A Study of Intelligent Design Debate

I am back, I know I said I was leaving but with these new site features how could I resist? (talk about sucking up). Anyway, I have been doing a lot of research on evolution (really I have) and after reading over my posts from before I actually found I was laughing at myself. Anyway, sorry for any of the stupid insults and I'm quite sure that I probably never offended anyone anyway (how could you be offended by that crap?). I am a new me, pretty much the same person as before but I won't be jumping to conclusions so quickly, if I post at 3am I'll make sure I still think about it and will try not take such naive interpretations of everything.

quote:

---

Originally posted by schrafinator:
Provide a Scientific Theory of Intelligent Design, complete with positive evidence, testable hypotheses, and potential falsifications.

---

Well, it's kinda a touchy subject this one in the light of science, since well, if there is an ID then it is out of our limited understanding of science. That does not mean one can not find evidence for intelligent design if one so wishes to look.But anyway, here goes...if there is an ID than you'd probably find his designs to reflect intelligents (damn, since I'm the one making the post I guess we're not off to a good start). One thing I do enjoy is mathematics, so all these sites here I find quite enjoyable. Please, just like I have taken the time to go through the sites you gave to me (really I did), I hope you do the same. Try really getting an understanding of the maths behind it, once you've got a good grasp of it you can find countless things that reflect these number pattern (strangely especially in the Bible). Here goes:My favourite
The evidence is almost scary
Lets not bite into the forbidden fruit to much nowIf you take the time to check it out, I consider that to be "positive evidence". If you really want to delve into history, mainly the Jews, testimony of the ID from the Bible is almost unnavoidable. I consider the forfilling of prophecies to be evidence.On that same train of though, "testable hypotheses" should be found in other prophecies. Find one, study it, then see if there is evidence to prove the "hypothesis" to be a theory, or even the prophecies to be a fact. You won't be dissapointed. As for "potential falsifications", well, I guess that's where you come in. Good luck! BTW, I no longer would consider evolution to be dissaproving an ID. Also, if the book of revelations isn't forfilled then I guess that would be a falsification. But don't get your hopes up, as that could not be forfilled for hundreds, thousands, even millions, perhaps billions of years yet. I'm sure if you go looking for this ID, you'll find him (I'm talking about really searching to, like search harder than you even thought you could even possibly imagine searching for something, what are you to be afraid of?).

Wow, this board is really getting some intelligent members. I might be a a little out of my depths just by being here.Anyway, I know this isn't proof to most people, but it sure does convince me there's some ID out there. It goes a little something like this:1 + 1 = 2What? You expected more. Well, I guess I'm a little different to most people, but I think you can't get any more possible evidence than that right there. Just really think about it. For there to be laws which governs the universe concludes there is an ID. Take a game like football for example, what makes football football? It's not just the having of all the physical equipment that makes it football. Using the equipment you could make countless games of football. But what is it that makes all those diffent games unique, what is it that makes it a certain type of football? Of course, it's the rules. Now, I ask this question, why are there those rules, did it just happen, or did some person(s) think about it, using intelligence and devised those rules? It's the latter and everyone knows that, so why should the universe be any different? It's not just a matter of having the right equipment to build a house. You can't just drop all the equipment in a pile and go look, we have a house. No, not at all, you have to DESIGN the house. When I look around at everything in the world, I see design, simple as that. I was watching an evolution show about extinct animals the other night and I was both surprised and confused when they said, the sabre tooth tiger (sp?) reflected incredible design. Huh? I know evolution doesn't propose it happened by absolute random chance. Evolution, or no evolution, there is still design and believing design without a designer is baffling. It has absolutely nothing to do with using a God to explain away gaps. If I get a pack of 52 cards, I don't expect to just throw them up in the air and it to land formed as a house of cards. If I want it to get it to that state I would have to design it, then purposefully place everything in the right order to form that house of cards. I notice alot of evolutionist keep saying that there is no real difference between non-life and life since it is all just the same chemicals. Well, to me, I see a big difference, its called design, they can't be just grouped together in any old order, it all needs to be quickly and purposefully placed. Its the same reason with something dead, you have to ask yourself, why is it now dead? Would it be because its design is now disrupted? A lot of science acknowledge things are designed, so how did that design get there without a designer? Some people just put it down to the laws of the universe got it that way, then you must ask yourself why are there designed laws of the universe without a designer? I see the laws of the universe to an ID much like the hand is to a human. A computer does not just put itself together, just like an ordered living structure doesn't put itself together. It is governed by those laws, just like the way you form stuff with your hands. Trying to dismiss an ID straight off the mark is like a creationist approach to evolution. It's a vert adequate hypothesis and I think it should be treated with the same respect as everything else in science. Not just looked at as people yelling "goddidit", there's a lot more to it than that.Anyway, for me, you'll never be able to prove there is no ID, as it is something I already know. Just like you can't tell me 1 + 1 doesn't = 2.

quote:

---

You display an attitude that is all too common in creationist circles. There is nothing to convince you that you are in error. How could you be? You KNOW you are correct.

​

So whay are you participating on a discussion board, if you already KNOW that 'ID' is true?

---

Obviously you have no idea of my beliefs, I don't think anyone really does, not even myself. As of this point I believe the Bible to be true. I've never ever classed myself as a creationist as I disagree with many of there points. I'm not in this "common circle" of I'm in "no error". Once again, obviously you don't know me, in recent times I've admitted myself to be wrong, I'm sure there are others on this board that could tell you the same. If I find myself in error and come to realise so I'm usually the first to admit.Next, this discussion board is not about whether there is an ID or not, but much more than that. I could ask the exact same question to you, if you know there is no God then why do you participate in this discussion board? See the useless reasoning here. If you want to attack my arguements go after the body of it, not just the little bit of crap tacked onto the end. To me an ID is obvious, perhaps not to you, but it is for me. I gave you a small proportion of why I think so (there is a lot more reason as to why I do, it's just hard to explain, but I'll get there) and you don't seem to be able to rebut it so I guess that must hold true at some level as of this point.It's obvious though from your posts you have no interest at arguing the topic at hand but rather the emotions held by us finite thinking people. You seem a little to caught up in the emotional side of all this, believe me, it's not worth it (speaking from experience). Just because someone disagrees with each other on an ID doesn't mean you dismiss it. Should we dismiss absolutely everything that has a contradictory view by another? Of course not, so start trying to follow the line of thought that has been presented. We were really getting some where on discussing this topic, probably the best I've seen it presented at any board, keep the big picture in your sight and don't let small indescreet (sp?) details get to you. Good luck. ;-BTW, there is an edit button, I'd suggest you use it as quadruple posts seem a little excessive.
)

​

[This message has been edited by RetroCrono, 01-02-2002]

​

[This message has been edited by RetroCrono, 01-02-2002]

Lets get back on track of an ID here. The junk DNA topic would be best at its own topic.So...does 1 + 1 = 2?

I'm still not exactly clear as to why junk DNA proves or dissaproves an ID. Why does such a small detail matter when trying to get an understanding of the unknown? I like to try look at the big picture.