Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
7 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Intelligent Design == Human Design?
onifre
Member (Idle past 2950 days)
Posts: 4854
From: Dark Side of the Moon
Joined: 02-20-2008


(1)
Message 33 of 196 (560342)
05-14-2010 1:16 PM
Reply to: Message 24 by tesla
05-14-2010 12:01 AM


Re: a scientific approach to the intelligent design issue:
The athiest chooses to ignore a potential. Accepting your digging through somthing designed by somthing intelligent means you look alot deeper than if you believe the forces are random and were not directed and designed to operate with the properties it has for a purpose. Key word: purpose. If you explore all of an items properties, Yet dont ask Why would it exist, and for what "purpose"; Then you can miss a ton of stuff you might actually find IF you asked the question. But there is no reason to ask the question if you are an athiest and believe God an impossability.
That makes the thiest a better scientist. He finds more because he isnt looking for somthing random, he's looking for its defined created purpose.
Tesla, you reply as though scientist were never theist. Newton infered god, Copernicus infered god, Kepler infered god...even Darwin infered somekind of intelligent agent. They all did so because they reached a limit in what they had evidence to prove and simply went to the defacto position of 'god-did-it'. So we came from that school of thought.
Nature was always approached with god in mind. It is only in the past 100 years that god as the ultimate answer has been removed, but only because no single shred of evidence points to there being a need for a causal agent. All that means is that how galaxies, planets, solar systems, etc., come to be is understood to happen naturally.
It is your own ignorance on the subject that forces YOU to propose a god. But if it were so, then all of cosmology would agree with you. And they used to. They just don't anymore. People with your same opinion of god had a long time to prove it, and failed. Don't get defensive now and claim we should resort back to that thinking. Prove it somehow, aside from incredulous rethoric, and maybe some people in science will begin to agree with you.
- Oni
Edited by onifre, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 24 by tesla, posted 05-14-2010 12:01 AM tesla has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 34 by tesla, posted 05-15-2010 2:22 AM onifre has replied

  
onifre
Member (Idle past 2950 days)
Posts: 4854
From: Dark Side of the Moon
Joined: 02-20-2008


(2)
Message 53 of 196 (560476)
05-15-2010 12:24 PM
Reply to: Message 34 by tesla
05-15-2010 2:22 AM


Re: a scientific approach to the intelligent design issue:
Think about this oni:
Ok...
All the greatest scientists believed in God.
Lets correct this a bit, since I am thinking about it upon your request for me to do so.
It should read: Most of the greatest scientist believed in a god concept.
Since there have been great scientist from all sorts of religious background. Hindu, Buddist, Muslim, Jewish, etc.
See what scientists today do not understand is the REASON.
I'll assume that you feel you do understand why, yet the greatest minds of today don't understand why?
You can see why I'm reluctant to believe you, right?
You like DeGrasse, lets take him for example. Do you feel you know more than him about the religious beliefs of Newton? If so, I would be curious as to what you're using as evidence to prove that.
many choose to believe that its because they reached a limit.
Well, no, that's just plain wrong. It's not a choice, that's just what the evidence points to. Newton discovered the equations for gravity and the laws of motion. But he couldn't understand what gravity was or where gravity came from.
As his famous quote goes:
quote:
"Gravity explains the motions of the planets, but it cannot explain who set the planets in motion. God governs all things and knows all that is or can be done."
But along comes Einstein and changes everyone's understanding of physics with his new field equations. He explains what Newton could not explain, and by doing so, Einstein removed god from the equation. Not by choice, he didn't choose to remove god. The equation simply didn't require magic anymore. The questions that Newton had were answered.
This is how god was removed from practically every field of science. By simply answering the question the scientist before you couldn't answer and had to infer an intelligent designer.
Einstein for instance believed in God, and after life, because " energy cannot be created or destroyed, but changed from form to form.
I don't know where you got that from but he most certainly did not.
Source
quote:
In a 1954 letter, [Einstein] wrote, "I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly.
In a letter to philosopher Erik Gutkind, Einstein remarked, "The word God is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weakness, the Bible a collection of honorable, but still purely primitive, legends which are nevertheless pretty childish."
Einstein had previously explored this belief that man could not understand the nature of God when he gave an interview to Time Magazine explaining:
I'm not an atheist and I don't think I can call myself a pantheist. We are in the position of a little child entering a huge library filled with books in many different languages. The child knows someone must have written those books. It does not know how. The child dimly suspects a mysterious order in the arrangement of the books but doesn't know what it is. That, it seems to me, is the attitude of even the most intelligent human being toward God.
Albert Einstein
Now, show me your evidence to support the claim that he did.
The truth is, they did not have access to the data we have today, or they would have added a lot more.
My friend, it's the data of today that has removed god from the equation. That doesn't mean that today's scientist don't believe in god, on the contrary, many/most of them do.
The difference is, today when a scientist approaches a question about a phenomenon that he/she may not have all the answers to, they don't stop looking for answers and say, "god-did-it." Instead, they keep doing science. Eventually the answers come, and in no case, ever, ever...ever...has the answer been god-did-it. They always find a natural cause.
In fact, show me one single example where a consensus is in and god-did-it is the only possible answer to a question.
They did not choose their beliefs because they were dumb. they chose to believe because they were smart.
They were raised in societies where the had to believe in god. Remember Galileo and his problems with the church? Or Keplers problems with the church? Or Darwins? Newtons? Copernicus? Shall I keep going?
They believed in a god, their version, not the Abrahamic version. This was their issue most of the time with the churches. It wasn't that they didn't believe in a higher power, the church called them heretics because they believed in intelligent design and not in the god of the Bible.
- Oni
Edited by onifre, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 34 by tesla, posted 05-15-2010 2:22 AM tesla has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 57 by tesla, posted 05-16-2010 10:35 PM onifre has replied

  
onifre
Member (Idle past 2950 days)
Posts: 4854
From: Dark Side of the Moon
Joined: 02-20-2008


Message 71 of 196 (560758)
05-17-2010 12:43 PM
Reply to: Message 57 by tesla
05-16-2010 10:35 PM


Re: a scientific approach to the intelligent design issue:
No. I'm saying i will not claim to know what no one can know.
This makes no sense and doesn't follow what you originally said. You said today's scientist don't know why all the great minds belied in god. You said they think it's because they were limited in their knowledge. You then said for them to look a little deeper and the real answer will be there.
So, as you can see, you are claiming to know.
Oni writes:
But along comes Einstein and changes everyone's understanding of physics with his new field equations. He explains what Newton could not explain, and by doing so, Einstein removed god from the equation. Not by choice, he didn't choose to remove god. The equation simply didn't require magic anymore. The questions that Newton had were answered.
tesla writes:
No he did not. The equation was never finished.
You'll have to be more clear here. No he didn't what? What equation wasn't finished?
What I explained above is fully accepted Einstein history. Its what's even shown on the History Channel or other cable tv shows about Eintstein. Einstein's physcis replain Newton's. Newton's didn't fully explain gravity, Einstein's did. Newton envoked god for the source of gravity, Einstein didn't. This is common knowledge, I don't know what you're even trying to say here.
God is not magic.
God is a made up term by humans used to explain phenomena. It is magic in the sense that it doesn't explain how anything is done it just introduces an invisible entity that is capable of doing anything because men claim that this entity has special powers. Special magical powers beyond anything natural.
It's the interpretation of that data. It needs re-examined and advanced.
So you're saying that all of the scientist throught the world are not doing their job properly? Who do you think should re-examine the evidence when scientist work every day dealing with the evidence?
Oni writes:
They were raised in societies where the had to believe in god.
tesla writes:
Oh hell no lol.
Yes they were. Are you ignoring the trail of Galileo? The issues Kepler had with the church? I wrote this in the last post, I gave you evidence to support what I said, and you reply with "Oh hell no"...?
I'll refrain from getting rude with you and wait for your next response, but try to deal with the factual evidence and don't just give me your opinion.
These scientist's chose to believe, Knowing the church was a corruption.
These men, for the most part, did not believe in any biblical god. They, if anything, believed in an intelligent designer. Not god.
The reason they chose to introduce a designer is because they were limited in their knowledge and had no other answer.
- Oni

This message is a reply to:
 Message 57 by tesla, posted 05-16-2010 10:35 PM tesla has seen this message but 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