EVOLUTION is FALSIFIED!!!!

[Subduction Zone]

Meaningless. Intellen appears to be a made up term without definition or supporting evidence. It appears to indicate that cells are independently intelligent and are incapable of being effected by anything other than another intelligence.
1. If biological cell is intelligently designed (intellen), then, cell is bound to function with intelligence.

You post quite a bit of nonsense in every single post that you make. So I am going to try to break this down and just deal with a very small part of your post.

To use a term you have to be able to properly define it. And explain how you measure it. What do you even mean by "intelligence"? You do not appear to have any evidence for it, merely statements. What is your evidence for this intelligence? How do you measure or observe a cell "acting with intelligence"?

If you cannot answer these questions you have not disproved anything.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Meaningless. Intellen appears to be a made up term without definition or supporting evidence. It appears to indicate that cells are independently intelligent and are incapable of being effected by anything other than another intelligence.
1. If biological cell is intelligently designed (intellen), then, cell is bound to function with intelligence.

A tautology.

What other basis of reality is there than reality?
No idea what this means. Isn't the scope of reality, simply reality?

2. Reality is based on testable basis that could only be found on reality. ToE has none of it..

The theory of evolution is based on the evidence of reality, so you are incorrect.

Your claims are based on what you want to believe. Without evidence they can be dismissed as unrealistic.

Are you saying that biology isn't fully in reality?
3. No, but Evolution is not broad/wide/full in scope when explaining reality. For example, if biological cell is intellen, then, the function of cell will always follow intelligent process, thus, Natural Selection is impossible

The theory of evolution is not a theory of cell origin or function. It isn't supposed to explain cell origin or function. That is not a failure. It is a rational scope of the theory.

Even if cells were intelligently designed, there is no reason to conclude that cells will always follow intelligent processes.

Natural selection is supported by evidence, so it cannot be impossible.

There is no evidence that the change in the allele frequency and change in the average population phenotype is driven by anything other than natural mechanisms.

4. Because scientists of ToE do not know the differences between natural processes and intelligent processes.

In regards to the origin of life, or claims of guidance in biological processes, no one knows the difference. There is no evidence revealing the actions of intelligence in natural processes.

Scientists are honest and do not report on observations and connections they do not or cannot make.

There is no evidence that an intelligent agent is operating to effect any changes. Claiming an intelligent agent requires evidence of that intelligent agent and the actions of an intelligent agent.
5. Because scientists of ToE do not know the differences between natural processes and intelligent processes.

In regards to the origin of life, or claims of guidance in biological processes, no one knows the difference. There is no evidence revealing the actions of intelligence in natural processes.

Scientists are honest and do not report on observations and connections they do not or cannot make.

We have evidence for plant and animal breeding by people. But only natural explanations for changes from other than people.
6. Did people originate or make the biological cell that do the changing in biological world? If no, then, when you use "natural explanation", you must also include the originator of biological cell, since human did not make cell

There is no evidence that people created life or the first cells. If an originator is to be included in the origin of life, there must be evidence for that originator. No one has produced this evidence.

Is scenarios supposed to mean theories? It is difficult to tell the meaning of a lot of what you have written pretty much everywhere.
The theory of evolution isn't a theory of how to falsify theories, so I am not surprised that it says nothing about that. Are you claiming to have a competing theory for the theory of evolution? I would love to see it and the evidence for it.
7. If natural (non-intelligence) is one scenario as basis of ToE, then, intelligence is another scenario. Did scientists of ToE test both before concluding natural (non-intelligence)?

What would they test to show intelligence? No scientist has observed intelligence or the actions of intelligence in natural processes.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Meaningless. Intellen appears to be a made up term without definition or supporting evidence. It appears to indicate that cells are independently intelligent and are incapable of being effected by anything other than another intelligence.
1. If biological cell is intelligently designed (intellen), then, cell is bound to function with intelligence.

What other basis of reality is there than reality?
No idea what this means. Isn't the scope of reality, simply reality?
2. Reality is based on testable basis that could only be found on reality. ToE has none of it..

Are you saying that biology isn't fully in reality?
3. No, but Evolution is not broad/wide/full in scope when explaining reality. For example, if biological cell is intellen, then, the function of cell will always follow intelligent process, thus, Natural Selection is impossible

There is no evidence that the change in the allele frequency and change in the average population phenotype is driven by anything other than natural mechanisms.
4. Because scientists of ToE do not know the differences between natural processes and intelligent processes.


There is no evidence that an intelligent agent is operating to effect any changes. Claiming an intelligent agent requires evidence of that intelligent agent and the actions of an intelligent agent.
5. Because scientists of ToE do not know the differences between natural processes and intelligent processes.

We have evidence for plant and animal breeding by people. But only natural explanations for changes from other than people.
6. Did people originate or make the biological cell that do the changing in biological world? If no, then, when you use "natural explanation", you must also include the originator of biological cell, since human did not make cell

Is scenarios supposed to mean theories? It is difficult to tell the meaning of a lot of what you have written pretty much everywhere.
The theory of evolution isn't a theory of how to falsify theories, so I am not surprised that it says nothing about that. Are you claiming to have a competing theory for the theory of evolution? I would love to see it and the evidence for it.
7. If natural (non-intelligence) is one scenario as basis of ToE, then, intelligence is another scenario. Did scientists of ToE test both before concluding natural (non-intelligence)?

Are you aware that the surface intent of the Intelligent Design movement is to show or conclude the actions of a designer by finding evidence for that in nature? Irreducible complexity was an attempt to do so and at least Behe tried to argue that coherently with what he thought was evidence showing that. Irreducible complexity did not fail because Darwin used the word complexity. It failed because it is logically impossible to test all iterations of complex processes and structures to show that no functional less complex structure or process could arise naturally. Behe's examples were shown to have natural, functional precursors with reduced complexity.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Bacon and eggs = eggs + bacon + bacon

That's brilliant. I am convinced.

 

[John53]

There are success in natural process, just once success, there are many successes in intelligence... thus, experiment is needed to show which is correct.

How does the egg experiment show many successes?

Natural process.... I finally worked this out last night because you slipped up in one of your videos and used a common term instead of one of your made up words. Would I be correct in saying that you claim only humans exhibit intelligence? Animals only have instinct?

 

[John53]

That's brilliant. I am convinced.

I call it the new breakfast <nb> and I discovered this discovery of new breakfast <nb>.

 

[rational experiences]

When just human men thinking posing themes says I believe. Then he did.

He looked he observed he saw he compared.

Natural owned what he looked at. Natural was not changing before his eyes.

So as just another human I ask why you want to be correct about a theme.

The topic you chose as a man.
The thoughts themed as a man.
Comparing as the man.

His idea I will know and understand how he did it.

How who as he did it?

My thoughts that posed all the changes as self imposed man statuses. My words my meaning's my thesis all identified thoughts. Of a man.

Said talking to himself.

Is the total proposal.

Then man's ego who wants to know all things said he must.

So he pretends he knows how a big bang blasted yet he studies what a sun body does in its natural conditions. Themed why the sun blasts.

Never knowing the burning as consciousness as identity does not exist. In burning.

Is about how much advice he wont ever understand.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

I call it the new breakfast <nb> and I discovered this discovery of new breakfast <nb>.

Tell me more of your groundbreaking and world shaking discoveries. Anything in the omelet sciences?

 

[John53]

Tell me more of your groundbreaking and world shaking discoveries. Anything in the omelet sciences?

Of course, Omelette Theory <OT>. That's the title of my 28th science book. It's very simple to understand but nobody understands new breakfast <nb> other than me and a few hobbits so I can't tell you.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Of course, Omelette Theory <OT>. That's the title of my 28th science book. It's very simple to understand but nobody understands new breakfast <nb> other than me and a few hobbits so I can't tell you.

Do you have a slide?

 

[MrIntelligentDesign]

How does the egg experiment show many successes?

Natural process.... I finally worked this out last night because you slipped up in one of your videos and used a common term instead of one of your made up words. Would I be correct in saying that you claim only humans exhibit intelligence? Animals only have instinct?

I had already given you the link for your research, but if you do not want it, then, we cannot discuss..

EVOLUTION HAS BEEN FALSIFIED!


This thread is for falsification of Evolution. Please, do not derail it.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

I had already given you the link for your research, but if you do not want it, then, we cannot discuss..

EVOLUTION HAS BEEN FALSIFIED!


This thread is for falsification of Evolution. Please, do not derail it.

You claim that your goal is to share information with humanity, but when you are asked to explain that information, you do your best to avoid explanation?

 

[Dan From Smithville]

I had already given you the link for your research, but if you do not want it, then, we cannot discuss..

EVOLUTION HAS BEEN FALSIFIED!


This thread is for falsification of Evolution. Please, do not derail it.

I read his post and several others asking you to explain what you did and what it means. I did not see anything in his questions that I would consider derails the thread. In fact, those questions would clarify things. It seems to me, that failure to clarify, explain and answer clearly and directly questions put to you does more to derail the thread than a few egg jokes.

 

[MrIntelligentDesign]

I read his post and several others asking you to explain what you did and what it means. I did not see anything in his questions that I would consider derails the thread. In fact, those questions would clarify things. It seems to me, that failure to clarify, explain and answer clearly and directly questions put to you does more to derail the thread than a few egg jokes.

Did you see the sources of that topic in this article? Do you want me to give you the link again? All your questions about intelligence are there.

https://www.amazon.com/Intelligent-Design-Turning-Scientific-Upside-ebook/dp/B00HWUX22O

EVOLUTION HAS BEEN FALSIFIED!

 

[kaninchen]

https://www.amazon.com/Intelligent-Design-Turning-Scientific-Upside-ebook/dp/B00HWUX22O

Love the: "Almost incomprehensible, written by a semi-literate buffoon" review.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Did you see the sources of that topic in this article? Do you want me to give you the link again? All your questions about intelligence are there.

https://www.amazon.com/Intelligent-Design-Turning-Scientific-Upside-ebook/dp/B00HWUX22O

EVOLUTION HAS BEEN FALSIFIED!

I did not expect you were going to answer the questions with anything more than an offer to post more links to references that don't answer the questions. I have seen enough. Nothing I have seen so far indicates that you have falsified evolution or found some means to determine intelligence in nature. You can add me to the growing list of those that you are not convincing.

 

[MrIntelligentDesign]

Love the: "Almost incomprehensible, written by a semi-literate buffoon" review.

I do not even care the bad reviewer... I defeated him in a debate, he revenged by writing bad review...lol!

 

[MrIntelligentDesign]

I did not expect you were going to answer the questions with anything more than an offer to post more links to references that don't answer the questions. I have seen enough. Nothing I have seen so far indicates that you have falsified evolution or found some means to determine intelligence in nature. You can add me to the growing list of those that you are not convincing.

You had never seen anything

 

[kaninchen]

I do not even care the bad reviewer... I defeated him in a debate, he revenged by writing bad review...lol!

Your self-evident genius works every time then?

 

[John53]

I had already given you the link for your research, but if you do not want it, then, we cannot discuss..

EVOLUTION HAS BEEN FALSIFIED!


This thread is for falsification of Evolution. Please, do not derail it.

Told you a few times I read it. I'm trying to discuss it with you but you refuse. How about answering my questions on your work.