quote:

ORIGINAL: seeksfemslave
Had we been on a website in the early 19th century you would have been as sure that Newton was right as you are that Darwin is right.
In both cases you would be wrong.

quote:

ORIGINAL: luckydog1

Ok the first paragraph of your wikilink  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interpretation_of_quantum_mechanics

"
An interpretation of quantum mechanics is a statement which attempts to explain how quantum mechanics informs our understanding of nature. Although quantum mechanics has been tested extensively in very fine experiments, some believe the fundamentals of the theory are yet to be fully understood. There exist a number of contending schools of thought, differing over whether quantum mechanics can be understood to be deterministic, which elements of quantum mechanics can be considered "real," and other matters.
Perhaps you don't understand what "contending" means, but I think you do.  But this statement is diametrically opposed to your earlier claim,

quote:


Although today this question is of special interest to philosophers of physics, many physicists continue to show a strong interest in the subject.

quote:

"Your claims about QM are simply wrong. QM is definitely not deterministic."  

Nope, that is made up nonsense by you, and directly contradictred by your own link (in the first paragraph, no less).  Would that be a documented lie on your part?

quote:

No, you are trying to fall back to zensees nonsense.  Determinism, does not require the ability to actually do the math and get an accurate prediction.  Just that it could theoretically be done, if ALL the data was known and all interactions were fully understood.  Physics existed and was just as deterministic before living things experienced it or the math was invented to model it.  Or do you dispute that?

quote:

Actually your statements in other threads matter also, not just this one (which is wierd because in the Dover case, they didn't focus on what was on the table, but on previous statements).  So now you are not an Atheist, and want to teach kids that some sort of God may be responible for and driving evolution.  I must have missed you saying that.  My apologies.

quote:

But lets take this up a notch, how are you asserting that QM gives Free Will?  Things on the Macro scale do not exhibit Quantum properties.  Things are not appearing and dissapearing in front of us.  Explain how that could work, or just admit it was a buzzword you threw out, like you did with Chaos theory (hint what they said in the Dinosaur movie was not accurate.)  If you actually have a model that allows QM to create Free Will, I would love to examine it. 

quote:

Things are Deterministic (goverened by laws), Random (not controlled by antything), or goverened by a Will.  Is there another catagory?  I want an honest answer, not insults if you can manage it.

The strawman argument here is you trying to switch terms from Deterministic to Predictable (by us now at this time in our intellectuall development.).    Which is nonsense, and not what I have asserted at all.  Switch terms so you an argue a different point.  That is a strawman tactic.  We can't predict when a volcano will erupt, but we know it happens because the balance of forces within it, reach a "tipping point" and it goes off.  It doesn't happen for random reasons.  Why are you trying to introduce the butterfly effect, I haven't made any assertions on it.  Though the butterflys wings are one of the uncalcuable variables that affect the weather.

One really interesting thing is that is the way you are asserting QM works (which is not fully accpeted by real scientists, there are contending schools as per your own source), events can be changed in the real world by Quantum events(in our brains for example, not commonly accepted), and Quantumn events can be affected by observing(that seems to be true via experimentation,  provides a mechanism for Homeopathy to operate.  And gives a scientific method for "God" to act in our universe, with out resorting to "supernatural" means.  And a reason why Testing "Psychic" abilities never finds anything.  After all Observing it changes the outcome. 



I have asserted from the very get go, that there is the appearence of Random Behavior in systems, but in a Materialist/ Deterministic Universe, its just an illusion.  Every event is governed by Law.  Period.  It being to complicated to accuratly model is of no relvance at all.  Its a dynamic system and Not Chaotic at all.  So it radioactive decay.  For some reason the stuff decays at a set rate, not at a random rate.  Does it randomly allways do the same thing?  If it did not decay according to rules, it could not decay at all for 10,000 years or all decay at once.  Be useless for dating.  Thats not what the evidence shows. 

You make an assertion about QM, and I demonstrate that your own link agrees with me.  First paragraph even. 
I asked for a serious answer, and you say you don't like me.  I am just devestated.  You don't like me or the topic, but have gone on for a few pages, odd.  And leaving in a huff, ok.  What ever makes you happy.

quote:

Express what you think is responsible for all the diversity of life on the planet and provide your best evidence in favor of your belief. Lady Ellen asked you for this at least once before and was ignored but really isn't it about time you put up or shut up

quote:

ORIGINAL: seeksfemslave

DomKen asks Seeks to

quote:

Express what you think is responsible for all the diversity of life on the planet and provide your best evidence in favor of your belief. Lady Ellen asked you for this at least once before and was ignored but really isn't it about time you put up or shut up

First LadyE was not ignored ...I believe that to understand the origin of things, ie the first cause of things is impossible.
Such understanding transcends the reasoning capacity of human beings.
You want an explanation for the emergence of intricately organised finely balanced and self replicating manifestations  of energy from nothing at all. A bit of a problem I think.

Lots of scientists just dont go there and recognise that these problems are outside the scope of rational inquiry. Only those committed to Darwinism do otherwise. An example of their conceit IMO 
There can be no doubt  that you are a member of a Fundamentalist Faith based on tautological untestable mumbo jumbo.You just have not got the insight to realise that fact. 

quote:

If Natural Selection were presented as what it is, an intelligent guess and its major limitations, which have been exposed due to developments in bio chemistry, admitted, then I would have no problem at all.
When it is presented as established fact, which it is not, it needs to be opposd and exposed to the ridicule that should be the reward of all snake oil salesmen.