What is the evidence for “purposeful intervention”?

FMM: Purposeful intervention is pretty much the opposite of random mutation.

FMM notes in the same comment:

 If there in nothing about an idea that distinguishes it from it’s alternative it seems to be superfluous.

So the idea is “non designed mutations” and the alternative is “purposeful intervention”.

Give that, and given FMM has not discarded the idea of purposeful intervention there must be something that distinguishes it from non designed mutations.

What is that distinguishing factor? What is the actual evidence for “purposeful intervention” regarding mutations?

And, more broadly, what is the evidence for “purposeful intervention” in any area of biology? Apart from, of course, wishful thinking.

603 Replies to “What is the evidence for “purposeful intervention”?”

  1. PopoHummel
    Ignored
    says:

    Since fifth has put keiths on his ignore list, I’m reposting some of keiths’ posts, so that fifth can see them.

    keiths wrote:

    ———————–

    fifth:

    That is exactly correct and it’s not inadvertent it’s intentional.

    It’s obviously unintentional, because it blows your thesis out of the water.

    fifth:

    I hold that persons are potentially immortal therefore the patterns we produce can in principle go on forever unlike anything in our universe.

    Even if that were true, it wouldn’t help you. You thesis is about how people infer intent in this life from finite patterns in a finite universe.

    You’ve scuttled your own criterion.

    Excellent work.

  2. fifthmonarchyman
    Ignored
    says:

    PopoHummel: How can an immortal person produce an infinite pattern?

    Um by placing one foot in front of the other —–forever

    PopoHummel: An algorithm can tell you that pi is the ratio of a circle’s circumference to its diameter

    I don’t think algorithms can talk so “telling you something” would probably not be in their skill set

    PopoHummel: then it can make it explicit to you so you have all the digits you need for a given task.

    If the “given task” is making all the digits of Pi explicit then an algorithm is unable to accomplish it.

    peace

  3. fifthmonarchyman
    Ignored
    says:

    PopoHummel: You thesis is about how people infer intent in this life from finite patterns in a finite universe.

    Yes and people infer rightly or wrongly that certain patterns they observe are potentially infinite. We usually use the symbol (…) to designate that.

    peace

    peace

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.