Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 65 (9077 total)
95 online now:
Michael MD, nwr, PaulK, Percy (Admin) (4 members, 91 visitors)
Newest Member: Contrarian
Post Volume: Total: 893,981 Year: 5,093/6,534 Month: 513/794 Week: 4/135 Day: 4/19 Hour: 1/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Nature belongs to ID
Coyote
Member (Idle past 1374 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


(1)
Message 6 of 146 (661519)
05-07-2012 12:10 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Vanessa
05-06-2012 12:38 PM


Whoops!
...Nature is God's work and ID is a champion for God

You made a major error there.

ID is supposed to be science, it goes to great lengths to pretend to be science, so you're not supposed to admit that it is religiously-based.

Have to keep up the pretense, you know.

I was impressed with the level of scientific evidence supporting ID. The arguments were robust and compelling...

Could you share some of that evidence with us?

It might help though if you checked the following link first to see if that "evidence" has already been refuted.

Index to Creationist Claims


Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Vanessa, posted 05-06-2012 12:38 PM Vanessa has taken no action

  
Coyote
Member (Idle past 1374 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


(3)
Message 64 of 146 (661814)
05-10-2012 1:39 PM
Reply to: Message 62 by Vanessa
05-10-2012 12:48 PM


One last thing - our fossil evidence better supports the theory of Punctuated Equilibria which states that biology was static over large periods of time (Equilibria) and then something happens (punctuation) and biology takes a great leap forward in complexity and diversity. Please refer to the Cambrian Explosion as one example.

The degree to which evolution is static vs. punctuated doesn't support ID in any way. If our current understanding of evolution is modified to include some or a lot of punctuations, that only makes the theory more accurate. That should be the last thing IDers want.

Also, the "Cambrian explosion" was not a rapid event. In broad terms it lasted as long as 70-80 million years.


Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 62 by Vanessa, posted 05-10-2012 12:48 PM Vanessa has taken no action

  
Coyote
Member (Idle past 1374 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


(2)
Message 137 of 146 (663286)
05-23-2012 12:07 AM
Reply to: Message 131 by Vanessa
05-22-2012 6:45 PM


Dope dreams or what?
In the 1980s in the Far East I learned a different explanation of evolution. A compelling and clever theory...

Without details and evidence, how are we to judge this "different explanation?"

For all we know, from what you have provided, it could be no more than...


Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 131 by Vanessa, posted 05-22-2012 6:45 PM Vanessa 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