Sidelined writes:
"I submit that the appearance of design that objects acquire is no more than a consequence of a balance of the undirected forces at work upon these items.This is consistent with what we observe. When we manipulate metals, for instance, to produce something we can observe the changes produced through our actions and we can explain how these manipulations occur.
The structure of the world and the life therein obey the four known forces of nature {strong ,weak, electromagnetic and gravitational forces}. I would say that design by an entity must show a mechanism by which these four forces can be manipulated.
In no way is there evidence that these forces are manipulated by unknown entities nor any hypothesis brought forth to claim they are."
(My response)
As we turn this method of observation inward we can neither claim to be intelligent nor design. As everything that is us is composed of and driven by the same forces.
Another thing to consider is that currently both intelligence and design are completely subjective terms. There is no scientific standard, that is nonsense. One cannot prove a system or object has the property of design nor can we say it is intelligent without an accepted tenet.
In my mind it is scientific to ask what intelligence is first. Then what can be intelligent. One can not discuss the subjective quality of design until the question of intelligence is answered as intelligence must be established for natural forces to be considered design.
One still comes back to the fact that we are considering ourselves intelligent and capable of design based on belief alone.
To me, it doesn't leave one much to work with other than we again think we are the center of everything.
I apologize for not highlighting. It's been a while.
Edited by Adminnemooseus, : Created quote box for Sidelined quote (use "peek" to see how it's done). Also added a blank line in the quote. Also deleted the "(Sidelined)" as the beginning of the message.
™ Version 4.2
