Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
8 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 7/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Help me understand Intelligent Design (part 2)
johnfolton 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5591 days)
Posts: 2024
Joined: 12-04-2005


Message 72 of 173 (265579)
12-04-2005 10:35 PM


ID is the Missing Link
Nuggin, ID is not a religious theory, simply that Toe's missing links is the scientific evidence that validates ID. The scientists that have or are turning to ID realize the missing transitional fossils only supports the ID premise.
If missing transitionals were not missing, then Toe would be validated. ID being not a religious theory but based on sound scientific evidence has no reason to go to the age of the fossil because the missing links would still be missing.
The fossil record simply does not lie. To an ID scientist the only missing link not missing is Intelligent Design. ID does not care if the earth is old (or not) or the fossils young (or not). These are scientists who simply care about what is and not what (is not).
There is no reason for scientists to go and argue on behalf of the evolutionists because even if the fossils are young (or not) the missing links are still missing. ID has no reason to argue on behalf of the creationists earth old (or not)because they have a theory based on the missing scientific evidences that "only" supports ID.
To an ID'er the missing links have been proven missing due to the diligent efforts of reputable scientists not reputable theologians. Its by scientists like the Paleontologists, Geologists through whose combined efforts have given us the massive fossil record is that which validates ID.
A massive fossil record would require a massive transitional evidence to invalidate the ID movement.
This message has been edited by The Golfer, 12-04-2005 10:37 PM

Replies to this message:
 Message 73 by Nighttrain, posted 12-05-2005 7:11 AM johnfolton has replied
 Message 140 by Nuggin, posted 12-22-2005 1:19 AM johnfolton has replied

  
johnfolton 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5591 days)
Posts: 2024
Joined: 12-04-2005


Message 75 of 173 (265725)
12-05-2005 10:35 AM
Reply to: Message 73 by Nighttrain
12-05-2005 7:11 AM


Re: ID is the Missing Link
Thank-you, Scientists realize the creations that go down the tube (extinctions) are the opposite of missing links. Scientists express irreducible genetic complexities simply doesn't bridge claudistics.
With creations going down the tube (extinctions) and no evidence of new species spontaneously being generated in the natural.
Scientists are in agreement with Natural selection (including mutations) are happening in the natural supporting (Grand Plan), (Competence).
Scientific claudistics without the necessary linking evidence in the fossil record "only" shows a (fully formed) emergence (origin). It will take massive transitional evidence that simply is not evident in the fossil record.
The scientific evidence for ID is simply in agreement with the Paleontologist massive fossil evidences. There is no reason for the scientist to go to the age of the fossil. Transitionals would of supported Toe, instead the lack thereof "only" supports ID.
Scientists have been hoaxed with frauds of a few fossils, it will take massive transitional fossils to derail ID. Scientists care about what is (not what is not) Its this scientific evidence thats turning Evolutionists into ID'ers.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 73 by Nighttrain, posted 12-05-2005 7:11 AM Nighttrain has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 76 by AdminNosy, posted 12-05-2005 11:00 AM johnfolton has not replied
 Message 92 by Nighttrain, posted 12-06-2005 5:02 AM johnfolton has replied

  
johnfolton 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5591 days)
Posts: 2024
Joined: 12-04-2005


Message 94 of 173 (266151)
12-06-2005 6:25 PM
Reply to: Message 92 by Nighttrain
12-06-2005 5:02 AM


Re: ID is the Missing Link
Nighttrain, I'd agree with Ned & Randman that the evidence is more than just the sudden emergence of the fossil evidences. Scientists are simply flipping a 180 based on the totality of the scientific evidences (this includes the fossil record).
Professor Antony Flew turned a 180 based on the evidence (scientific complexities issues). Flew has not yet given a name to this Intelligence but based only on the evidence, he has recanted.
Professor Flew told the Associated Press if his admirers are upset with his about-face, then thats too bad. My whole life has been guided by the principle of Plato;s Socrates: Follow the evidence, wherever it leads.
http://www.ca/...-to-creation-antony-flew-former-atheist.htm

This message is a reply to:
 Message 92 by Nighttrain, posted 12-06-2005 5:02 AM Nighttrain has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 95 by randman, posted 12-06-2005 6:29 PM johnfolton has not replied
 Message 100 by nwr, posted 12-06-2005 7:44 PM johnfolton has replied

  
johnfolton 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5591 days)
Posts: 2024
Joined: 12-04-2005


Message 102 of 173 (266226)
12-06-2005 9:45 PM
Reply to: Message 100 by nwr
12-06-2005 7:44 PM


Re: ID is the Missing Link
nwr, Flew believes the scientific complexities (evidences) is the work of Intelligence. Origin of the Species is the issue, Professor Antony Flew is now supportive of ID not TOE.
Mr. Flew's change was consistent with his career-long principle of following the evidence where it led him. And his newfound theism is the product neither of a Damascus road experience nor of fresh philosophical arguments, but by his sustained analysis of scientific data.
Flew said :"What I think the DNA material has done is show that intelligence must have been involved in getting these extraordinarily diverse elements together." "The enormous complexity by which the results were achieved look to me like the work of intelligence."
http://www.bible.ca/...eation-antony-flew-former-atheist.htm

This message is a reply to:
 Message 100 by nwr, posted 12-06-2005 7:44 PM nwr has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 103 by AdminAsgara, posted 12-06-2005 9:57 PM johnfolton has replied

  
johnfolton 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5591 days)
Posts: 2024
Joined: 12-04-2005


Message 104 of 173 (266288)
12-07-2005 12:36 AM
Reply to: Message 103 by AdminAsgara
12-06-2005 9:57 PM


Re: ID is the Missing Link
Asgara, Nuggins in the opening statement begged the question. What is ID theory? Nuggins wanted to know what supporters of ID believed. What mechanics should be taught in public schools if ID was the only theory.
Flew being a supporter of ID answered Nuggins question what is ID. I thought this qualified it to be on topic. Its not about the evidence of theology (religion) but the enormity of the scientific evidences supporting the mechanics of ID that should be taught in the public schools. Theological evidence is not scientific evidence and because of separation issues left to the church.
nuff said...

This message is a reply to:
 Message 103 by AdminAsgara, posted 12-06-2005 9:57 PM AdminAsgara has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 105 by MangyTiger, posted 12-07-2005 12:52 AM johnfolton has not replied
 Message 106 by nwr, posted 12-07-2005 12:56 AM johnfolton has not replied
 Message 141 by Nuggin, posted 12-22-2005 1:45 AM johnfolton has not replied

  
johnfolton 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5591 days)
Posts: 2024
Joined: 12-04-2005


Message 119 of 173 (267183)
12-09-2005 12:09 PM
Reply to: Message 118 by ramoss
12-09-2005 8:23 AM


Re: It's a scientific loophole
ID movement is about a scientific loophole not a theological loophole. Perhaps the problem is scientists are not willfully ignorant of the sciences and the evolutionist is. This means the evolutionist too understand the sciences. Knowing this fear ID because its based on the scientific evidence and not theology.
This message has been edited by The Golfer, 12-09-2005 12:55 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 118 by ramoss, posted 12-09-2005 8:23 AM ramoss has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 120 by Wounded King, posted 12-09-2005 12:19 PM johnfolton has not replied
 Message 122 by jaywill, posted 12-19-2005 1:27 PM johnfolton has not replied

  
johnfolton 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5591 days)
Posts: 2024
Joined: 12-04-2005


Message 143 of 173 (271612)
12-22-2005 2:09 AM
Reply to: Message 140 by Nuggin
12-22-2005 1:19 AM


Re: ID is the Missing Link
Nuggin, I'm evolving more into a YEC and believing the evidence more supports YECisms than ID. I agree ID has been proven by the lack of transitionals, but so is YECisms. I'd rather see YEC taught alongside of ID. Evolution if taught should have a disclaimer that its just a theory.
So, perhaps you'd like to step up to bat and give it a shot
I'll Pass for the Now. Maybe later. Like how ID evolved from the TOE.
This message has been edited by The Golfer, 12-22-2005 02:13 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 140 by Nuggin, posted 12-22-2005 1:19 AM Nuggin has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 144 by mark24, posted 12-22-2005 7:10 AM johnfolton has not replied
 Message 145 by Nuggin, posted 12-22-2005 10:02 AM johnfolton has replied
 Message 148 by Theodoric, posted 12-22-2005 1:36 PM johnfolton has not replied

  
johnfolton 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5591 days)
Posts: 2024
Joined: 12-04-2005


Message 147 of 173 (271727)
12-22-2005 1:13 PM
Reply to: Message 145 by Nuggin
12-22-2005 10:02 AM


Re: ID is the Missing Link
Nuggin,
The fact that you are giving up on ID when confronted with a question about how it works and turning to YEC simply reveals that you have been a YEC all along, wanting to cram your personal religious beliefs down the throats of people who are more educated than yourself.
The speed of light has been broken, are we seeing the entire visible universe in near present time. Energy = the speed of light squared.
The scientific evidence is causing scientist to re-evaluate cherished beliefs. TOE has too many problems that are answered by ID, but the breaking of lights speed supports the YECists.
-------------------------------------------------
Scientists have seen a pulse of light emerge from a cloud of gas before it even entered.
This astonishing and baffling observation was made by researchers from the NEC Research Institute in Princeton, US.
The end result was a beam of light that moved at 300 times the theoretical limit for the speed of light.
Earlier this year, a team of physicists made a microwave beam travel 7% faster than light speed. Last year, they announced that they had even slowed light down to almost a crawl.
It was Einstein who said nothing physical could break this barrier because, among other things, to do so would also mean travelling back in time.
Or so almost all physicists think - for now. Privately, some admit that experiments such as Dr Wang's may force a reassessment of some cherished ideas.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/841690.stm
This message has been edited by The Golfer, 12-22-2005 01:25 PM
This message has been edited by The Golfer, 12-22-2005 01:35 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 145 by Nuggin, posted 12-22-2005 10:02 AM Nuggin has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 149 by Theodoric, posted 12-22-2005 1:40 PM johnfolton has replied
 Message 150 by Adminnemooseus, posted 12-22-2005 2:01 PM johnfolton has not replied
 Message 152 by nwr, posted 12-22-2005 2:45 PM johnfolton has not replied
 Message 154 by Nuggin, posted 12-22-2005 3:01 PM johnfolton has not replied

  
johnfolton 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5591 days)
Posts: 2024
Joined: 12-04-2005


Message 151 of 173 (271743)
12-22-2005 2:03 PM
Reply to: Message 149 by Theodoric
12-22-2005 1:40 PM


Re: ID is the Missing Link
Theodoric, TOE says the universe is old cause of their beliefs that lights speed could not be violated.
IDists are staying out of the TOE / YEC debate of the age of the universe, age of the earth.
Its only the YECist that have been saying all along that the universe's light is young.
P.S. I'm getting dragged quite literally from my computer.
Have a Merry Christmas

This message is a reply to:
 Message 149 by Theodoric, posted 12-22-2005 1:40 PM Theodoric has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 153 by Theodoric, posted 12-22-2005 2:45 PM johnfolton has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024