Posted: Jul 30, 2010 10:42 pm
by Calilasseia
More excrement is flowing ...

Robert Byers wrote:one last time about this rock thing.


Let's see what more drivel is going to be erected here shall we?

Robert Byers wrote:Cali was trying to say that real rocks and man made rocks looking the same means intelligence can't be observed in nature.


No, Byers, I did NOT say that, and I'll thank you NOT to put words in my mouth.

What I was actually saying, if you bothered to pay attention thereto, was that detection of instances of "design" is a FAR FROM TRIVIAL EXERCISE. It requires painstaking attention to detail and careful analysis, as opposed to blithely asserting that something is "designed" because retarded Bronze Age mythology says so. Those rocks illustrate this principle in action, in case you hadn't worked this out. Do pay attention when people are trying to teach you important lessons about REALITY, Byers.

Robert Byers wrote:The rock thing fails.


No it doesn't Byers, because I have more than amply demonstrated that people who erect fatuous assertions about "design", on the basis of nothing more than uncritical acceptance of retarded mythological bullshit, are unable to provide proper substantive reasons for their assertions when challenged. You were unable to pick out of that pile of rocks the one rock that has been shaped by human hand, which makes a mockery of any assertion you care to erect that so-called "design" is "obvious". The only failure on display here, Byers, is yours.

Robert Byers wrote:A person making the rock shape is using processes of insight. Intelligence.


And once again, what RIGOROUS means do you have of detecting this, Byers? Here's a clue: blind assertions that an entity is "designed" because of wishful thinking about an imaginary magic man in the sky don't count as a rigorous means of detection.

Robert Byers wrote:The rock made naturally is also from intelligent processes.


HA HA HA HA HA HA!

This is a joke, Byers. What "intelligence" does fucking wind have?

Robert Byers wrote:Its not a natural thing in space but a unique thing on earth or where forces are at work.


Scientifically illiterate gibberish.

Byers, forces are at work all over the universe. Gravity being one of them. Indeed, one of the reasons we are able to tell the difference between Moon rocks and rocks from Earth, is because rocks on the Moon are subject to space weathering, which involves cosmic ray spallation within the rock matrix, and results in the production of, amongst other materials, nanophase iron, which is almost never found naturally on Earth, but which can be produced in the laboratory by replicating lunar conditions. There are forces at work on the surfaces of the Jovian moons that shape those surfaces, in the case of Io, these forces involve tidal heating from Jupiter's gravitational pull, which is the reason why Io's interior is hot enough to be liquid, and the reason why Io has active volcanoes.

Try learning some basic science before posting nonsense of the above sort in the future.

Robert Byers wrote:Its from intelligent ideas.


BOLLOCKS. What "intelligence" is present in wind, Byers, when it erodes rocks?

What "intelligence" is present in water, Byers, when it erodes rocks?

What "intelligence" is present in molten lava when it flows out of a volcano?

Learn to distinguish between natural processes and our understanding of those processes, which are two different entities.

:picard:

Robert Byers wrote:Its not chance.


Byers, you have been TOLD REPEATEDLY that scientists do NOT postulate that entities observed in the real world are the product of "chance", but the product of TESTABLE NATURAL PROCESSES. Learn this lesson quickly, and don't post the "chance" canard ever again.

Robert Byers wrote:Its not evolution.


Nobody here claimed that biological evolution produced rocks, Byers. This is another of your duplicitous apologetic fabrications. What people here DO say, Byers, if you pay attention to them, is that TESTABLE NATURAL PROCESSES THAT ARE COMPREHENSIBLE BY HUMAN MINDS are responsible. Learn this lesson.

Robert Byers wrote:If the processes are at work the rocks could only look this way.


Someone obviously knows nothing about the Navier-Stokes Equations or chaotic dynamic processes. And since I studied both of these at university, Byers, it isn't me.

Robert Byers wrote:Nature looks intelligent as opposed to what things look like without laws etc.


No, Byers, it looks ordered, which is something different. Crystals don't require any "intelligence" to form them, all they require is electrostatic forces operating on atoms precipitating out of solution, but they produce regular geometric shapes when they precipitate out of solution under the influence of those electrostatic forces.

Robert Byers wrote:All things in nature are intelligent where processes are at work.


Bullshit, Byers, bullshit.

Once again ...

What "intelligence" is present in wind, Byers, when it erodes rocks?

What "intelligence" is present in water, Byers, when it erodes rocks?

What "intelligence" is present in molten lava when it flows out of a volcano?

Robert Byers wrote:so the rock thing fails because it presumes natures rock shaping is chance or evolutionish.


Bollocks, Byers. This is another of those LIES you keep posting.

Once again, what part of "scientists postulate that TESTABLE NATURAL PROCESSES are responsible" do you not understand?

And what part of "no one postulates that biological evolution produced rocks" do you ALSO not understand?

Learn some real science, Byers, and stop posting palsied, droolingly encephalitic apologetic excrement.