Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 63 (9161 total)
0 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
Tanypteryx
Member
Posts: 4320
From: Oregon, USA
Joined: 08-27-2006
Member Rating: 5.4


(2)
Message 16 of 230 (653804)
02-24-2012 11:01 AM
Reply to: Message 12 by Modulous
02-23-2012 7:12 PM


Mod,
Modulous writes:
Human artifacts can be studied by science, and science can conclude that the artifacts were created for a purpose and may even infer what that purpose was
I agree that we can clearly see and understand purpose with regard to human artifacts.
Evolutionary biology is all about purpose. What is the purpose of the rabbit's tail? What is the purpose for the appendix? What is the purpose of flagella? If there is no purpose for something that we can detect: it might called a quandary for evolution. How can you work out how something evolved, if you don't know what purpose it serves?
I disagree. I think the proper word is function, not purpose.
And we can examine tool use in other animals, and infer what the purpose of those tools is. That is: we can study those things that are implemented at the will of animals besides humans.
Again, we are talking about artifacts. A non-human animal modifies an object or material it finds in the environment. A twig does not have a purpose until it is modified to fish termites out of a mound or build a nest. Before that it had a function as part of a tree.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by Modulous, posted 02-23-2012 7:12 PM Modulous has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 18 by Panda, posted 02-24-2012 12:23 PM Tanypteryx has seen this message but not replied
 Message 23 by Modulous, posted 02-24-2012 3:45 PM Tanypteryx has seen this message but not replied
 Message 39 by jchardy, posted 02-25-2012 12:06 AM Tanypteryx has replied

  
Tanypteryx
Member
Posts: 4320
From: Oregon, USA
Joined: 08-27-2006
Member Rating: 5.4


(1)
Message 20 of 230 (653815)
02-24-2012 1:59 PM
Reply to: Message 17 by Taq
02-24-2012 11:30 AM


Taq writes:
The goal of scientists is to figure out how nature works. That's it. That is not the goal of ID supporters. The goal of ID supporters is to have religion taught in science class.
It seems so sad to me that ID supporters miss the whole point of science. The excitement of finding mysteries in nature is completely lost to them. They know something is going on, but they misinterpret it as an attempt to prove their beliefs in the supernatural as wrong, meanwhile we're just having a blast telling each other what we discovered.
As others have noted, there is a simple cure for this. Stop using propaganda and get into the laboratory. Do the science.
Of course we know that is never going to happen. First, because most of them don't understand how to do science. And second, because they are waiting for us to build a god detector for them.
The other strategy is just to admit that ID is a religious belief and teach it as such outside of the public school science classroom.
This is so brilliant, that I would think even they would get it. Good grief, it's not like we are trying to get science and evolutionary theory in their churches and Sunday schools.

What if Eleanor Roosevelt had wings? -- Monty Python
One important characteristic of a theory is that is has survived repeated attempts to falsify it. Contrary to your understanding, all available evidence confirms it. --Subbie
If evolution is shown to be false, it will be at the hands of things that are true, not made up. --percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 17 by Taq, posted 02-24-2012 11:30 AM Taq has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 21 by jchardy, posted 02-24-2012 3:00 PM Tanypteryx has not replied

  
Tanypteryx
Member
Posts: 4320
From: Oregon, USA
Joined: 08-27-2006
Member Rating: 5.4


(1)
Message 54 of 230 (653911)
02-25-2012 12:10 PM
Reply to: Message 39 by jchardy
02-25-2012 12:06 AM


JCH thanks for the reply.
I agree that Cephalopods are fascinating.
Thus, in spite of their intelligence, Cephalopods have not advanced since they have been structured at a creative (inventive) dead end.
Maybe I am reading your underlying meaning incorrectly, but you seem to be saying that intelligence, specifically Human intelligence, is the goal or purpose of life.
Why in the world would a species evolve this way?
Evolution can only work with what it has. There is no target or end point to evolution.
"Evolution is the change in the frequency distribution and composition of hereditary traits within breeding populations from generation to generation, in response to ecological challenges and opportunities." to quote RAZD.
Cephalopods are a highly diverse group with lots of species that exploit niches in almost every marine environment. Hardly an evolutionary deadend!
2) They are being kept protected (in an ocean environment) in reserve in case the intelligent bipeds (with thumbs) destroy themselves and a successor is required.
Ah, I see now. The designer designed us with a nuclear holocaust in our genes, which will get rid of us and cause a higher background radiation which will cause Cephalopods to have more mutations and to evolve to the next level and on upward to the top spot in creation.
-
... as you are new here, some posting tips:
type [qs]quotes are easy[/qs] and it becomes:
quotes are easy
or type [quote]quotes are easy[/quote] and it becomes:
quote:
quotes are easy
also check out (help) links on any formatting questions when in the reply window.
For other formatting tips see Posting Tips
For a quick overview see EvC Forum Primer
If you have problems with replies see Report Discussion Problems Here 3.0
It would also make your replies a lot more readable if you would put some blank lines or pargraphs in.

What if Eleanor Roosevelt had wings? -- Monty Python
One important characteristic of a theory is that is has survived repeated attempts to falsify it. Contrary to your understanding, all available evidence confirms it. --Subbie
If evolution is shown to be false, it will be at the hands of things that are true, not made up. --percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 39 by jchardy, posted 02-25-2012 12:06 AM jchardy has not replied

  
Tanypteryx
Member
Posts: 4320
From: Oregon, USA
Joined: 08-27-2006
Member Rating: 5.4


Message 106 of 230 (654238)
02-28-2012 10:32 AM
Reply to: Message 101 by jchardy
02-28-2012 3:19 AM


Re: I'M NOT SO SURE!
JCH writes:
analysis and critical thinking should lead to a discussion of facts that are known and those that are unknown, which always risks broaching questions of "why are they not known?".
I think you are full of it. Do you think that only things that we know the answers to should be taught in school? What kind of school did you go to and how long ago was that?
No discussion is allowed, because things then can get "too creepy" in a class room.
So giving the students the actual answer (the technical reasons) is creepy?
analysis and critical thinking should lead to a discussion of facts that are known and those that are unknown,
If they are unknown they are not facts.
This whole thing is BS. I'm glad you have no say in my children's education.
-

What if Eleanor Roosevelt had wings? -- Monty Python
One important characteristic of a theory is that is has survived repeated attempts to falsify it. Contrary to your understanding, all available evidence confirms it. --Subbie
If evolution is shown to be false, it will be at the hands of things that are true, not made up. --percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 101 by jchardy, posted 02-28-2012 3:19 AM jchardy 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