Emergent Complexity is this now a Law that would explain that simple objects would assemble themselves to form complex structures….if not. Then it is by faith that you believe that this process exists!
Not faith. Observation. Just look at swarming behavior, Conway's Game of Life, fractals, etc.
Highly complex patterns can arise from the simplest initial conditions. No faith needed for the Mandelbrot Set.
How did this so called "naturally occurring complexity of life came into existence in the first place....by chance, dumb luck?
I don't know. Just as I don't know how come
pi and
e are transcendental numbers with no end and no discernable pattern.
You say, "Higher Being." I say, we're
living in a computer simulation.
Or do they all follow certain principles common to all systems, that of having a purpose for its creation...
See, this is where you let your Faith lead your 'science'. Having a purpose? Does a snowflake have a 'purpose' (other than to look beautiful for an instant, then melt?)?
You've already decided things have a purpose, and from there, are working backwards looking for complexity that you can't explain, then you go, "Well, it has a purpose and it's complex therefore it must've been created/designed by some Higher Being."
In the same breath your belief in Evolution as the "natural progression of the specie" is a Leap of Faith! With so little evidence for the theory to form a more plausible intelligent conclusion...
Nope. observation and Scientific/Mathematical induction.
Organisms die, or reproduce. Organisms don't reproduce perfectly—that is, mutations and normal heredity introduce different traits (including new body parts and/or bigger bodies) among different offspring.
Natural selection means organisms with traits more favorable for their environment will survive longer, and reproduce more than those unfit.
Over time, this means that ever more complex life forms emerge out of earlier, simpler life forms. Except for this last statement, everything so far is observable, falsifiable, reproducible fact which can explained (to a great extent) by biology, etc.
Ah so something as complex as the DNA emerged spontaneously in the distant past, just like you emerged from your mother's womb "spontaneously".
Everyone knows babies don't come from the womb "spontaneously"—unlike that rib that turned into Eve. We have a perfectly ordinary, scientific/biological explanation for that.
ID propositions that the universe and living organisms are explained by an Intelligent cause.
And that is entirely a matter of faith and belief for the
simple reason that it cannot be verified or falsified.
If you believe in Invisible Pink Unicorns—you're entitled to that belief.
Now, if you say that Invisible Pink Unicorns created or designed the Universe, um, for whatever reason then you're entitled to that belief.
But if you say that, "Look, the Universe/Life is complex, therefore it must've been created by the Invisible Pink Unicorns"—see how
that doesn't follow?
Higher Being -> Complex structures, sure.
Complex structures -> Higher Being, no.
p -> q doesn't mean
q -> p. Basic logic.
By contrast,
~q -> ~p, or not Complex -> not Higher Being. Again, basic logic.
So, how come we have simple structures? Why isn't
everything complex? Were these simpler structures 'designed' by lesser Higher Beings (maybe the angels)?
Why do we have RNA (which some say is the precursor to DNA) and viruses, prions and simpler lifeforms? Were these all designed? For what purpose? Couldn't we have just had *poof*
homo sapiens, highly complex, intelligent, self-aware, 23 chromosomes?
Or, how come complexity can arise from simple initial conditions? Why can't simple be simple only, and shouldn't
all complex things have been created/designed?
Answer my other earlier question: How come no Higher Being is required to explain the whole of Human Language? Did some super smart person create Latin, Greek, Mandarin, Sinhalese, etc. then teach them to different tribes spread over the Earth?
Ok, if not Man, then a Higher Being. If you believe in the Bible, then I suppose you'd say "Yeah, God have one language to Man in the beginning, then after Babel, gave different languages to different nations."
Uhuh. Interesting worldview. Do you have any archeological records that bear it out? The oldest written language we have evidence for is Sumerian, around 2700 BC. What language did Adam & Eve speak, and how come we have no evidence for it?
It does not exclude the possibility of mutations and adaptation. Mutations do occur in the dna due to various intrinsic and extrinsic factors, adaptation occur due to the needs of a specific organism...both does not invalidate Intelligent Design.
And DNA complexity doesn't necessitate or imply it.
DNA is complex, I agree. But we both know DNA begets DNA. We have a perfectly
cromulent, non-magical explanation for how DNA propagates, and for how it changes—just as we have ordinary (Mathematical & scientific) explanations for the complexity of fractals, snowflakes, the weather.
Which brings me to my conclusion: if you say believe everything has a purpose—then what purpose does ID have?
So far, things (meaning, the Universe) seem to have come along just fine without the need for Intelligent Design.
Put it another way—with or without Intelligent Design, DNA exists, DNA works, and to a certain extent we even know how it works. Stars form, go supernova or singularity, worlds collide, and so on.
The
Clockwork Universe seems to humming along just fine without the Watchmaker.
Before all these Scientific discoveries, there wasn't even such a
thing called Intelligent Design. Is the only purpose of ID to give Creationists a chance to remain relevant?