Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 63 (9161 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,585 Year: 2,842/9,624 Month: 687/1,588 Week: 93/229 Day: 4/61 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   A Plea to understanding: SCIENCE vs INTELLIGENT DESIGN
jar
Member (Idle past 384 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


(2)
Message 6 of 230 (653705)
02-23-2012 5:41 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by jchardy
02-23-2012 2:44 PM


Blending? Intelligent Design should be just laughed at.
Intelligent Design should only be laughed at and mocked by everyone; theist, agnostic, atheist and in the US, by every honest Christian.
Intelligent Design is absolutely nothing but another dishonest attempt by the US Christian Creationist Cult to destroy science and totally redefine education.
There is no conflict between adherents of faith and science, since there is no such thing as an adherent of science. To claim that 'We the people badly need a clarification to understand the conflicts between adherents of faith and science.' is to state a falsehood and try to sneak in that falsehood as a given assumption. We don't need to understand the Creationist/Intelligent Design marketers, we do understand them.
Until and unless those who are trying to market the con job absurdity called "Intelligent Design" actually present first the designer critter for examination and testing and second, the method/model used by that critter, Intelligent Design should be simply relegated to the same wastebasket as other absurdities like Ouija Boards, astrology, magic crystals, homeopathic medicines and prayer hankies.

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by jchardy, posted 02-23-2012 2:44 PM jchardy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 29 by jchardy, posted 02-24-2012 11:33 PM jar has replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 384 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 42 of 230 (653868)
02-25-2012 12:50 AM
Reply to: Message 29 by jchardy
02-24-2012 11:33 PM


Re: Blending? Intelligent Design should be just laughed at.
There is no anger and really only pity and yes, to some extent laughter, when anyone tries to market the con job that is Intelligent Design as anything other than a yet another attempt to try to sneak religion into science.
We may not be able to rule out a designer just as we cannot rule out the possibility that fairies exist, but such personal beliefs have no place in the science class or even the science discussion.
Until you bring in the Designer and present both the Designer and the Method/model used by that Designer for examination and testing, Intelligent Design is just fantasy.

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 29 by jchardy, posted 02-24-2012 11:33 PM jchardy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 61 by jchardy, posted 02-25-2012 2:25 PM jar has replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 384 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 62 of 230 (653936)
02-25-2012 2:31 PM
Reply to: Message 61 by jchardy
02-25-2012 2:25 PM


Re: Blending? Intelligent Design should be just laughed at.
As long as it is impossible to bring in the Designer and present both the Designer and the Method/model used by that Designer for examination and testing, Intelligent Design is just fantasy.
Intelligent Design is simply another attempt to bring religion into science and pretend that it has any significance and it should be opposed and denounced as just that, an attempt to make fantasy legitimate.
There is no place for the Intelligent Designer and no need or value to such a concept until the above conditions are met.

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 61 by jchardy, posted 02-25-2012 2:25 PM jchardy has not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 384 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 79 of 230 (653964)
02-25-2012 5:02 PM
Reply to: Message 78 by Modulous
02-25-2012 4:53 PM


Re: purpose in science
Since hammers have been mentioned as well as human design for a particular purpose/function, we can consider the fact that there are claw hammers and ball-peen hammers; two entirely different designs each designed and created to meet a unique and specific set of conditions, a particular function.

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 78 by Modulous, posted 02-25-2012 4:53 PM Modulous has seen this message but not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 384 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 92 of 230 (654070)
02-26-2012 5:20 PM
Reply to: Message 91 by jchardy
02-26-2012 5:11 PM


Re: PIVOTAL QUESTION FOR ALL
No, Intelligent Design should not be separated from Creationism since it is absolutely nothing but another attempt to insert a picayune christian goddlet into science. Intelligent Design is a creation of the Christian Cult of Ignorance and absolutely nothing more.
Until Intelligent Design presents the Designer and the method/model used by that Designer to influence evolution it should only be mocked, condemned, disparaged, challenged, questioned and illuminated as the con job it really is.

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 91 by jchardy, posted 02-26-2012 5:11 PM jchardy has not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 384 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 108 of 230 (654248)
02-28-2012 11:33 AM
Reply to: Message 101 by jchardy
02-28-2012 3:19 AM


Discuss?
The problem is that Intelligent Design like Creationism does not want discussion; in particular Intelligent Design does not want to discuss what is behind the curtain, who the Oz really is and how the Oz does it.
We certainly understand Intelligent Design, it is the Great and Wonderful Oz.

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 101 by jchardy, posted 02-28-2012 3:19 AM jchardy has not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 384 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


(1)
Message 118 of 230 (654460)
03-01-2012 7:08 PM
Reply to: Message 117 by Panda
03-01-2012 7:02 PM


Re: PIVOTAL QUESTION FOR ALL- jch
And if you go back to the source one thing you don't find is an Intelligent Designer.

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 117 by Panda, posted 03-01-2012 7:02 PM Panda has seen this message but not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 384 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 155 of 230 (655109)
03-07-2012 11:51 AM
Reply to: Message 144 by jchardy
03-07-2012 12:48 AM


There can be no ID science.
You may not realize this, but there are some ID supporters who do real scientific research. NOT on PROOVING intelligent design (even teleologic ID) — since ID can never be proven --- obviously! But those who have a faith-based belief ensconced in their final results keep that belief well hidden, because should they discuss their interpretations openly, they would be maligned and ostracized and their work ignored or denied publication no matter how valid because there is such an incredibly strong bias against such scientists. It would be almost like being of the wrong caste or wrong race or wrong sexual orientation which seems to be much more reasonably tolerated today than having a faith based interpretation of anything. How can such a disparity exist in the 21st century?
Someone that believes in Intelligent Design might do real scientific research, but anyone that "ensconces" any faith based belief in a final result or intermediary result or preliminary result or in research is simply not doing science. Faith based stuff has no place in any scientific publication.
It is not a matter of bias, but of honesty.

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 144 by jchardy, posted 03-07-2012 12:48 AM jchardy has not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 384 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 194 of 230 (655475)
03-10-2012 5:37 PM
Reply to: Message 193 by jchardy
03-10-2012 5:30 PM


Re: purpose in science
But I would say that the odds are actually 100%.
We are not the goal, but the product.
It really is that simple.

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 193 by jchardy, posted 03-10-2012 5:30 PM jchardy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 196 by jchardy, posted 03-10-2012 6:59 PM jar has replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 384 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 199 of 230 (655488)
03-10-2012 7:31 PM
Reply to: Message 196 by jchardy
03-10-2012 6:59 PM


Re: purpose in science
But it is simple.The water exactly fits the puddle. We are simply the product, not some goal.
The odds of us being the way we are is 100%.
The odds of the universe being the way it is is 100%.
The odds of anything in the past is 100%.

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 196 by jchardy, posted 03-10-2012 6:59 PM jchardy has not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 384 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 228 of 230 (655990)
03-15-2012 9:32 AM


Summary
The baby ducks lived under the front porch. They were very special baby ducks, not yellow like Easter chicks, or white, or even blue though blue duckies would be purty.
They were invisible. That means that only Daddy and me can see them, nobody else.
Sometimes Daddy would take me for a walk all the way up to the big road and back. He taught me how to call the baby ducks out and that I had to take care of them. I had to hold my arms out and keep them together and be very careful 'cause no one else could see them and they might step on them and then they would pop and sometimes one would run away and Daddy would see it and say "Son, git that one before it gits too far off." and he would point it out and I'd shoo it back with the others.
Herding baby ducks is hard work and Daddy says it is 'portant. That means I gotta work real hard at it and keep my eyes open.
Sometimes Daddy would stop to talk with another Daddy and I'd have to keep the baby ducks quiet so they could talk. And I had to watch real close 'cause the other Daddy couldn't see the baby ducks and might step on one but I always watched real good and if it was gonna happen I'd pull on the Daddy's pants and he'd move his foot and no baby ducks ever got popped.
Then when we got to the big road we would turn back home. The baby ducks would be tired and sometimes stop walking and I'd wait until they weren't tired any more and Daddy would wait with me. We'd sit on the grass in front of a yard while the baby ducks ate grass and Daddy would tell me about the things he had seen, men that rode camels and mountains with snow on the top and houses that were on a hill over the water and all had red roofs and they were almost like stairs going up the hill and when the duckies were ready we would walk some more.
When we got home I would lead the baby ducks back to the hole under the porch and they would go in and go to sleep. Daddy would sit on the steps and I'd sit in his lap and he'd tell me stories about what the clouds were doing. Then I'd wake up and be in my bed and sometimes Mommy would be calling and I would go downstairs and we would all eat lunch.

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024