Paul Nelson to speak in Toronto, Saturday, November 5, 2011
| November 2, 2011 | Posted by News under Biology, Intelligent Design, News |
Here. Plus the Ontario premiere of Metamorphosis – the film on why butterflies make nonsense of Darwinism.
RHCCC: 9670 Bayview Avenue, Richmond Hill, L4C 9X9
Here: 2:30 PM – Registration
3:00 PM – Lectures: (Room D57) “The Assumptions of Atheism” by Bruno Cordovado
(Room D47) “Are Humans Just Like Animals?” by Geoff Francis
(Room D52) “The Human Genome – Evolution’s Achille’s Heel (Ascent or Descent?)” by Richard J. Van Seters
(Chapel 103 – G/F) “Be Ready to Give Answers” by Christine Williams
(Room D55) “The Universe: By Design or By Chance” by Don Wallar
(Room D43) “Is “Darwinian Evolution” Self-Contradictory?” by Michael Paré
4:15 PM – Refreshments
4:30 PM – Viewing of Metamorphosis DVD
Masters of Ceremonies (Peter Koropatwa)
5:30 PM – Refreshments – DVDs and books will be available to purchase
6:15 PM – Introduction of speaker by Michael Paré
6:30 PM – 7:30 PM Keynote Lecture by Dr. Paul Nelson: “Intelligent Design: the Beauty and Design of Butterflies”
7:30 PM – 8:00 PM – Q&A
12 Responses to Paul Nelson to speak in Toronto, Saturday, November 5, 2011
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
“The Ontario premiere of Metamorphosis”
I thought you were referring to Dalton McGuinty.
Explanation for non-Canadians
Lol.. No, that premiere was eight years ago and it’s been nothing but reruns since..
Are we to assume butterflies are to be the next poster child for ID? Seeing as the irreducible flagellum went down like a lead outboard motor among the scientific community.
Let me make a prediction about Nelson’s key-note talk. After an introductory pre-amble in which the audience will be enchanted by high-definition time-lapse photography there will then follow a litany of amazing facts about metamorphosis that Darwinism can’t explain.
(Keep in mind that this follows a whole day of laymen waxing lyrical on fields they have no apparent expertise in; combined with a side dish of religious soporifics e.g.“Be Ready to Give Answers” by Christine Williams; and a hearty meal to boot – the audience’s senses should be sufficiently receptive to Nelson’s presentation.)
Allow me a further prediction; Nelson will not even attempt to explain just how the process of metamorphosis came to be other than that vacuous verb ‘design’. Consistent with the ID movement’s past behaviour it is enough for them to merely point a finger at those features of the living world that are difficult, complex and may not yet yield a satisfactory explanation, while all the while casting aspersions upon those who, from an admitted position of ignorance, are at least making an attempt at understanding.
Fossfur you state:
Really??? Seems I didn’t get the memo that the flagellum, or any other molecular machine, has been originated by the purely material processes of Neo-Darwinism.
further note;
Machines, which far surpass man-made machines in ‘engineering parameters’, are now being found inside ‘simple cells’.
And in spite of the fact of finding molecular motors permeating the simplest of bacterial life, there are no detailed Darwinian accounts for the evolution of even one such motor or system.
The following expert doesn’t even hide his very unscientific preconceived philosophical bias against intelligent design,,,
Yet at the same time the same expert readily admits that neo-Darwinism has ZERO evidence for the chance and necessity of material processes producing any cellular system whatsoever,,,
Further notes:
Shoot even the movement of the bacterial flagellum is mediated by ‘non local’, beyond space-time mass-energy, quantum action. Thus, if even the movement of the flagellum can’t be adequately explained by ‘local’ material processes, how in blue blazes can you have the audacity to claim that the purely material processes of neo-Darwinism have completely explained the origination of it???
Music and verse:
The irony of your post, indeed the complete lack of self-awareness, is touching.
I had just predicted that Paul Nelson’s talk would consist of nothing more than glossy videos, admonitions that Darwinism can’t do X,Y and Z and a total lack of any ‘design’ explanation.
And then right on cue you pop up with a bunch of glossy videos, admonitions that Darwinism can’t do X,Y and Z and not even a hint of a ‘design’ explanation.
And to top it off you end with the Jesus; whoever it was that said ID was simply Christian apologetics in a lab coat must be eating their words right now!
Whereas the scientific literature is simply bursting at the seams with ‘design theoretic’ explanations….oh wait, that’s not right is it? Ah well.
Please don’t bother replying, it’ll save you the trouble of cut ‘n’ pasting a ton of stuff that a) you don’t understand and b) nobody reads.
So you concede that there are no Darwinian accounts for the evolution of even one such motor or system, and yet rather than honestly admit this glarring lack of evidential support and concede that you were deliberately misleading in your claim that ‘the irreducible flagellum went down’, you offer belittling comments towards me? How very shallow of you!
This post is Neo-Darwinism at it’s best. Fossfur, all you’ve done is post self- proclaimed predictions of a conference you’ll most likely not even attend (although I hope you do) and belittle another persons post. Instead of coming onto a discussion board and throwing plastic hand grenades around, It least put an effort into suggesting how Neo-Darwinism might be able to account for these incredibly complex molecular machines.
Well, I cannot fault your comprehension.
But would you seriously care to wager against my prediction that Paul Nelson’s talk will not even attempt an ID explanation of metamorphosis? Anyone?
Should I lose I promise to apologise to Bornagain77 for ‘belittling’ his post.
This is an ID blog. I want to read the ID explanation* for these incredibly complex molecular machines. Not another two decades of complaints about Charles Effing Darwin.
*Hint: Just saying they were designed is not an explanation.
Fossfur ‘Just saying they were
designedrandomly evolved is not an explanation.There much better!!!
Fossfur, let’s just go ahead, cut to the chase, and falsify the whole materialistic foundation of neo-Darwinism since you seem to think that neo-Darwinists have any leg whatsoever to stand on scientifically:
notes:
The following describes how quantum entanglement is related to functional information:
Anton Zeilinger, a leading researcher in Quantum mechanics, relates how quantum entanglement is related to quantum teleportation in this following video;
A bit more detail on how teleportation is actually achieved, by extension of quantum entanglement principles, is here:
And quantum teleporation has now shown that atoms, which are suppose to be the basis from which ALL functional information ‘emerges’ in the atheistic neo-Darwinian view of life, are now shown to be, in fact, reducible to the transcendent functional quantum information that the atoms were suppose to be the basis of in the first place!
Thus the burning question, that is usually completely ignored by the neo-Darwinists that I’ve asked in the past, is, “How can quantum information/entanglement possibly ‘emerge’ from any material basis of atoms in DNA, or any other atoms, when entire atoms are now shown to reduce to transcendent quantum information in the first place in these teleportation experiments??? i.e. It is simply COMPLETELY IMPOSSIBLE for the ’cause’ of transcendent functional quantum information, such as we now find on a massive scale in DNA and proteins, to reside within, or ever ‘emerge’ from, any material basis of particles!!! Despite the virtual wall of silence I’ve seen from neo-Darwinists thus far, this is not a trivial matter in the least as far as developments in science have gone!!
further notes:
In what I find to be a very fascinating discovery, it is found that photosynthetic life, which is an absolutely vital link that all higher life on earth is dependent on for food, uses ‘non-local’ quantum mechanical principles to accomplish photosynthesis. Moreover, this is direct evidence that a non-local, beyond space-time mass-energy, cause must be responsible for ‘feeding’ all life on earth, since all higher life on earth is eventually completely dependent on the non-local ‘photosynthetic energy’ in which to live their lives on this earth:
To solidify my basis for inferring the necessity of a ‘non-local’, beyond space and time, cause to explain photosynthesis, I would like to refer to the quantum wave collapse of a photon;
Further notes:
It is important to note that the following experiment actually proved that information can be encoded into a photon while it is in its quantum wave state, thus destroying the notion, that was/is held by many, that the wave function was not ‘physically real’ but was merely ‘abstract’. i.e. How can information possibly be encoded into a entity that is not physically real but is merely abstract? It simply would not be possible!
Now, I find the preceding to be absolutely fascinating! A photon, in its quantum wave state, is found to be mathematically defined as a ‘infinite-dimensional’ state, which ‘requires an infinite amount of information’ to describe it properly , can be encoded with information in its ‘infinite dimensional’ state, and this ‘infinite dimensional’ photon is found to collapse, instantaneously, and thus ‘non-locally’, to just a ’1 or 0? state, out of a infinite number of possibilities that the photon could have collapsed to instead! Now my question to materialistic atheists is this, “Exactly what ’cause’ has been postulated throughout history to be completely independent of any space-time constraints, as well as possessing infinite knowledge, so as to be the ‘sufficient cause’ to explain what we see in the quantum wave collapse of a photon???
Fossfur
Good luck with that.
“it’s not ID’s task to match your pathetic level of detail in telling mechanistic stories” – W.A. Dembski
Saying it was designed is teh first step to understanding it and says quite a bit by itself.
Look how much we have learned by saying Stonehenge was designed.