Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 81 (8905 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 04-19-2019 6:42 PM
23 online now:
Coragyps, Diomedes, DrJones*, JonF, marc9000, Percy (Admin), Tangle, Tanypteryx (8 members, 15 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: WookieeB
Post Volume:
Total: 849,846 Year: 4,883/19,786 Month: 1,005/873 Week: 361/376 Day: 38/116 Hour: 1/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Prev12
3
Author Topic:   What is the benefit of ID.
Peg
Member (Idle past 3034 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 31 of 42 (502549)
03-12-2009 8:39 AM
Reply to: Message 29 by Stile
03-12-2009 8:31 AM


Re: The Benefit of ID
Stile writes:

they'll try deception in order to get into schools so they can reach a multitude of young-minds for the only purpose of "getting more people to act exactly like they do."

how do they act?

ps. i dont think we have ID people here in australia...i've never met one anyway.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 29 by Stile, posted 03-12-2009 8:31 AM Stile has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 32 by Stile, posted 03-12-2009 8:49 AM Peg has not yet responded
 Message 33 by Stile, posted 03-12-2009 10:17 AM Peg has not yet responded
 Message 35 by Dr Adequate, posted 03-12-2009 11:04 AM Peg has not yet responded

    
Stile
Member
Posts: 3418
From: Ontario, Canada
Joined: 12-02-2004
Member Rating: 4.6


Message 32 of 42 (502552)
03-12-2009 8:49 AM
Reply to: Message 31 by Peg
03-12-2009 8:39 AM


Intellignet Design People and Actions
Peg writes:

how do they act?

ps. i dont think we have ID people here in australia...i've never met one anyway.

A very good question. I didn't realize someone didn't know :)

I'm sorry, it's just that with the general population of a forum such as this, "Intelligent Design" is a rather common-place term. I've re-read my posts and see that I've been really rather vague on it.

I will attempt to explain, but here it is a bit too far off-topic.
I'll create a new topic, and link to it when (if?) it's promoted.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 31 by Peg, posted 03-12-2009 8:39 AM Peg has not yet responded

    
Stile
Member
Posts: 3418
From: Ontario, Canada
Joined: 12-02-2004
Member Rating: 4.6


Message 33 of 42 (502560)
03-12-2009 10:17 AM
Reply to: Message 31 by Peg
03-12-2009 8:39 AM


Link to new topic
As promised, see here for what will hopefully be a lively discussion on how ID folk act. Or, at least, those who propose and support ID as an explanation of certain aspects of this universe:

Message 1


This message is a reply to:
 Message 31 by Peg, posted 03-12-2009 8:39 AM Peg has not yet responded

    
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 16093
Joined: 07-20-2006
Member Rating: 9.1


Message 34 of 42 (502567)
03-12-2009 11:02 AM
Reply to: Message 30 by Peg
03-12-2009 8:35 AM


Re: The Benefit of ID
Everything in your post is off-topic.

However, I cannot quite contain my curiosity on this subject:

You know there was a time when geologists were finding Ice Ages at every stage of the geological time table, but in our century, with a better understanding of things, geologists realized that there were not as many ice ages as previously thought. In fact the earlier geologists were reading the 'evidence' incorrectly.

Can you direct me to anything confirming this claim in any way?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 30 by Peg, posted 03-12-2009 8:35 AM Peg has not yet responded

  
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 16093
Joined: 07-20-2006
Member Rating: 9.1


Message 35 of 42 (502568)
03-12-2009 11:04 AM
Reply to: Message 31 by Peg
03-12-2009 8:39 AM


Re: The Benefit of ID
how do they act?

They add to the usual dishonesty of creationists by pretending not to be creationists.

ps. i dont think we have ID people here in australia...

You guys don't have a First Amendment for creationists to try to weasel their way round.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 31 by Peg, posted 03-12-2009 8:39 AM Peg has not yet responded

  
Meddle
Member
Posts: 168
From: Scotland
Joined: 05-08-2006


Message 36 of 42 (502739)
03-13-2009 4:18 AM
Reply to: Message 30 by Peg
03-12-2009 8:35 AM


Re: The Benefit of ID
this does not mean that every species alive today had to be created individually because, thanks to the genes, animals of a 'kind' or 'type' can diversify without intervention. We see that in the many breeds of Dogs and horses and cats for example. We can create new breeds of these animals thru selective breeding.

Does this not make you an ID'ist at a basic level. After all to get those original created kinds of animal would they not have to be intelligently designed? And in so doing you have put an arbitrary limit on what we can learn from the study of genetics by saying species are only related within these distinct kinds, ignoring all the evidence to the contrary.
So what do you do to understand the how 'goddidit'? You can n longer base it on the physical evidence since all the evidence available could have been changed by the creator to make it appear like anything. Any 'scientific' discussion would then become peoples arguments over gods motivations, with nothing to differentiate opposing views. Afterall ID'ist/creationists attacks on evolution are basically attacks on the scientific method as a whole, so that method could no longer be used, at least not in a functional form.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 30 by Peg, posted 03-12-2009 8:35 AM Peg has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 37 by Peg, posted 03-13-2009 9:30 PM Meddle has responded

  
Peg
Member (Idle past 3034 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 37 of 42 (502888)
03-13-2009 9:30 PM
Reply to: Message 36 by Meddle
03-13-2009 4:18 AM


Re: The Benefit of ID
Malcolm writes:

to get those original created kinds of animal would they not have to be intelligently designed? And in so doing you have put an arbitrary limit on what we can learn from the study of genetics by saying species are only related within these distinct kinds, ignoring all the evidence to the contrary.

When it comes to breeding, what does the evidence show?

It shows that only animals of the same genetic code can reproduce. Dogs cannot reproduce with cats, rabbits cannot reproduce with guinea pigs

the evidence is that "species are only related within these distinct kinds" as you said above.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 36 by Meddle, posted 03-13-2009 4:18 AM Meddle has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 38 by Phage0070, posted 03-14-2009 2:35 AM Peg has not yet responded
 Message 39 by Rrhain, posted 03-14-2009 4:11 AM Peg has not yet responded
 Message 40 by hari, posted 03-14-2009 7:49 AM Peg has not yet responded
 Message 41 by Meddle, posted 03-14-2009 9:27 PM Peg has not yet responded
 Message 42 by Capt Stormfield, posted 03-15-2009 10:31 AM Peg has not yet responded

    
Phage0070
Inactive Member


Message 38 of 42 (502908)
03-14-2009 2:35 AM
Reply to: Message 37 by Peg
03-13-2009 9:30 PM


Re: The Benefit of ID
Actually, as I am sure you are aware, the different "kinds" of animals that you list cannot breed with each other but that is not to say that they did not stem from the same "kind". If you go far enough back you will find an animal that is neither the dog we know today or the cat, but a predecessor of both. This organism diverged into a line that at some point would become a modern dog, and another line which would become a modern cat. Once they had sufficiently diverged those two lines would be unable to reproduce together, even perhaps at some point being capable of mating only to form sterile offspring (such as the mule we are familiar with).

This is what the *evidence* shows us, not wild speculation. Human endeavors into breeding have caused offshoots which are unable to breed with the previous stock; this provides empirical evidence showing how different "kinds" can be created with a common source. I highly suspect that you eat some of this evidence daily.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 37 by Peg, posted 03-13-2009 9:30 PM Peg has not yet responded

  
Rrhain
Member
Posts: 6349
From: San Diego, CA, USA
Joined: 05-03-2003


Message 39 of 42 (502915)
03-14-2009 4:11 AM
Reply to: Message 37 by Peg
03-13-2009 9:30 PM


Peg writes:

quote:
When it comes to breeding, what does the evidence show?

That there is no limit to how far the genome can change. Insertion, deletion, even complete duplication. Point mutations, frame shift mutations, jumping genes, recombination.

How does the genome know that it isn't allowed to mutate anymore otherwise it would be in violation of "god's limit"?

quote:
the evidence is that "species are only related within these distinct kinds" as you said above.

Except speciation creates new kinds. We've seen it happen both in the lab and in the field. And for something that really will back your noodle, look up "ring species": Each adjacent species in the ring is interfertile, but the ends of the ring are not.


Rrhain

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 37 by Peg, posted 03-13-2009 9:30 PM Peg has not yet responded

    
hari
Junior Member (Idle past 3594 days)
Posts: 15
From: Harmandar
Joined: 03-10-2009


Message 40 of 42 (502918)
03-14-2009 7:49 AM
Reply to: Message 37 by Peg
03-13-2009 9:30 PM


Re: The Benefit of ID
Peg writes:

the evidence is that "species are only related within these distinct kinds" as you said above.

Can I add the work of behavioral psychologists to the mix, because I think it is building a simple story for non-specialists like me that all life is inter-connected, and undermines both ID and YEC.

- The work is engaging and easy to understand, with no technicalities to get over
- The field is advancing rapidly, with regular publication of new results
- It is not being done to prove evolution, which only makes it more persuasive

quote:

The researchers first trained the animals to swap tokens in exchange for food. Initially, the monkeys were happy to trade a token for a slice of cucumber. But when one monkey in a pair received a more sought-after grape reward instead, the animal offered the cucumber was often less than impressed. Sometimes the slighted animals refused to give up their tokens; on other occasions they took the cucumber but refused to eat it or tossed it out of the cage entirely.

"People often forgo an available reward because it is not what they expect or think is fair," Brosnan remarks. "Such irrational behavior has baffled scientists and economists, who traditionally have argued all economic decisions are rational. Our findings in nonhuman primates indicate the emotional sense of fairness plays a key role in such decision-making."

http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=monkey-business-is-fair-p


quote:

The UK/Puerto Rico team noted how the threat of violence from angry onlookers seemed to prompt the mothers to act.

Just like human babies, rhesus macaques (Macaca mulatta) have a piercing cry that is useful for grabbing their mother's attention - particularly if they are hungry.

And - as many human mums will attest - if the infant is ignored, a tantrum can result that can sometimes grate on bystanders.

Dr Semple told the BBC: "When I tell any parents of young children about this research, they get it immediately - they've felt this kind of bystander effect when their own offspring is having a public tantrum.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7934852.stm


As the results pile up, they coincidentally show strong similarities of behavior between man and apes, weaker connections between man and other mammals such as wolves, etc.

I think the field will provide a compelling case, without even mentioning it along the way, for the inter-connectedness of species in exactly the way that Darwin predicts. If we are made in Godís image then so too are all other animals.


Oh don't listen to me, I'm just a girl
This message is a reply to:
 Message 37 by Peg, posted 03-13-2009 9:30 PM Peg has not yet responded

  
Meddle
Member
Posts: 168
From: Scotland
Joined: 05-08-2006


Message 41 of 42 (502982)
03-14-2009 9:27 PM
Reply to: Message 37 by Peg
03-13-2009 9:30 PM


Re: The Benefit of ID
It shows that only animals of the same genetic code can reproduce. Dogs cannot reproduce with cats, rabbits cannot reproduce with guinea pigs

the evidence is that "species are only related within these distinct kinds" as you said above.

As others have pointed out speciation events have been observed, and also it is well documented which specific species are capable of hybridisation and how effective i is. Just because some cat species, for example, can interbreed does not mean they all can.
However, I did not bring up this example to discuss species relationships or finally obtain an actually useful definition of 'kind', as that would be off topic. Rather I brought this up as an example of how ID/creationism limits the scientific endeavour to try and understand the world around us. So basically we can study kinds to understand the first cat kind, but no further. A limit has been placed, so that what we find is not developed from some pre-existing common ancestor of cats and dogs, but is instead the product of design decisions by a creator. So on that basis, how did those first kinds get created, what decisions went into this, and can we glean what thought processes were involved from what we see in the physical evidence? For example, why did all mammal kinds have the same backwards retina in the eye, yet three different methods of reproduction?
As far as I can see, these sorts of questions are beyond what physical evidence can show us. Of course, anyone can make conjectures about answers to questions such as these, but without anything to back them up, all such conjectures are equally valid (or invalid), so how do you suggest we proceed.
To me there seems to be an inherently defeatist attitude in the ID'ist view of science. First there is this idea of a creator which can intervene and alter the physical evidence, or completely fabricate it as in the case of 'kinds', and therefore invalidate it. There is also this suggestion that we really don't know anything, that our current theories are probably wrong, and should be discarded unless they can be shown to be 100% accurate (at least for the theories that question the genesis account), and that any changes in sciences view of the world is somehow a failure. Of course science itself operates on a degree of scepticism but we still work with all the available evidence and if a theory is invalidated that just means it will be replaced with something even more accurate. It is a refinement or improvement, not a failure.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 37 by Peg, posted 03-13-2009 9:30 PM Peg has not yet responded

  
Capt Stormfield
Member
Posts: 402
From: Vancouver Island
Joined: 01-17-2009


Message 42 of 42 (503017)
03-15-2009 10:31 AM
Reply to: Message 37 by Peg
03-13-2009 9:30 PM


Re: The Benefit of ID
It shows that only animals of the same genetic code can reproduce. Dogs cannot reproduce with cats, rabbits cannot reproduce with guinea pigs

the evidence is that "species are only related within these distinct kinds" as you said above.

I think you are using the phrase "the evidence" incorrectly. By "evidence" you seem to mean "that which would have been apparent to a simple farmer 3000 years ago".

Would you limit the microbiologist or the astronomer to the information they can gather with the naked eye? The chemist to grinding with a mortar and pestle? The engineer to measuring with a marked stick?

Then why limit biology to watching animals breed on the farm? Why exclude the record left in our genes? In the ground? In our anatomy?

This is the real "benefit", and the stated intent, of ID. Its purpose is to stop knowledge that undermines the religious views inherited from the past. It saves the Biblical literalist from having to imagine a complex God.

Capt.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 37 by Peg, posted 03-13-2009 9:30 PM Peg has not yet responded

  
Prev12
3
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019