Biological complexity:how toxoplasmosis parasitizes (Introduction)

by dhw, Friday, December 02, 2016, 10:47 (2914 days ago) @ David Turell

dhw: You are misrepresenting both my position and the meaning of double standards! Firstly, I do not have disbelief, and I do not reject both sides. I am an agnostic. That means I neither believe nor disbelieve in God. In terms of how evolution works, I offer a theistic hypothesis which I actually find more convincing than your own, though I would not go so far as to call it a belief. As regards double standards, although I accept the possibility of God’s existence, you accuse me of wanting absolute proof, which is impossible. However, you refuse even to consider the possibility of cellular intelligence without absolute proof, which is also impossible. Your hypothesis does not require absolute proof, but mine does. Double standards.

DAVID: My decision is based on the cellular complexities I have been presenting, and I believe they provide proof beyond a reasonable doubt that cellular intelligence, if any existed, cannot be complex enough to invent the complex biochemistry I present. Later today I will bring the latest diagrams on nuclear membrane pores which are still only partially understood and fantastically complex as far as they are described.
David's comment (on membrane pores): Any reasonable person will see that these pores are extraordinarily complex in structure and function. They obviously require exquisite planning that only a great mind can accomplish. And the complete architecture is not fully elucidated at this time. How much complexity is required to make this point obvious? Not by chance!

As always, you present the most convincing case against chance, and I agree that any reasonable person will accept it. Indeed, that is a major argument against atheism, which I have accepted from the very beginning. However, it is totally irrelevant to the argument for cellular intelligence, and from the very beginning I have agreed that cellular intelligence may be God-given. You are conflating two issues. The evidence for cellular intelligence comes from scientists who have observed the behaviour of cells. You disagree with them, which is your right, but please don’t try to defend your double standards by pretending that the complexity of the cell precludes the possibility that the cell is intelligent.