Does ID follow the scientific method?

Praying and asking god for an anwser That science is wrong when it comes to dating, and evolution. There is none, god is always right it says so in the bible go and read it.SeriuslyID and science are like water and oil.Science does its best to disprove its own theories
ID does its best to ignore science, when it comes to disproving its own theoriesScience accounts for all known facts
ID picks and chooses the facts that they deem relevantScientific theories change when new evidence comes to light
ID ignores new evidence that would require the bible to change

Well most of us disagree, IDs observation is if it looks desighned then it is no parameters are used for what actualy is desighned or not, so it is based on personal objectivity only. Experimentation evaluation i have yet to see any ID experiments and evaluations of this experiment that does not involve magic to fill the holes in id logic. Yes they are but ID does not use them. Yes please do it, please make an observation define what you see, why you think you see that, then desighn an experiment that would prove your claim, evaluate this experiment and then i will provide one that disproves your claim so we can dump ID please play by SM rules if it is disproven it goes in to the trashcan. Well yes until i provide an experiment whitch using the same starting conditions always produces a diferent resaoult. All of it Almost all posts in this tread did in their own way. Give me an example of a theory made by id and i will point out your speculations.

Observation: everything falls down when you drop it.
Evaluation: some one must push those things down
Experimentation: lets make a airoplane smooth and aerodinamic so nothing can grab it and make it go realy fast so they cannot catch it if the plane does not fall we prove that someone is willfuly pushing it down.
Conclusion our experiment worked and it proves that someone is wilfully holding the plane down when it goes fast it cannot hold it anymore do to its shape and it flies.
Prediction: all such shapes fly if they move fast enough.ID is about the same BS as what i have written above.

Unlike macro evolution i can disprove mine in 5 seconds. No, as long as you have some evidence to support that conclusion. Show me your 4billion old piece of plastic that came from the mothership. Whitout any evidence it is as unreasnoble as the conclusion that everything was made 5 seconds ago the way it is now all our memories this forum, light in transit .... No you will haveto do better to demonstrate ID is not BS. You are right im waiting for you, i cannot debunk something if you provide nothing to be debunked so far you said ID is the same as SM and that is all you provided no evidence to why?, how?, they are the same. If they where the same they would agree in everything well they dont so they are not Usualy ID-ists say well life is to complex to be made by a natural process so it must be desighned.That is poor logic an I beam is verry simple and it is not made by natural processes alone man has to use those processes to make it so it is desighned. Old Faitful a geiser in yelowstone is verry complex and you can set your watch to it is it desighned or made by natural processesGive me something and il get started on debunking it. Edited by frako, : No reason given.

No one is arging against order, law or harmony. We are arguing that those are not in the slightest evidence for an inteligent desighner.Example of order forming: When you throw dice long enough you see that there is order in how many times a number drops comapred to other numbers that is order forming though there is no evidence that there is an inteligence behind the dice telling them what number they should drop on.A2+B2=C2 in a triangle its a law still no evidence of a inteligence telling the longest side of the triangle to be the root of (a2+b2)Harmony well if you are refering to animals in nature the more food availible to herbavores the more herbavores the more herbavores you have the more carnivores you get, it works backwards too a harmony still no sighn of an inteligent being controlling it.Inteligent desighn has always failed because it presumes an inteligent being controling everything, or desighning life WHITOUT any evidence that would point to that conclusion other then the bible.

And you presume order, law and harmony requires a desighner because???

In response to your latest post abbout an experiment being showed in poste 131. Would you mind doing it again one more time for me cause i cant find any examples. I hate to dissapoint you but there is no logic in the development faze of lets say a human, Gills are made and then unmade, a tail is made and then unmade.... logicly a small form a human would be made and then grown whit none of these energy wasting illogical steps. Sorry i cant evan find what you think is pointing to desighn much less conclude it is desighn. Well logicly if i would desighn a race to look like me for all eternety i would make it in a way that it could not change, though every species can change dna mutations are happening all over the world in every species even humans.If the order you say was so fundamental then why all the bad mutations. Like all of the genetic desieses we humans can have.If there is so much harmony in our bodies what about auto immune desieses when ones own body attacks itself. YES BECAUSE YOU HAVE SHOWN NO EVIDENCE ONLY WILD GUESSES WHY SOMETHING COULD SHOULD BE!!! How much evidence did DARWIN have (well more then ID cause id has none) and he hypothesised evolution and it was later refined and proved. Because ID usualy starts whit an unproven assumption to support its theory and then uses its theory to support the asumption.

Above and wherever i find them posted now will you tell me WHY DO YOU PRESUME THEY NEED A DESIGHNER? They would wait for an erthquake and fall on their own now stop avoiding the question. They are triangles evolution has nothing to do whit triangles. It has all to do whit laws though. And there is no law saying because a2+b2=c2 there cannot be any evolution it says that at least this law has no desighner controling it. So what are you saying heare that evolution made them your grammer has me confused. Um now i am realy confused is there a desighner or no or what do you presume he actualy did. Snap his fingers made the big bang and then waited 15 billion years so the erth would form then made the first cell and waited some more for humans to arive so they could worship him. Usualy ID says a desighner desighned it all.What form of ID are you preaching? What that the harmony in nature is so complex it had to be desighned why why could it not acure naturaly?? Whitout any aid from an inteligence?? Sorry to dissapoint you but there is plenty of evidence for macro evolution i still haveto see ANY evidence for a Desighner or that anything in nature actualy is desighned.

Order: does not point to a desighner it was shown that order can spawn on its ownDiverse elments: Huh?? well yes they usualy form in stars no desighner neededOperative forces: huh?? so your saying gravity and the like so gravity is caused by mass and that proves a desighner how?Complicated complexity: Huh?? So complex things cannot be complex on their own they need a desighner for them to be complex. An simple things can come to be because they are simple like an I beam it is perfectly simpla an I shaped metal beam nothing complex abbout it though i see none acuring in nature.And the geiser in yelowstone: The workings are complex at least to the complexity of the i beam and they formed on their own. Snow flakes verry complex compared to the I beam and abundant in nature and still no simple I beam.Complexity and simplicty is a flawed argument to support a desighner. I dunno what you mean by lot. Well no because that would be guessing, stabbing in the dark..... Because we have no evidence nothing to show us what could have been. Why not the greek record, or hindu, or that it happend by the laws of nature. Te biblical record gets slaped in the face whit every new discovery that has anything to do whit its record i dout the exsistance of god would be any different. Not unless there is a big rip, or a big chill. And what is pointing to this conclusion?? Oh can you predict when he will come to erth i would like to have some of that water turned to wine.

Yes I do not think it is religius, almost all religions say that the world/universe was created, Though SM differs there is no evidence that a god or an inteligent being created it. Science: we know it was made we are not sure about the process that made it. Religion: we know it was made it was definitivly our god. See the diference? Um since when has evolution become a religion?? What makes you think it is? Religion: our god made it all. Science: this is what we know happened with the evidence at hand, this is what we do not know yet. Evolution: This is the evidence we have and it points to this.Where is the religion part in evolution or science.Inteligent desighn is a religion yes it presumes a desighner and uses the desighner to support its theories and then uses its theories to support the desighner ignoring all other evidence a clear sighn it is a religion.

You still do not get it you base your conclusion on the base that order needs desighn to be order. You have not put one argument forward that would say or point to that. Until you do it is more logical to assume that order can spawn naturaly whitout the aid of inteligence.

Ok lets say chance and order are opposites. To the naked eye they are a coin toss can only be heads or tails and there is no way to predict what the toss will be. So one would think coin tossing has nothing to do whit order though throw a coin long enough and a pattern emerges a 50:50 pattern the more times you throw it the closer to 50:50 it gets so there is some order in coin tossing. Was there a will needed to toss the coin in a 50:50 pattern or did the coin fall in a 50:50 on its own and would do the same in a random vibration generator.I would say order in the coin tossing spawned on its own our will for it to land on heads or tails in a 50:50 ratio had NOTHING to do whit it. After the big bang spawned matter order as we see it is only a natural occurance, atoms rubing one a nother causes static electricity, static electricity pulls the first few together, when enough are together their mass atracts more trough gravity when enough are atracted the first stars are borne all fallowing simpla natural laws. Evolution also follows the same natural laws after the first cell was borne it was only natural that mutations accured, and by the same chance as the coin toss some of those mutations benifited the cell to have a better chance at survival and mythosis, the more time you have the more mutations accure the more mutations acure the grater the chance of a benifitial mutation, benifitial mutations have a better chance of being passed on because the offspring have a better survuval chance of those that do not have this mutation. All of it following natural laws and order spawning from chance i see no need for a desighner willing dissorder to become order. Correct because we have TONES of CIRCUMSTANTIAL evidence, And some normal evidence too. ID has no evidence only an assumption based on flawed logic.

No i think he is yust making stuff up as he goes along so he does not haveto admit the truth that id is not science. Edited by frako, : No reason given.

And there is Well whos fault is that creationism, and id got such a bad rep in science circles? O dont worry the media loves to air people who claim that bananas are desighned for the human hand by god, that we should see new life forming in penut butter if evolution where true, that evolution does not explain the origins of matter and energy so its not true .... Edited by frako, : No reason given.

Because most of what they get is called PRATT point refuted a thousand times. And they do not want to take the time to refute it the 1001 time.