder"]
The answer to this question explains a lot about how science works, but most importantly, it shows that religion inserts an unreasonable presupposition that leads to no answers.
If you think there is a lesson about how science works in assuming the watch is man-made, please explain it. Religion is faith and faith is confidence in what we believe, but cannot prove. It doesn't mean we don't try.

The sperm finds the egg. How does it know to do that?

“Maccullochella macquariensis”

Since: May 08

Melbourne, Australia

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#38
Jun 21, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

ChicBowdrie wrote:
<quoted text>
If you think there is a lesson about how science works in assuming the watch is man-made, please explain it. Religion is faith and faith is confidence in what we believe, but cannot prove. It doesn't mean we don't try.
The sperm finds the egg. How does it know to do that?
The overwhelming majority of sperm do not, in fact, find an egg. The sperm do not know how to do anything. They simply swim in the very limitied number of directions available (at least in mammals). It is not suprising that out of the millions and millions of sperm a few do manage to find an egg. Of course in other animals it can be a lot more wasteful of sperm. Coral for example eject countless billions of sperm cells so that a vanishingly tiny proportion might find egg cells to fertilise.

That is how matural things often work. It may not be particularly efficient, but it does not have to be. It only has to work well enough.

You are making the classic error of athropomorphising the process - your question is a dead give away. Maybe you need to study a bit of biology so that you don't make such basic mistakes in the future.

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#39
Jun 21, 2012
 
ChicBowdrie wrote:
<quoted text>
If you think there is a lesson about how science works in assuming the watch is man-made, please explain it. Religion is faith and faith is confidence in what we believe, but cannot prove. It doesn't mean we don't try.
The sperm finds the egg. How does it know to do that?
The sperm thing requires you actually studying a bunch of biology.

Now, when you find a watch on the ground, how do you know it is made by human hands?

You are dodging the question, likely because there is no linguine to answer it with. Use your own words.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#40
Jun 21, 2012
 
ChicBowdrie wrote:
<quoted text>
In earlier comments, you asserted the simplicity of a watch suggests intelligence, but the complexity of a propogating plant implies a natural process, one without intelligent intervention. Also you say Paley's watch analogy fails, because a watch is obviously intelligently inspired. Whereas knowing that nature propogates life, that living things change with time, and that the earth's chemical properties are known--you conclude that life is a natural process?
Yes.
Are you not curious where nature comes from?
I'm not even sure that is a meaningful question. To 'come from' implies something else in existence. But if 'nature', i.e. the u niverse is all that exists, then that simply isn't the case. Also,'coming from' implies that time is active. Again, time is a *natural* process, you already must have nature to have time. Again, a problem with the question.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 21 - 40 of69
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

10 Users are viewing the Evolution Debate Forum right now

Search the Evolution Debate Forum:
Topic Updated Last By Comments
It's the Darwin crowd that lacks the facts in e... (Mar '09) 48 min DanFromSmithville 127,185
god is not real!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (Jun '06) 1 hr Bob of Quantum-Faith 13,494
Should evolution be taught in high school? (Feb '08) 2 hr Dogen 168,583
Evolution vs. Creation (Jul '11) 5 hr The Dude 106,046
Kevin Wingate: ID should be included in science... Apr 17 llDayo 5
Science News (Sep '13) Apr 17 Ricky F 2,671
Science News NOT related to evolution (Jul '09) Apr 16 MikeF 1,236
•••
•••
•••
•••