Post by Wombat
Is your concept with "selection" in the random or directed sense. After the storm , there was a selection of rocks left on the mountain.- no intent. --- (Example A) After the mountain climbers arranged a selection of rocks, they made a fire - intent. -- (Example B) Does a sieve select particles randomly or directedly? A bag of flower fell over a the sieve forming a selection of white powder in the pan. - No intent.
The cook poured flower through a sieve forming a selection of white powder in the pan. - Intent.
If there was no intent back 3bil years ago, then don' t use words such selection, modification, filter and sieve which used in 99% of cases in the directional, volition, intent meaning because this bootstraps(Agrippa) the Christian mythological archetype.
Note that Wilkins said that ordinary language due to its innate volition isn't suitable for discussing concepts within the premise of matter before mind. We are using the same words but with different belief systems, resulting in a huge circus where Ken Ham is now even more confused than Wilkins.
1) Theism - mind came before matter. This is a religious metaphysical belief taken by faith, which is the evidence of things not seen. 2) Non-theism - matter results in mind. Also a religious belief taken by faith.
Because of our different religious belief systems we are basically incapable of communicating with one another , because of our religious belief systems.
http://www.news.harvard.edu/gazette/2009/06.04/wrangham.html ",,,Wrangham says. “We are biologically adapted to cook food. It’s part of who we are and affects us in every way you can imagine: biologically, anatomically, socially...”
How did Wrangham manage to figure out that were are adapted to cook food other than noting we do cook food? Instead of deriving the actual reason we are cooking food he formulates a proposition that cannot be disputed, which can be generalized to all of nature: A rock is adapted at being a rock by the same logic, with "adapted' here meaning that through some process something morphed into a rock, which begs the question because it assumes the very thing that needs to be proven.
http://www.archive.org/stream/irishnaturalist05roya/irishnaturalist05roya_djvu.txt "...Specimens were handed round for inspection, as well as a selection of rocks found in the glacial beds about Dublin, which......."
Or restated " ...... a sampling of rocks found ...." Selection, sampling is semantics, the issue is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pragmatics where I posted the "You have a green light" example...... Another transmutationist (not evolution, don't use the word evolution) professor wrote on his university web page under his bio: ".....I study selection....." Selection what ?