|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Another Test for Intelligent Design Proponents | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ramoss Member (Idle past 640 days) Posts: 3228 Joined: |
If he is goign to read all that, he also should read the Dover PA decision by Judge Jones, in specifically the sections tht dealt with the
testemony under oath from Behe and Dembski. That was such a precise and LEGAL arguement that I bet teh Discovery Institute will evendually abandon trying to 'teach about I.D., but rather fall back to 'TEach the controversy'.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Parasomnium Member Posts: 2224 Joined: |
ramoss writes: he also should read [...] For some reason I doubt he'll even read the first paragraph of the Wedge Document. On the other hand, if he reads the previous sentence of this message, he might feel sufficiently challenged to make it through the second paragraph of that document. Anyway, even if he first acquaints himself with only the ID side of the matter, that would be a boon. If we have to talk him out of something, he at least needs to understand what he is being talked out of. Did you know that most of the time your computer is doing nothing? What if you could make it do something really useful? Like helping scientists understand diseases? Your computer could even be instrumental in finding a cure for HIV/AIDS. Wouldn't that be something? If you agree, then join World Community Grid now and download a simple, free tool that lets you and your computer do your share in helping humanity. After all, you are part of it, so why not take part in it?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 422 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
That was such a precise and LEGAL arguement that I bet teh Discovery Institute will evendually abandon trying to 'teach about I.D., but rather fall back to 'TEach the controversy'. Nah, their new direction is "Discover the Controversy" and AIG is moving towards "Create the Controversy". Aslan is not a Tame Lion
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
joshua221  Inactive Member |
A seeming athiest tell me that I don't know of creation. That's funny.
The science is the unimportant part of Creation. It doesn't even matter. I've told you guys about it all before. "The old man cries in the sorrow of eternity." Van Gogh
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NosyNed Member Posts: 9004 From: Canada Joined: |
The science is the unimportant part of Creation. It doesn't even matter. I've told you guys about it all before. So why do you bother to discuss it. Why would you care about ID? -- Which is trying to be "scientific". Why not just leave us poor deluded fools to our unimportant little games? The little games which have transformed the world (for good and ill) in less than 5 centuries after millenia of religious belief left the world more or less unchanged from one century to the next.
A seeming athiest tell me that I don't know of creation. That's funny. But he is mentioning the ID movement to you. The one that believes that things evolve over millions of years; the one that believes humans and other extant apes are related. Do you then agree with them? That would be surprising. If you don't agree then perhaps you should learn more about it. The ID movement has the same political goals as YEC creationists but what they accept as true is anathema to the YEC creationists and even to some OEC creationists. Maybe there is no problem and you agree with the main core of the ID movement. Do you? This message has been edited by NosyNed, 01-05-2006 09:45 PM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Parasomnium Member Posts: 2224 Joined: |
prophex writes: A seeming athiest tell me that I don't know of creation. That's funny. Well, it would be, if it weren't actually so sad. One thing I'll say for you, Prophex: you are making it really easy for me to criticize your posts, because here you are, doing it yet again. The prominent ID-ers I mentioned (Behe/Dembski et al.) have gone out of their way to maintain that ID is indeed science, all the while carefully avoiding any association with creationism. And then, along comes Prophex, in a thread about intelligent design, saying that the Intelligent Designer is in fact the Christian God of creationism. On second thought I'll concede it is both sad and funny. The sad part is your remarkable failure to grasp what this is all about. The funny part is that you're actually right about the fact that ID is creationism. It's just that you're not supposed to be saying it out loud. This message has been edited by Parasomnium, 06-Jan-2006 01:23 PM "Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge: it is those who know little, not those who know much, who so positively assert that this or that problem will never be solved by science." - Charles Darwin. Did you know that most of the time your computer is doing nothing? What if you could make it do something really useful? Like helping scientists understand diseases? Your computer could even be instrumental in finding a cure for HIV/AIDS. Wouldn't that be something? If you agree, then join World Community Grid now and download a simple, free tool that lets you and your computer do your share in helping humanity. After all, you are part of it, so why not take part in it?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
riVeRraT Member (Idle past 444 days) Posts: 5788 From: NY USA Joined: |
Neither one would indicate if it was designed or not.
The reason being is that one could design something to fall into a random position. One of the things I do is install boilers for a living. I have seen neat boiler installations that could represent the drawing on the left, and other spagetti installations that represent the drawing on the right. Both of them may work just fine, or not.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
joshua221  Inactive Member |
I don't think that you can prove God's existance scientifically. With reason, yes, with common sense, certainly. Knowing God is there, isn't really something that is meant to be debated about, it's a given.
quote: It's not even about religious belief, it's about God. It's about nothing else other than truth, and I find myself unable to express God. You can keep your little games. "The old man cries in the sorrow of eternity." Van Gogh
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
joshua221  Inactive Member |
quote: I don't really know if I said that, but the main point was that Intelligent Design does not need science to be true, and that scientific evidence means nothing in the eyes of God, and those who realize that there is more to life than this earthly plight. "The old man cries in the sorrow of eternity." Van Gogh
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1495 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
I don't really know if I said that, but the main point was that Intelligent Design does not need science to be true, and that scientific evidence means nothing in the eyes of God, and those who realize that there is more to life than this earthly plight. Maybe God is a little more appreciative of the collossal effort and sacrifice generally required for scientific achievement than you are?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
joshua221  Inactive Member |
Show me statistics that show that the majority of scientists are not living well, and actually have to time to think about DNA extractions. I would bet you that the majority of scientists like what they do, and sacrifice nothing to earn a large income to study physis.
This message has been edited by prophex, 01-08-2006 02:02 AM This message has been edited by AdminPhat, 01-08-2006 12:29 AM This message has been edited by prophex, 01-08-2006 12:22 PM "The old man cries in the sorrow of eternity." Van Gogh
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Funkaloyd Inactive Member |
prophex writes: I don't think that you can prove God's existance scientifically. Then you have a beef with ID, knowingly or not. Maybe in future you'd consider helping us evos with our deadly traps?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Parasomnium Member Posts: 2224 Joined: |
prophex writes: I don't really know if I said that {that the Intelligent Designer is the Christian God of creationism, P.} Oh, you said it all right: I showed you picture of things in nature that aren't really such fine examples of intelligent design - the pictures in post 70 - and asked you if intelligent design could explain them. You answered:
Corruption Original Sin God's World Changed When I replied that Intelligent Design isn't religion, that it was instead supposed to be science, you answered:
God is beyond science, how could it be about science? Maybe you never literally said "the Intelligent Designer is the Christian God of creationism", but you certainly implied it very clearly.
[...] the main point was that Intelligent Design does not need science to be true You prove once more that you don't understand what the people of the intelligent design movement - whose side you are supposedly on - are actually saying. You are doing them a disservice. Not that I mind, though, such cases of friendly fire are usually welcomed from the opposite side. In any case, to conclude our exchange, the important thing is not that we disagree about whether or not there is an Intelligent Designer, but that I pointed out to you the fact that you and the intelligent design movement are in disagreement, apparently, on what can be said openly about the nature of the intelligent designer. You are welcome to comment, but I will leave it at this. This message has been edited by Parasomnium, 08-Jan-2006 05:00 PM "Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge: it is those who know little, not those who know much, who so positively assert that this or that problem will never be solved by science." - Charles Darwin. Did you know that most of the time your computer is doing nothing? What if you could make it do something really useful? Like helping scientists understand diseases? Your computer could even be instrumental in finding a cure for HIV/AIDS. Wouldn't that be something? If you agree, then join World Community Grid now and download a simple, free tool that lets you and your computer do your share in helping humanity. After all, you are part of it, so why not take part in it?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2198 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: Well, they are paid to think about these kinds of things, so of course they "have time" to do so. Would you criticize a welder for "having time to think about welding"?
quote: Spoken like a kid who is still in high school and has never had to work for a living, or even work very hard academically. Take it from me, the wife of a very bright man who just defended his PhD. There are many, many sacrifices. Profound, painful ones that you are not grown up enough to understand, apparently. Oh, and what do you consider a "large income"?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Ben! Member (Idle past 1427 days) Posts: 1161 From: Hayward, CA Joined: |
I would bet you that the majority of scientists like what they do, and sacrifice nothing to earn a large income to study physics. AAAAHAHAHAHAHAHA!! I need some extra money, since I'm so friggin' poor from being involved in science. So all I can say is... HOW MUCH YOU WANNA BET? I NEED WHATEVER YOU CAN PROVIDE BUDDY BOY. I'm actually leaning towards getting out. Too little money, too much politics, so hard to be able to do what you want. It's been frustrating!
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024