How do you categorize a group with such arrogant flare and remain unconflicted in your views?
Evolution does not preclude creation. It is quite possible that matter is and has followed a path towards a logical conclusion. That conclusion in my opinion would be to reflect its maker in greater and greater ways with each step. For example, when you paint a picture it reflects your view of you much more than you might understand. You are in fact showing creative thought processes. Are you a reflection of higher consciousness or of a set of incalculable circumstances?
As far as explaining or providing scientifically irrefutable evidence that our universe and all of its structure is evidence of a creator I will offer you one very simple problem. It is a problem that is as yet unanswered by the whole of the scientific community and that problem sets inside you. Your "Brain" is a huge problem for science to replicate. I will be specific, use small words where I can, and site my sources, while I lay out my argument for design and thus a designer....(Please understand that I do not think for one moment that you are either worth this much time nor that I will some how change your mind. This is for me. I want to rub this in the face of all of you smug individuals that consider themselves more studied than an entire group of people simple due to their belief in a creator.)...
In his book "wider than the sky the phenomenal gift of consciousness" author Gerald M. Edelman, M.D., Ph. D, winner of the Noble Prize and current director of the Neurosciences Institute whose mission statement is:
Mission
The Neurosciences Institute, formed in 1981, is an independent scientific research organization dedicated to furthering our knowledge of the biological bases of brain function, particularly its higher functions such as perception, memory, and learning. This knowledge will profoundly affect the way we think about ourselves and will have practical implications for many aspects of our lives from medicine to education to philosophy. In addition to thirty-five resident scientists engaged in theoretical and experimental neurobiological research, the Institute serves as host to visiting scientists who pursue their own interests. Neurosciences Research Foundation, Inc., a publicly supported non-profit corporation, is the Institute's legal parent.
There are three main categories of activities through which the Institute pursues its goals:
The Institute acts as a unique center in which visiting scientists can meet, exchange ideas, and plan new research. Since 1981, over 900 visiting scientists from 140 institutions and 24 countries have participated in conferences, workshops, symposia, or courses at the Institute or have been Visiting Fellows for periods of several weeks to several months.
The Institute carries out a program of basic research and training for resident Fellows in Theoretical Neurobiology. Since 1988, fellows have produced and published a series of important brain models, called “Brain Based Devices” or “BBD’s” that are at the forefront of computational neuroscience. This research uses advanced computer methods in an approach called synthetic neural modeling: complex neural systems are synthesized from realistically simulated components, each patterned after elements in real nervous systems and operating according to physiological principles. These simulations are used to test ideas about brain processes in ways generally not feasible in laboratory experiments with biological material.
The Institute, in 1995, began a program of basic research for Fellows in Experimental Neurobiology who work in newly completed "wet" experimental laboratories. These fellows tackle key scientific problems in areas including developmental, molecular, and behavioral neurobiology, neuropharmacology, neurophysiology of motor and sensory systems, cellular neurophysiology, and the physiology of sleep.
The Director of the Institute is Dr. Gerald M. Edelman. He received the Nobel Prize for Physiology or Medicine in 1972 for his studies on the structure and diversity of antibodies. More recently, he has formulated a detailed theory to explain the development and organization of higher brain functions in terms of a process known as neuronal group selection, and he has extended this work to provide a biologically based theory of consciousness.
The Institute is also the home of the Neurosciences Research Program, an informal college of scientists founded in 1962 to promote interdisciplinary study of the brain. At any one time, there are thirty six NRP Associates from institutions around the world; these distinguished scientists serve seven year terms before becoming Honorary Associates. The NRP meets at the Institute once per year in March
wrote the following to conclude his book on pages 147 and 148;
"In line with these reflections, I have previously suggested that there are two main modes of thought--logic and selectionism (or pattern recognition). Both are powerful, but it is pattern recognition that can lead to creation, for example, in the choice of axioms in mathematics. While logic can prove theorems when embedded in compututers, it cannot choose axioms. Even if it cannot create axioms, it is useful in tamming the excesses of creative pattern making. Because the brain can function by pattern recognition even prior to language, brain activity can yield what might be called "pre-metaphorical" capabilities. The power of such analogical abilities, particularly when ultimately translated into language, rests in the associativity that results from the degeneracy of the neural networks. The products of the ensuing metaphorical abilities, while necessarily ambiguous, can be richly creative. As I have stressed, logic can be used to tame the excesses of those products, but cannot itself be creative to the same degree. If selectionism is the mistress of our thoughts, logic is their housekeeper. A balance between these two modes of thought and the endless riches of their underlying neural substrates can be sampled through conscious experience. Even if, SOMEDAY, we are able to embed both of these modes in the construction of a conscious artifact and thus further extend our comprehension, the particular forms of consciousness that we possess as humans will not be reproducible and will continue to be our greatest gift."
My question you and all like you is this:
Where did this gift come from? And to you arrogant f...ks that will say evolution ask yourself this question. How would natural selection produce a mechanism that is beyond its own comprehension? Is natural selection smarter than the biological material that it has selected? If it is does that imply intelligence? If it is does it have a locust?