Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 86 (8998 total)
70 online now:
Hyroglyphx, jar (2 members, 68 visitors)
Newest Member: Juvenissun
Post Volume: Total: 879,510 Year: 11,258/23,288 Month: 510/1,763 Week: 149/328 Day: 64/22 Hour: 0/2

Announcements: Topic abandonment warning (read and/or suffer the consequences)


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Silly Design Institute: Let's discuss BOTH sides of the Design Controversy...
Blzebub 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3825 days)
Posts: 129
Joined: 10-10-2009


Message 130 of 219 (530279)
10-12-2009 8:48 PM
Reply to: Message 129 by Buzsaw
10-12-2009 8:27 PM


Re: Creationist Side Of Silly Design
"ID science" -- oxymoron. ID is faith-based, not evidence-based.

Behe placed ID alongside astrology in his definition of scientific theory!


This message is a reply to:
 Message 129 by Buzsaw, posted 10-12-2009 8:27 PM Buzsaw has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 135 by RAZD, posted 10-12-2009 9:39 PM Blzebub has responded

  
Blzebub 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3825 days)
Posts: 129
Joined: 10-10-2009


Message 133 of 219 (530288)
10-12-2009 9:16 PM
Reply to: Message 110 by ICdesign
10-10-2009 5:47 PM


Re: Round 2: Neo-Paleyism FAILS to explain all the evidence: Silly Design does.
ICDESIGN,

Your post (no.110) is nothing more than a "credo". You believe, but you have no evidence on which to base your belief other than an old book containing the creation mythology of some Bronze-Age Middle-Eastern desert dwellers.

This is not science. You might as well believe that the Harry Potter stories are factually true. Or that the Sun rotates around the Earth - observational data of the kind you provide supports both of these beliefs.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 110 by ICdesign, posted 10-10-2009 5:47 PM ICdesign has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 134 by ICdesign, posted 10-12-2009 9:37 PM Blzebub has not yet responded

  
Blzebub 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3825 days)
Posts: 129
Joined: 10-10-2009


Message 140 of 219 (530331)
10-13-2009 2:25 AM
Reply to: Message 135 by RAZD
10-12-2009 9:39 PM


Re: topic please.
Hi, thanks for the welcome. I hope the off topic flavour didn't offend.

I was responding to incredibly uninformed statements made in this thread by ICDESIGN. Anyone who can type "ID science" with a straight face clearly knows very little (probably nothing at all) about genes, proteins, and of course evolution. In fact they almost certainly know little or nothing about any kind of "science". Post 110 was just mindless Bible-bashing.

In many ways, "thread drift" off topic is analogous to evolution, if you think about it.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 135 by RAZD, posted 10-12-2009 9:39 PM RAZD has acknowledged this reply

  
Blzebub 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3825 days)
Posts: 129
Joined: 10-10-2009


Message 142 of 219 (530446)
10-13-2009 2:21 PM
Reply to: Message 141 by Perdition
10-13-2009 11:08 AM


Re: Round 5: Neo-Paleyism still FAILS to explain all the evidence: Silly Design does.
Explaining why the obvious design in the world (as we're assuming in this thread) points to an "Intelligent" designer...

The "obvious" design you refer to is not design at all. The problem is that you are viewing the biosphere through 3000-year old spectacles. The ancients had no explanation for life on earth, so they just said "god did it", and made up some stories to back up that hypothesis.

Nowadays, however, we know that all life on earth had a common ancestor, and evolved from it, and everything alive is related to everything else. DNA sequencing proves this.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 141 by Perdition, posted 10-13-2009 11:08 AM Perdition has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 143 by Perdition, posted 10-13-2009 2:47 PM Blzebub has responded

  
Blzebub 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3825 days)
Posts: 129
Joined: 10-10-2009


Message 144 of 219 (530454)
10-13-2009 3:35 PM
Reply to: Message 143 by Perdition
10-13-2009 2:47 PM


Re: The point of the thread
Ah. Please accept my unreserved apology, sir (or madam). Thanks for the welcome. It's an odd place - looks like a discussion between 21st century scientists, and a primitive, isolated tribe, at times.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 143 by Perdition, posted 10-13-2009 2:47 PM Perdition has acknowledged this reply

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2020