The Power of the New Intelligent Design...

Dredge used it first. I don't know where he dredged it up but he doesn't know what it means. It applies to HIM perfectly.

This is why no one takes ID/creationism seriously. All you can do is name call and bury your head in the sand.

Here it is:Human Genetics Confirms Mutations as the Drivers of Diversity and Evolution – EvoGradThe differences between species have been shown to be due to the natural mechanisms we see creating mutations in living populations.

Spoken like a true scientist.

quote:

---

For, be it observed, the exception in limine to the evidence which we are about to consider, does not question that natural selection may not be able to do all that Mr. Darwin ascribes to it: it merely objects to his interpretation of the facts, because it maintains that these facts might equally well be ascribed to intelligent design. And so undoubtedly they might, if we were all childish enough to rush into a supernatural explanation whenever a natural explanation is found sufficient to account for the facts. Once admit the glaringly illogical principle that we may assume the operation of higher causes where the operation of lower ones is sufficient to explain the observed phenomena, and all our science and all our philosophy are scattered to the winds. For the law of logic which Sir William Hamilton called the law of parsimony—or the law which forbids us to assume the operation of higher causes when lower ones are found sufficient to explain the observed effects—this law constitutes the only logical barrier between science and superstition. For it is manifest that it is always possible to give a hypothetical explanation of any phenomenon whatever, by referring it immediately to the intelligence of some supernatural agent; so that the only difference between the logic of science and the logic of superstition consists in science recognising a validity in the law of parsimony which superstition disregards.
--George Romanes, "Scientific Evidences of Organic Evolution", 1882
The Project Gutenberg eBook of The Scientific Evidences of Organic Evolution, by George J. Romanes, M.A., LL.D., F.R.S.

---

You have superstition. We have science.

That's a stupid lie. All you have is a theory ... a theory is not a discovery.You Darwinoid con-men can't tell the truth."You are of your father the devil, and your will is to do your father’s desires ... When he lies, he speaks according to his own nature, for he is a liar and the father of lies." John 8:44-45 A "robust" theory? ... only if you ignore all its weaknesses! Another stupid Darwinoid lie.

And you don't.As I have pointed out before, saying "only a theory" is like saying "only a billion dollars". Foolish people like you might not realize it but that's a lot.A theory is the best explanation of a set of facts. That's a lot. You don't have that.So you calling it a "stupid lie" is just stupid. And a lie. If you knew any weaknesses, why have you never shown any? All you ever show is your own ignorance.

I believe life started as a miracle and that life could not exist without intelligent design.
(As hard as it is to accept, even atheists and Darwinoids are the result of intelligent design.)I accept the scientific evidence that suggests life on earth started as simple forms, and as time (possibly millions-billions of years) went by, more complex and diverse life-forms appeared.What process was responsible for the appearance of those life-forms cannot ever be known ... however, I'm sure neo-Darwinism isn't the answer. I suspect the aforementioned changes in life-forms were the result of divine intervention.I believe (neo-)Darwinism is a demonically-inspired cult, the aim of which is to promote atheism (therefore it comes as no surprise that that cult is riddled with con-men, charlatans and liars).

Oh, we have far more than that. We have discoveries, which is the evidence that the theory is based on and all that evidence demonstrates that the diversity of life on this planet is the result of evolution. Ah, your life model...your mission statement. Well, so far you have not given a single valid weakness and you are ignoring hundreds of museums and libraries stuffed with supporting evidence for a robust 21st century scientific theory. And in 160+ years of biological research not a single shred of evidence hints at unnatural creation by your imaginary sky spook.​

Please be advised that saying that my "stupid lie" comment is "just stupid" and "a lie" is a stupid lie.Stop lying stupidly is good advice from me to you, who needs help dealing with reality.

Why not? We have a direct record of ancestry in the genomes of living species. Why can't we use that evidence to determine how life changed over time? Strange how there are thousands and thousands of Christians who are biologists and accept the theory of evolution.

The term "intelligent design" is a slippery one and on this forum we have to be careful as to how we use it I agree with the basic use of the term but unfortunately the folks behind the Discovery Institute have co=opted the term and have made it a term based on a weak scientific theory. I think that the best way of looking at this is that taken by Chris Barrigar in his book Freedom All the Way UpWe live in a world where the future is open and where conscious creatures such as ourselves have free will. Barrigar with an extensive background in theology, philosophy and science thoughtfully proposes that God brought about life with the evolutionary process designed in such a way to have a high probability of ultimately producing sentient creatures with the capability of what he calls agapeic love.In that sense evolution becomes an entirely natural process which is really all we have evidence for. Barrigar's position is that there was no need for God to intervene in the process.You raise the point of starting with simple life forms. The simple life forms are again something that shouldn't necessarily be considered as being the result of instant creation but it seems logical to believe there were natural processes that brought them into existence as well. Apparently the world was around for around 10 billion years before those simple life forms came into exitance. I suggest that God is the mind behind the processes that allowed for the probability of life.All of that of course is simply a discussion around the concept of creative intelligence as being distinct from being about any specific deity. It even includes deism. I'd be really careful about calling atheism demonic. Firstly if we are the result of evolution then maybe we should look at natural causes for evil. When we do that we can then look at the evil that is done by both theists including Christianist in the name of their deity, as well as the good that atheists can do.Also, I'd suggest that using that type of language about those who disagree with you is not helpful and frankly kinda un-Christian.I believe that God does intervene in this world through the hearts and minds of conscious beings and particularly through humans.

I was reading the blurb on Amazon and came across this:"Materialism (atheism) claim the universe has no meaning, . . ."Oy. You would think that if someone was going to write about atheism that they would learn what atheism actually is. Many, many atheists, myself included, find meaning in the universe. A lot of these misunderstandings could be cured by having honest and open conversations with atheists. I have actually seen Christian apologists who speak honestly about atheists, so I know it's possible. I just wish it were more common. A definite step in the right direction.

I think you are reading something into this that wasn't intended. Science tells us taht some day this world will no longer exist due to some cosmic catastrophe. Personally I believe that civilization will end because we did oursleves in with nuclear or chemical weapons, or maybe somw virus. But that isn't the point.Barrigar's point is that when civilization comes to an end and if there is nothing other than the material, then the meaning and purposes we had in this life will ultimately have no meaning and purpose. However, that does not mean that a materialist can't have meaning and purpose. They can fulfil whatever meaning and purpose they assign to thier lives, which might well include to leave this world a better place because they were here. However again, as this is a finite world and if materialism represents actual reality, then ultimately there is no meaning or purpose to our lives that aren't simply transitory.

About 5 years ago I came across a Christian page, "10 Things I Wish Christians Considered Before Arguing with Atheists".Actually, I just found this link through Google, but I'm pretty sure that this was the same page as I had found five years ago -- the author's name, Mike, looks familiar as do the major points. Please note that he is writing as a Christian.Here is the list of those 10 things, albeit without the expository text which I will leave to you-all to read for yourself at that page (though I will occasionally include some bits as in #1 or interject my own notes):

1. Make sure you’re arguing about the same definition of God.
   Bottom line: Don’t let your conversation turn into the tattoo scene from Dude, Where’s My Car?

   ​

   DWise1 NOTE:

   This is why I am constantly asking creationists, "What are you talking about?", by which I am asking what they think evolution is, how it works, and why they have a problem with it. So far in over three decades of asking that question, no creationist has ever answered it. Indeed, one creationist was so terrified of the question that he canceled their email accounts.
   ​
2. As Philip Yancey said, “No one ever converted to Christianity because they lost the argument.”
   ​
3. Don’t treat your conversation as a confrontation — treat it as a collaborative effort to get closer to truth.
   ​
4. Please, don’t start the dialogue by talking about hell.
   DWise1 NOTE:

   Despite GDR's stated desire for proselytizing to be based on appeals for becoming a better person, the sad truth is that Christianity is almost always hawked and sold as "after-life insurance" by trying to scare the mark into ensuring that he avoid eternal torture after death.

   ​

   Part of that appears as what I call "The Christian Death Threat", a gleeful proclamation that you're going to burrrrn. That is often hurled at a mark after failing to convert him or at an opponent after losing to him (eg, by Kent Hovind at a high school kid who had just mopped the floor with him in the Q&A after Hovind's presentation -- reported somewhere under No Answers in Genesis) as well in the typical examples of "Christian love" in emailed run-by flamings.
   ​
5. Don’t give an atheist your unsolicited opinion about why he embraces atheism.
   ​
6. Stop saying evolution is wrong.
   ​
7. Whenever possible, direct the conversation toward Jesus.
   ​
8. Don’t unintentionally create more atheists.
   ​
   Theology that claims the Bible is scientifically accurate produces atheists who reject the Bible as bad science — and well-intentioned believers who defend it as good science. ... Sloppy theology creates sloppy atheism.

   ​

   DWise1 NOTE:

   There's also the all too common scenario of believers depending on that bad science (eg, "creation science") finally learning how bad it is and, realizing that "their religion had been lying to them all along" (actually it was their religious leaders lying to them, even when unintentionally), becoming atheists angry at how religion had betrayed them. Not the best kind of atheist to create -- it is far better to become an atheist by having outgrown religion.
   ​
9. Ask about meaning and purpose.
   ​
10. A joyful, Christ-filled life is a far more powerful argument than anything else.

 My Google search on 10 things I wish christians knew about atheists through which I refound the above also links to similar lists, some by atheists (which would make them more pertinent and important to be read by Christians intending to "minister" to atheists.For example, at Skeptical Science there's The top 10 things atheists wish Christians knew which draws from a YouTube video linked to on that page. It presents this list:

1. We have morals too
2. You don’t know us better than we know ourselves
3. We don’t deep down believe in your particular god
4. We don’t hate your particular god
5. We don’t all disbelieve because something bad happened to us
6. Believing isn’t a choice
7. Most of us used to be Christians too
8. Quoting the bible does not work like a Jedi mind trick
9. We don’t worship the devil
10. Hell dosen’t scare us, it does not even make sense to us
11. Not all of us are anti-theists

Eleven! Eleven things.Nobody ever expects the Spanish Inquisition!

Both of those lists are really good. I especially like, "You don’t know us better than we know ourselves."At it's heart, it's just asking Christians to treat atheists like a fellow human being. Instead of telling someone what they think, why not ask them? Just a basic level of respect.Also, a little humility from everyone goes a long way. Instead of "evolution is wrong," a better approach might be, "From my limited understanding as a non-scientist, I don't see how evolution can be true." Atheists can also turn the dial down and say, "From my limited understanding of Christian theology, this tenet just doesn't make sense to me." It allows for everyone to correct any misunderstanding, and at least try to see things from the other person's point of view. 12. We aren't atheists because we want to sin.
13. Atheism isn't nihilism, so we find meaning in life just like you do.
14. Not all atheists claim that God does not exist, we just don't believe in God. Evidence could change our minds.