Evolutionary Informatics and Evolutionary Design

OK.
How does this support Intelligent Design?
Eerr.. what are you doing here referring to Intelligent Design. I don't recall Intelligent Design being discussed. In fact, the OP says it quite clearly:


Thus, the aim of this thread is to:
1) Discuss evolutionary dynamics and fitness landscapes and how it is related to nature and other evolutionary algorithms.
2) See if there are any parallels between the two examples of how evolutionary informatics are applied in molecular biology.
3) How evolutionary dynamics and evolutionary design principles can be applied to real world problems.
 
Eerr.. what are you doing here referring to Intelligent Design. I don't recall Intelligent Design being discussed. In fact, the OP says it quite clearly:


Thus, the aim of this thread is to:
1) Discuss evolutionary dynamics and fitness landscapes and how it is related to nature and other evolutionary algorithms.
2) See if there are any parallels between the two examples of how evolutionary informatics are applied in molecular biology.
3) How evolutionary dynamics and evolutionary design principles can be applied to real world problems.

No, please don't misunderstand!
Everyone knows that you subscribe to ID.
I would like to know how this fits in with the idea of ID.
 
Phrony, seeing as this thread has most likely degenerated beyond the point of recovery - what is your stance on the YEC 6,000-year-old Earth brigade.
I don't find it necessary to believe in a young earth in order to believe in God and Christianity. If a person comes from a Young Earth perspective and does research that benefits mankind, I am not against that. Just different paradigms. Is it science. No. Can it lead to productive scientific insights? Why not?

Believing Scripture but Playing by Science’s Rules
 
No, please don't misunderstand!
Everyone knows that you subscribe to ID.
I would like to know how this fits in with the idea of ID.
Define this "ID" I ascribe to... What is this postion that everyone apparently knows I ascribe to? The only aim of this thread is to:

1) Discuss evolutionary dynamics and fitness landscapes and how it is related to nature and other evolutionary algorithms.
2) See if there are any parallels between the two examples of how evolutionary informatics are applied in molecular biology.
3) How evolutionary dynamics and evolutionary design principles can be applied to real world problems.
 
I don't find it necessary to believe in a young earth in order to believe in God and Christianity. If a person comes from a Young Earth perspective and does research that benefits mankind, I am not against that. Just different paradigms. Is it science. No. Can it lead to productive scientific insights? Why not?

Believing Scripture but Playing by Science’s Rules

Fair enough, and thanks for the answer - it has no bearing on this thread, or any other; I was merely interested to hear your own point of view. I do question the validity of the last portion of your statement, as any such insights would be founded upon fallacious assumption (purely w.r.t. to a young Earth) but I suspect that would veer towards arguing semantics.

Where people adhere to the concept of a young Earth, but are involved in research outside of that specific tenant, so be it. It takes all sorts, after all - just not all sorts trying to do all things, and by implication attempting to sway others to an empirically false frame of reference. ;)

EDIT

To add - I know you highly value keeping discussion within a thread to that premise initially stated in the opening post. It's not going to work in this one... that ship has sailed. You might as well let your hair down & go with the flow.
 
Last edited:
Define this "ID" I ascribe to... What is this postion that everyone apparently knows I ascribe to? The only aim of this thread is to:

1) Discuss evolutionary dynamics and fitness landscapes and how it is related to nature and other evolutionary algorithms.
2) See if there are any parallels between the two examples of how evolutionary informatics are applied in molecular biology.
3) How evolutionary dynamics and evolutionary design principles can be applied to real world problems.

Then what do you ascribe to?
 
Then what do you ascribe to?
I would actually like to know what you mean by "Everyone knows that you subscribe to ID."

Be specific now please because I am interested. BTW, what I ascribe to has nothing to do with this thread as you know:

1) Discuss evolutionary dynamics and fitness landscapes and how it is related to nature and other evolutionary algorithms.
2) See if there are any parallels between the two examples of how evolutionary informatics are applied in molecular biology.
3) How evolutionary dynamics and evolutionary design principles can be applied to real world problems.

So in a new thread, could you please elaborate what you when you say: "Everyone knows that you subscribe to ID."
 
Last edited:
I would actually like to know what you mean by "Everyone knows that you subscribe to ID."

Be specific now because I am interested. BTW, what I ascribe to has nothing to do with this thread as you know:

1) Discuss evolutionary dynamics and fitness landscapes and how it is related to nature and other evolutionary algorithms.
2) See if there are any parallels between the two examples of how evolutionary informatics are applied in molecular biology.
3) How evolutionary dynamics and evolutionary design principles can be applied to real world problems.

So in a new thread, could you please elaborate what you when you say: "Everyone knows that you subscribe to ID."

Ok, let me rephrase.
I completely spoke out of turn. I apologise.

I understand from your posts that you ascribe to Intelligent Design.
This is what I understand from Intelligent Design:
It is the concept that everything has an intelligent cause and did not occur through a random occurence.

I understand that you ascribe to ID purely from information I gleaned from your posts in the PD and Science subforums.

I understand that what we do is defined by what we think.
So, it can be accepted that a thread we start will have be based on what we think.

You are more than welcome to correct me.
 
Ok, let me rephrase.
I completely spoke out of turn. I apologise.

I understand from your posts that you ascribe to Intelligent Design.
This is what I understand from Intelligent Design:
It is the concept that everything has an intelligent cause and did not occur through a random occurence.
I think it is more accurate to say that I believe that everything has a cause. Hence discussing evolutionary change and the causes thereof, amongst other things.
 
1) Discuss evolutionary dynamics and fitness landscapes and how it is related to nature and other evolutionary algorithms.
2) See if there are any parallels between the two examples of how evolutionary informatics are applied in molecular biology.
3) How evolutionary dynamics and evolutionary design principles can be applied to real world problems.

There is no evolutionary "design" per se, so claiming there to be, in the science section, is just evidence of your again punting your ID twaddle. This thread appears to be based around one of the ID wedges put up by William Dumbski - compare the thread title with:

http://www.uncommondescent.com/inte...lligent-design-and-not-as-theistic-evolution/

Don't let the "innocence" of Phroners fool you. The thread reeks of ID.

:eek:
 
Pfff, coming from MyBB's number one anti-scientific materialist. What is your motto again? Oh ya, "sh|t happens". If a compound is not designed as a result of a designed evolutionary algorithm being employed by a scientist, what is it then? Did "sh|t just happen"? Is it just there because of no design? What exactly is designed in this world and what is not? Where do you draw the line rwenzori? Why don't you tell people everything is just "sh|t that happens", including science and reasoning? You seem unwilling. Why old chap? Scared people might realize just how magnificently anti-scientific and anti-intellectual you are?
 
Pfff, coming from MyBB's number one anti-scientific materialist. What is your motto again? Oh ya, "sh|t happens". If a compound is not designed as a result of a designed evolutionary algorithm being employed by a scientist, what is it then? Did "sh|t just happen"? Is it just there because of no design? What exactly is designed in this world and what is not? Where do you draw the line rwenzori? Why don't you tell people everything is just "sh|t that happens", including science and reasoning? You seem unwilling. Why old chap? Scared people might realize just how magnificently anti-scientific and anti-intellectual you are?

More Junk Posting - your usual insults as a response when your ID agenda is exposed.

Anyway, I found this great quote for you by Mintaka over at the Skeptics forum:

There is no more point to life than there is a point to sodium chloride.

Good one, hey??
:D:p
 
More Junk Posting - your usual insults as a response when your ID agenda is exposed.
So, pointing out your anti-scientific materialistic musings is an insult to you? Erm, I think you need to answer a few question old chopples.
1) If a compound is not designed as a result of a designed evolutionary algorithm being employed by a scientist, what is it then? Did "sh|t just happen"? Is it just there because of no design?

2) What exactly is designed in this world and what is not? Where do you draw the line rwenzori?

3) Why don't you tell people everything is just "sh|t that happens", including science and reasoning? You seem unwilling. Why old chap? Scared people might realize just how magnificently anti-scientific and anti-intellectual you are?


Anyway, I found this great quote for you by Mintaka over at the Skeptics forum:



Good one, hey??
:D:p
Summarizes the beliefs of some pretty well. Sad though.
 
OK, wopples.

1) If a compound is not designed as a result of a designed evolutionary algorithm being employed by a scientist, what is it then? Did "sh|t just happen"? Is it just there because of no design?

There are no "designed" evolutionary algorithms. Don't try to equivocate. The phrase "evolutionary design principles" that you use NOT samey-samey "human applying what is found in nature" to real-world issues.

2) What exactly is designed in this world and what is not? Where do you draw the line rwenzori?

New things that are constructed or conceived, often for a purpose but not necessarily so, by a conscious mind.

3) Why don't you tell people everything is just "sh|t that happens", including science and reasoning? You seem unwilling. Why old chap? Scared people might realize just how magnificently anti-scientific and anti-intellectual you are?

Not scared at all. Ultimately it is just "sh|t" that happens. But while we are here we can use science and reason to understand our universe if we so wish. A lot of really amazing "sh|t" happens. What part of "There is no more point to life than there is a point to sodium chloride." did you not get?

Summarizes the beliefs of some pretty well. Sad though.

Not really. Not as sad as having to imagine teddybears in the sky who love and comfort you LOL! Delusions really are sad.
 
There are no "designed" evolutionary algorithms. Don't try to equivocate. The phrase "evolutionary design principles" that you use NOT samey-samey "human applying what is found in nature" to real-world issues.
There are no "designed" evolutionary algorithms? Oh really. I think you should walk into a bioinformatics center and say that. I am afraid you will be laughed at.

New things that are constructed or conceived, often for a purpose but not necessarily so, by a conscious mind.
Conscious mind? I am actually waiting for you to come up with scientific evidence that you have a mind. Still nothing there unless demonstrated or proven old chopples.

Not scared at all. Ultimately it is just "sh|t" that happens. But while we are here we can use science and reason to understand our universe if we so wish. A lot of really amazing "sh|t" happens. What part of "There is no more point to life than there is a point to sodium chloride." did you not get?
Thank you for showing everyone how completely and utterly anti-scientific and anti-intellectual you are. That there are actually people out there that hold such beliefs and think it is even remotely intellectual is mind-boggling.


Not really. Not as sad as having to imagine teddybears in the sky who love and comfort you LOL! Delusions really are sad.
Bad generalizations are even sadder.
 
Last edited:
There are no "designed" evolutionary algorithms? Oh really. I think you should walk into a bioinformatics center and say that. I am afraid you will be laughed at.

<snip twaddle>

OK show me in nature what has been designed as opposed to having evolved ( excluding the activities of man and some higher-order mammals )?

Simple one for you - ain't I kind?

PS, Please name the "designer".
 
From which tree did you fall? First you say there are no "designed" evolutionary algorithms, now you are asking me what is designed? Wow man, try and be coherent for a change or are you drunk again?
 
From which tree did you fall? First you say there are no "designed" evolutionary algorithms, now you are asking me what is designed? Wow man, try and be coherent for a change or are you drunk again?

What part did you not understand. Or has your brain closed down for the night? I know you struggle with English, but do try to keep up here.

For the benefit of others, about Bioinformatics:

Bioinformatics is the application of information technology to the field of molecular biology. The term bioinformatics was coined by Paulien Hogeweg in 1979 for the study of informatic processes in biotic systems. Bioinformatics now entails the creation and advancement of databases, algorithms, computational and statistical techniques, and theory to solve formal and practical problems arising from the management and analysis of biological data. Over the past few decades rapid developments in genomic and other molecular research technologies and developments in information technologies have combined to produce a tremendous amount of information related to molecular biology. It is the name given to these mathematical and computing approaches used to glean understanding of biological processes. Common activities in bioinformatics include mapping and analyzing DNA and protein sequences, aligning different DNA and protein sequences to compare them and creating and viewing 3-D models of protein structures.

The primary goal of bioinformatics is to increase our understanding of biological processes. What sets it apart from other approaches, however, is its focus on developing and applying computationally intensive techniques (e.g., pattern recognition, data mining, machine learning algorithms, and visualization) to achieve this goal. Major research efforts in the field include sequence alignment, gene finding, genome assembly, protein structure alignment, protein structure prediction, prediction of gene expression and protein-protein interactions, genome-wide association studies and the modeling of evolution.

I must have missed the bit about "detect design in nature".
:eek:
 
I think you missed the part where bioinformaticists design evolutionary algorithms and then ignorantly proceeding to claim "there are no "designed" evolutionary algorithms".
 
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X