Debate with AI about Intelligent Design of Life

Today I listened to Dr. James Tour’s message on the origin of life.

James Mitchell Tour (born 1959) is an American chemist and nanotechnologist. He is a Professor of Chemistry, Professor of Materials Science and Nanoengineering, and a Professor of Computer Science at Rice University in Houston, Texas. (from Wikipedia)

He was raised Jewish and first heard the Gospel when 18 years old from a young man who was part of a Christian ministry called the Navigators. I came to know Christ through the very same ministry when I served in the USAF in 1971! If you listen to any of Dr. Tour’s talks, one of the first things he’ll tell you is he’s a Jew who loves Jesus!

Dr. Tour’s talk inspired to me see what an AI bot has to say about it. I installed an app called Ask AI on my phone. It’s powered by what’s called ChatGPT. I can only ask 3 questions per day unless I pay for it.

My comments are interspersed in the conversation with the AI chatbot.

How did life evolve from non-life?

Of course, I don’t really believe that life evolved from non-life. The law of biogenesis says that life can only originate from other life. I just wanted to see what AI would say.

The question of how life evolved from non-life is one of the most fundamental and intriguing questions in science. However, the exact mechanisms by which this happened are still not fully understood.

One of the leading theories is that life originated from simple organic molecules that were present on Earth billions of years ago, which gradually evolved into more complex molecules and eventually formed the first living organisms. This process may have been facilitated by a variety of factors, including the presence of energy sources such as lightning, volcanic activity, and UV radiation, which could have helped to drive chemical reactions that led to the formation of more complex molecules.

Another proposed mechanism is that life may have originated elsewhere in the universe and was brought to Earth by meteorites or other forms of interstellar debris. This theory is supported by the discovery of organic molecules in meteorites, as well as the fact that life on Earth shares many common features with organisms found on other planets and moons in our solar system.

Despite these theories, the exact process by which life originated from non-life remains a subject of active research and debate among scientists.

DNA is the code of life. Code is information. Can information come from something other than an intelligent designer?

Yes, information can arise from natural processes rather than an intelligent designer. In fact, there are many examples of information arising through natural processes in the world around us.

For example, consider the patterns formed by snowflakes. These intricate, geometric patterns arise from the physical properties of water molecules and the conditions under which they freeze, rather than from any intentional or intelligent design.

Similarly, the genetic code encoded in DNA can arise through natural processes such as mutation, recombination, and selection. These processes do not require an intelligent designer to create or guide them; rather, they are a result of the natural laws of chemistry and physics.

It is worth noting that the question of whether or not an intelligent designer is necessary to explain the origin of life or the complexity of living organisms is a subject of ongoing debate among scientists and philosophers. While some argue that the complexity of life requires an intelligent designer, others argue that natural processes can account for the observed complexity and diversity of life on Earth.

I vehemently disagree with AI that information can arise from natural processes rather than an intelligent designer! Patterns formed by snowflakes are NOT information! A snowflake has no message to tell you. According to Dr. Werner Gitt:

The fundamental quantity information is a nonmaterial (mental) entity. It is not a property of matter, so that purely material processes are fundamentally precluded as sources of information.
Information only arises through an intentional, volitional act.
Information comprises the nonmaterial foundation for all technological systems and for all works of art.
A code is an essential requirement for establishing information. (Examples of a code: language, letters, ideographs such as Chinese, Morse code, hieroglyphics, international flag codes, musical notes, various data processing codes, genetic codes)
The allocation of meanings to the set of available symbols is a mental process depending on convention.
If a code has been defined by a deliberate convention, it must be strictly adhered to afterwards.
If the information is to be understood, the particular code must be known to both the sender and the recipient.
A code system is always the result of a mental process (it requires an intelligent origin or inventor).
Any given piece of information can be represented by any selected code.
Any piece of information has been transmitted by somebody and is meant for somebody. A sender and a recipient are always involved whenever and wherever information is concerned.
Any entity, to be accepted as information, must entail semantics (the branch of linguistics and logic concerned with meaning); it must be meaningful.
When its progress along the chain of transmission events is traced backwards, every piece of information leads to a mental source, the mind of the sender.
Information always entails a pragmatic aspect. (Requesting a workable action.)
Information is able to cause the recipient to take some action (stimulate, initialise, or implement).
Every piece of information is intentional (the teleological aspect) (Teleology: the philosophical doctrine that final causes, design, and purpose exist in nature.)
The teleological aspect of information is the most important level, since it comprises the intentions of the sender.
There is no known natural law through which matter can give rise to information, neither is any physical process or material phenomenon known that can do this.

I suppose AI hasn’t added Dr. Gitt’s information about information to its database.

Can a natural process draw a detailed picture of a person in sand on a beach? Wouldn’t it be more reasonable to assume it was drawn by an intelligent designer?

It is unlikely that a natural process could draw a detailed picture of a person in sand on a beach. The reason for this is that the formation of such a detailed and specific pattern would require a level of organization and specificity that is not typically observed in natural processes.

In contrast, the creation of a detailed picture of a person in sand on a beach is much more likely to be the result of intentional and intelligent design, such as by a person using a stick or other tool to draw the image.

It is worth noting, however, that the question of whether or not a particular pattern or structure is the result of intelligent design or natural processes can be a difficult and contentious one. In some cases, it may be possible for natural processes to produce patterns or structures that are highly organized and specific, although such cases are relatively rare. In general, the determination of whether a particular pattern or structure is the result of intelligent design or natural processes requires careful analysis and evaluation of the available evidence.

Is a detailed picture of a person in sand on a beach more complex than the code of life in a DNA molecule? The two cannot be compared. The AI chatbot concedes it’s not likely that a natural process can create a detailed picture of a person in sand but also says, “the genetic code encoded in DNA can arise through natural processes such as mutation, recombination, and selection” in spite of the fact a living cell is indescribably far more complex than a detailed picture of a person in sand. There’s a disconnect somewhere in its reasoning. 🙂