tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6274381712003139086.post9019913508670654134..comments2024-03-19T04:19:18.871-05:00Comments on Atheism Analyzed: Evolution, Part 3Unknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6274381712003139086.post-83865374774978606692015-06-21T06:51:12.223-05:002015-06-21T06:51:12.223-05:00"Deterministic complexity" is an interes..."Deterministic complexity" is an interesting term. And that's right, it would produce only random, unintelligible, non-semantic, non-algorithmic, code-free sets. That's completely due to the random positioning/momentum of electrons at the time that the initial conditions are determined. With random initial conditions, the consequence of any forcing function would produce random results the next moment (one planck time?) later.<br /><br />Edward Feser writes that some materialists claim that reality might always devolve to a future physics, if not to the present physics. He points out that a future physics might actually find that non-material causation is a requirement of the new physics, thereby invalidating current materialist reductionism. Materialism is always a Just So Story which can be overcome easily with different, better Just So Stories. What Materialists don't have, and cannot have, is material evidence which proves their Materialist claims in a material, empirical fashion, providing objective justification for their belief system - which is necessarily blind ideology.Stanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15754447145433452423noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6274381712003139086.post-92175881871899616212015-06-21T04:02:54.847-05:002015-06-21T04:02:54.847-05:00Thanks for the elucidation.
Deterministic Complex...Thanks for the elucidation.<br /><br />Deterministic Complexity is an oxymoron,since determinism requires specific particles to produce a specific effect/event.Given the exact state of prior affairs,it will always produce the exact same results.Complexity on the other hand is random and requires decoding before it can pass as intelligible information.Unfortunately,since Materialists have pigeon-holed complexity as a fixed state,it is therefore in a perpetual state of unintelligibility.Yet life as we know it is fundamentally rational and intelligent,contradicting the Materialist's conclusion.Phoenixhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02173422646774264502noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6274381712003139086.post-81303233534622004982015-06-20T11:09:05.911-05:002015-06-20T11:09:05.911-05:00Complexity does not arise very far in deterministi...Complexity does not arise very far in deterministic nature. Kimura's unselectablity has show that entropy prevents it. And, it cannot be shown that semantic complexity arises at all. It is not even possible to produce semantic RNA from simple atoms and forcing functions <i>in the lab with intelligent direction and all the proper conditions</i>. Szostak abandoned trying to get RNA to exist and replicate, after decades of trying with his team, and he is now "searching for a simpler molecule" to get it to replicate. <br /><br />Science, mathematics, reality and common sense are all against the "complexity" argument.<br /><br />In fact, arguing "life arises from complexity" is an argument from ignorance, being with zero support from any quarter, and necessitated purely by the intellectual lock-down of Materialist diktat which limits the zone of investigation ideologically.Stanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15754447145433452423noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6274381712003139086.post-5496810578708413352015-06-20T10:35:23.519-05:002015-06-20T10:35:23.519-05:00"Complexity means life" is a fairy tale ..."Complexity means life" is a fairy tale meant for support of Materialism and Atheism. This Materialist/Atheist fairy tale is a god replacement (source of origin) which has no evidence, is not based on observation (not inductively known), cannot be deduced from first principles, cannot be used to develop an hypothesis from general rules produced by induction (is not testable), so it is not falsifiable, and is not ever capable of generating knowledge of objective fact. So it is a religious proposition, having passed all the intellectual requirements for a religion. But it is not just any religion, it is the false story religion, made up to combat actual religions.<br /><br />There is a difference between complexity and order, and between order and life. The difference is this: complexity includes both randomness and unreducible semantic information. A billion bit <i>random</i> chain is complex, as is a billion bit <i>semantic</i> chain. Order is generally simple and is reducible to a suitable algorithm. Neither randomness nor semantic information is reducible to an algorithm.<br /><br />Life - cellular life, probably includng the first cell - requires a specific type of complexity: (a) semantic information (b) which is useful (teleological), (c) simultaneously available in (d) the thousands of different useful, semantic, feedback communication systems, which (e) all (or most) contain <i>separate semantic languages</i> understood by two or more functional entities through dedicated, noiseless communication channels and which (f) which are animated by <i>directed forces</i> which are not the deterministic four forces, and which (g) perform all the separate necessary functions for anentropic life, including the timed functions of extra complexity such as perfect separation during mitosis.<br /><br />Also included is the necessity for the prior creation of a containing membrane with the special features of allowing nutrient passage one-way and effluent passage the other way, while maintaining the necessary and sufficient contents within the cell for all the cycles necessary to life, including the DNA/RNA/RNA polymerase (plus many many other complex enzymes necessary for reproduction of DNA, RNA and the enzymes (a self contained cycle of necessity, where all the components must exist prior to the ability to create any of the components). And containing the metabolic cycle and components, which are necessary prior to any metabolism, as well.<br /><br />This sort of listing of initial complexity can go on and on, and maybe a complete listing is necessary at some point (except that all of the functions are not yet even known, even for simple prokaryotes). <br /><br />There is one more salient issue: dead cells are complex, too. The same complexity exists in a dead cell as exists in a live cell. So what is missing in a dead cell? None of the components, except one: life.<br /><br />So complexity, even purposeful, teleological, semantic complexity is not sufficient to produce life, because life is separate from the complex material structure and can leave the complex material structure, rendering it dead.<br />Stanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15754447145433452423noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6274381712003139086.post-37035440904886187432015-06-20T04:18:44.729-05:002015-06-20T04:18:44.729-05:00Oh boy,I will have to save this article and re-rea...Oh boy,I will have to save this article and re-read it several more times.<br /><br />Quick question Stan and perhaps I missed it in the article.Are there any examples of inanimate objects which have more complexity than a any living organisms? <br />The typical Atheist claim is that complexity produces life.So if there is a more complex object than a cell or living organism then that theory is immediately falsified.It also seems that complexity is a very subjective concept.What may seem complex to one is simple to another.For example Aquinas thought God was the most simple being yet most Atheists will reject God because he is too complex to comprehend.Phoenixhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02173422646774264502noreply@blogger.com