Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 65 (9077 total)
68 online now:
Tangle (1 member, 67 visitors)
Newest Member: Contrarian
Post Volume: Total: 894,001 Year: 5,113/6,534 Month: 533/794 Week: 24/135 Day: 1/23 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Why would an intelligent designer design these?
nator
Member (Idle past 1439 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 48 of 108 (214976)
06-07-2005 10:23 AM
Reply to: Message 45 by Eledhan
06-07-2005 8:54 AM


Re: Bizarre logic.
quote:
Along those same lines, you would have to get rid of the United States, as well as alot of those things that you say religious people would have to get along without; because alot of those things were developed by religious people.

Let's say that the people who performed the first heart bypass operation were devout Christians.

Did it happen that they came home after their adult literacy and GED preparation classes and prayed to God to instantly make them gifted cardiac surgeons the next day, and it happened that way?

The point that you are missing is not that religious people do not successfully operate within the constraints of scientific inquiry, but that the very same people who deny science benefit from it regardless of their denial.

quote:
This very country, assuming you live in the U.S., was founded by Christian "religious" people.

Actually, most of them were not Christians, but Deists. They believed in a Creator, but not the Christian god.

Besides, what does this have to do with science deniers benefitting from that which they deny?

quote:
So, next time you want to attempt to slander "religious people", think again; because some of the most powerful people in the world are "religious"

So? Should I be afraid of another Crusade or a witch burning or something?

The truth is that people who deny evolution benefit from the application of evolutionary theory in many, many aspects of medicine, horticulture, animal husbandry, etc.

For example, do you get vaccinations?

The only reason they work is because we understand evolutionary theory.

quote:
My only point in this whole thing is, there is a leap of faith on both sides, and no matter how you slice it, you are never going to be able to convince me that it doesn't take faith to believe in evolution,

Well, then why bring it up if you believe this dogmatically?

I could explain to you how this isn't true, but you clearly are not interested.

quote:
or whatever it is you want to call the whole atheistic worldview;

So, are physicists and Geneticists and eologists and Virologists and Bacteriologists ALL athieistic, too?

quote:
just as I will never convince you that it doesn't take faith to believe in God.

Huh? I thought that having faith, the "belief in things unseen", was the whole point.

quote:
However, I am ready, willing, and able to admit that my belief is a religion; and that you don't have to believe it if you don't want to. You on the other hand, are not willing to admit that your belief is not 100% provable,

Huh? Of course science isn't 100% provable.

Nobody ever said it was.

quote:
and therefore, you think you can force it on every other person in the world in the name of SCIENCE.

Nobody is forcing you to receive medical treatment like vaccines or antibiotics, use electricity or your computer.

You can reject all science-based technology if you like.

quote:
What happened in a creature's body 2 BILLION YEARS AGO is not science, but speculation.

Nobody has ever directly observed an electron.

Do you deny the existence of electrons?

quote:
I can come up with any theory I want about how the sexes were developed, and as long as I use a scientific community, or a well known scientist to advance my ideas; and everybody will say, "oh, that's not speculation, that's science.

Are you seriously saying that all scientists are just advancing silly, unfounded ideas that have no basis in evidence?

Then you had better never, ever get any medical treatment from any doctor or hospital ever again. It's too risky, considering that the science behind the treatments is clearly all silly and unfounded and based upon only speculation.

quote:
And the way we know that this is the best theory as of today is becuase if it weren't, then other scientists would disagree."

Do you actually know any scientists?

Do you have any idea of how contentious science is?

quote:
Well, the fact of the matter is, hundreds of well-respected scientists, who were avid supporters of evolution, as well as atheists; have begun to question many different teachings that originated with the evolutionary theory.

How many of them have degrees in the Biological sciences?

How many of them publish their ideas in the peer-reviewed scientific literature?

quote:
They have begun to raise questions about how these things could possibly come about by chance.

Huh?

You mean chance plus selection, right?

Evolution does not proceed solely by chance.

quote:
However, as soon as they speak up, they immediately get branded as "religious" for trying to destroy science because they don't agree with the way that the scientists are using the information to support evolution.

Well, all they have to do is do quality research to show that their theory is a more correct explanation of the evidence.

Can you cite some research?

quote:
I just have to wonder what it is that makes evolutionists get so antsy as soon as someone brings up ID. Are evolutionists really so willing to listen to the flaws in their own theory as they say?

Such as...?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 45 by Eledhan, posted 06-07-2005 8:54 AM Eledhan has taken no action

Replies to this message:
 Message 52 by MangyTiger, posted 06-07-2005 8:04 PM nator has replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 1439 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 55 of 108 (215366)
06-08-2005 2:32 PM
Reply to: Message 52 by MangyTiger
06-07-2005 8:04 PM


Re: Bizarre logic.
The only reason they work is because we understand evolutionary theory.

quote:
Is this really true? I may be wrong but I thought modern vaccine development was based on understanding of how our immune system responds to 'alien' substances such as viruses, bacteria and the plasmodium parasite.

Jenner's first trial vaccination against smallpox was over sixty years before Origin of Species was first published, so clearly the initial work wasn't based on Evolutionary theory (and Pasteur's work was more or less coincident with publication so I doubt that was either).


Yeah, I reread that sentence and realized it was REALLY poorly-worded, sorry. It's bad to be in a hurry.

The bit about vaccines should have been expanded to include something about new vaccines being developed every year to protect us from the new mutated strains of, say, influenza.

An even better example would have been antibiotic resistance rather than vaccines.

Thanks for catching that.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 52 by MangyTiger, posted 06-07-2005 8:04 PM MangyTiger has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 56 by MangyTiger, posted 06-08-2005 6:12 PM nator has taken no action

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.1
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2022