Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 52 (9178 total)
1 online now:
Newest Member: Anig
Upcoming Birthdays: Theodoric
Post Volume: Total: 918,081 Year: 5,338/9,624 Month: 363/323 Week: 3/204 Day: 3/21 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Is there a legitimate argument for design?
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1512 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 4 of 638 (713552)
12-14-2013 10:58 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by PlanManStan
12-13-2013 4:31 PM


Deism -- the first Intelligent Design Belief
Hi PlanManStan, and welcome to the fray.
Is there a legitimate scientific argument to made for ID?
Not that I am aware of, and I too have seen a lot of purported arguments for it, arguments usually full of the argument from incredulity logical fallacy.
Sometimes, they provide me with gaps in other theories.
But a gap in anything -- theory or biological evidence of evolution -- does not provide an alternative, it just allows some people to believe what they want to believe.
First-hand accounts, as well, could easily be lies?
Could be, could be hallucinations, could be ... most anything, even perhaps a glimpse of reality ... perhaps ...
No different than subjective evidence for say sasquatch or yeti ... or alien visitations ...
There may be truth behind them, but the truth may not be what the believers think. See YETI nother explanation? for a possible truth.
What do you think?
Personally I think there are a lot of questions where falsifiability cannot be assured and thus science as we currently know it would not be able to provide an answer.
That does not mean we should not ask the questions or search knowledge for hints, it just means we should not expect clear scientific answers.
The criteria I use is open-minded skepticism -- open to the idea of possibilities, skeptical of concepts with little or no evidence. Content to wait for more complete information before needing to decide ...
Is there a legitimate scientific argument to made for ID?
To my thinking ID is a philosophical pursuit rather than a scientific one (see Is ID properly pursued?)
Enjoy
... as you are new here, some posting tips:
type [qs]quotes are easy[/qs] and it becomes:
quotes are easy
or type [quote]quotes are easy[/quote] and it becomes:
quote:
quotes are easy
also check out (help) links on any formatting questions when in the reply window.
For other formatting tips see Posting Tips
For a quick overview see EvC Forum Primer
If you have problems with replies see Report Discussion Problems Here 3.0

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by PlanManStan, posted 12-13-2013 4:31 PM PlanManStan has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 5 by PlanManStan, posted 12-14-2013 11:10 AM RAZD has replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1512 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 9 of 638 (713566)
12-14-2013 1:00 PM
Reply to: Message 5 by PlanManStan
12-14-2013 11:10 AM


Re: Deism -- the first Intelligent Design Belief
I don't understand what you mean by "falsifiability cannot be assured". I would say that there is a dichotomy of false and not false. No in between.
There is "can't tell if it is one or the other" and "we don't know yet" ...
The question "do god/s exist" is not necessarily falsifiable, in part because it is difficult to prove a negative unless you know everything. The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence but evidence of the absence of evidence in our current state of knowledge.
The question "does Yeti exist" is not necessarily falsifiable either, for slightly different reasons -- you can have 'ardent believers' and 'ardent deniers' such that when a feasible explanation for the fairly subjective evidence to date is a previously unknown species of bear, both groups dismiss it as "not ape so not Yeti" and claim therefore existence or non-existence is not demonstrated. Someone not committed to either ardent extreme can look at the evidence and conclude that such a bear would explain the subjective evidence, and that it is certainly a possible answer, even while there remains no solid evidence (other than DNA from a hair) that this animal exists. Is it the final true\false answer though? No.
Enjoy

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by PlanManStan, posted 12-14-2013 11:10 AM PlanManStan has not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1512 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 12 of 638 (713581)
12-14-2013 5:05 PM
Reply to: Message 11 by PlanManStan
12-14-2013 4:08 PM


Re: Deism -- the first Intelligent Design Belief
To the test the hypothetical "God Earthquake", we would first have to prove God. It isn't the fact that God made the earthquake that is falsifiable, it is whether or not God exists. If He does, it is easily falsifiable, if He doesn't, it is also falsifiable.
And this gets back to the question of whether we can detect design or not, whether we can sense/understand god/s or their actions. If god/s are not falsifiable then it isn't science ... but philosophy or theosophy.
And like the green ravens, you cannot disprove god/s by the apparent absence of evidence because you haven't looked everywhere, everywhen, every dimensional aspect of the universe or bulk universe (Did a 5-D black hole brane event horizon make the universe? ... the math makes my brane hurt ... )
Enjoy

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 11 by PlanManStan, posted 12-14-2013 4:08 PM PlanManStan has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 13 by PlanManStan, posted 12-14-2013 5:10 PM RAZD has replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1512 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 14 of 638 (713623)
12-14-2013 10:17 PM
Reply to: Message 13 by PlanManStan
12-14-2013 5:10 PM


Re: Deism -- the first Intelligent Design Belief
To say that I cannot completely disbelieve something just because I haven't looked EVERYWHERE is, well, stupid. ...
Now there is a nice scientific retort ...
And no you can never completely believe/disbelieve anything unless you know everything.
This is why science is tentative -- it approximates reality by ruling out false concepts, with each new concept improving on the work previous, but even falsifications can turn out to be erroneous.
You have 7 basic patterns on a spectrum of belief:
ardent believerconvinced and committed to true
tentative believernot convinced but committed to true
potential believernot convinced and not committed but inclined to true
abstainerneither convinced nor committed to either true or false
potential deniernot convinced and not committed but inclined to false
tentative deniernot convinced but committed its false
ardent denierconvinced and committed its false
Like I said before, I go into something with disbelief and try to find evidence for its belief. My opinons can easily change with new evidence.
This is easy to say, in practice you are already somewhat committed to denial in your world view and this flavors how open you really are to new information.
Cognitive dissonance - (Wikipedia, 2010)
Cognitive dissonance is an uncomfortable feeling caused by holding two contradictory ideas simultaneously. The theory of cognitive dissonance proposes that people have a motivational drive to reduce dissonance by changing their attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors, or by justifying or rationalizing them.[2] It is one of the most influential and extensively studied theories in social psychology.
A powerful cause of dissonance is an idea in conflict with a fundamental element of the self-concept, such as "I am a good person" or "I made the right decision". The anxiety that comes with the possibility of having made a bad decision can lead to rationalization, the tendency to create additional reasons or justifications to support one's choices. A person who just spent too much money on a new car might decide that the new vehicle is much less likely to break down than his or her old car. This belief may or may not be true, but it would reduce dissonance and make the person feel better. Dissonance can also lead to confirmation bias, the denial of disconfirming evidence, and other ego defense mechanisms.
See some of the experiments ...
This slight commitment can still cause your initial reaction to be negative. You may find yourself more committed than you realized.
The approach I strive for is open-minded skepticism -- that it is possible until shown falsified, but how possible is debatable, and I can abstain from making a decision if it doesn't affect my life directly.
Yeti as an example - is it possible they exist, yes, should one believe they exist? show me evidence ... and whether they exist or not doesn't affect my life directly so I can abstain from choosing true\false at this time, I can afford to wait for new information.
... That is the beauty of science. It is constantly updating as we explore more and more. ...
Indeed, knowledge builds on knowledge, sometimes with surprises.
Currently, I see no evidence for a God or ID, so therefore I disbelive in both of them.
Currently I see no evidence sufficient to decide one way or the other -- there is no known direct impact on my life that depends on such choice. The choice to believe has no direct benefit nor does the choice to disbelieve.
... therefore I disbelive in both of them.
Belief is not scientific. You can disbelieve in Ohio if you want (old family joke).
Belief\disbelief\opinion has shown a very poor track record on affecting reality. One could simply say "I don't know" and be honest about it. I find it curious that people have trouble (feel uncomfortable?) just saying "I don't know" as if there is some great intellectual failure for not knowing, and choosing denial gives a (false?) sense\feeling of knowing ... perhaps a touch of cognitive-dissonance ... ?
Enjoy
ps -- it's a slow time here, and I've been bored. Have fun - you'll fit right in I do believe ...

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 13 by PlanManStan, posted 12-14-2013 5:10 PM PlanManStan has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 15 by PlanManStan, posted 12-14-2013 10:35 PM RAZD has seen this message but not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1512 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


(2)
Message 17 of 638 (713631)
12-14-2013 10:59 PM
Reply to: Message 16 by PlanManStan
12-14-2013 10:38 PM


Re: Deism -- the first Intelligent Design Belief
... All non-proved things are false. ...
No, all non-proved things are non-proved things. You don't know they are false and saying they are false is a non-proven thing and therefore -- by your very own reasoning -- false.
Ardent belief and ardent denial are equally irrational.
... For example, most babies, although they cannot articulate it, are atheists. That is, they have no belief in a God. ...
Oh brother ... no they are ignostic if anything, unaware of the issue, and therefore incapable of deciding one way or the other.
... I guess it really is just a pseudo-life philosophy choice
hrmm ... it's just a philosophical choice, nothing pseudo (with negative overtones) or life affecting about it -- an intellectual pursuit.
Enjoy

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by PlanManStan, posted 12-14-2013 10:38 PM PlanManStan has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 18 by PlanManStan, posted 12-14-2013 11:06 PM RAZD has replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1512 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


(1)
Message 20 of 638 (713646)
12-15-2013 12:06 AM
Reply to: Message 18 by PlanManStan
12-14-2013 11:06 PM


Re: Deism -- the first Intelligent Design Belief
Either you are quote-mining or I mispoke on my position. ...
You can check the quote, so it seems you mispoke or were careless in word choices. No biggie.
... All things non-proved TO ME, I TREAT as unreal. For example, if gravity was not proved to me, I would go about my life without fear of falling, because I would have no reason to fear it. The minute gravity was proven to me, I would be much more careful! ...
And yet you would be affected by gravity whether you knew about it or not, believed in it or not, you wouldn't suddenly be capable of falling only once some "proved" gravity to you (with caveat that science doesn't 'prove' - it can demonstrate (replicate) and it can explain (theory) but it is still tentative).
... I wouldn't say so. Ardent denial is definitely irrational, but commitment to cause is not always a negative. Commitment to a cause can bring about wonderful changes (e.g. The French and American revolutions, Spartacus' slave revolt, etc.). While "wonderful" is clearly sujective, what isn't subjective is that those people like Spartacus were very commited to bettering their position, which is a good thing.
Interesting point. Commitment to a goal that one believes will benefit yourself and others ... not sure the French revolution was all that clear a victory, and the US is sliding into a corporatist fascism with the ability of companies to buy elections ... was Spartacus real?
Is it rational to go to war, is war rational?
Certainly this is one of the claims for evolutionary benefit for religion -- that it forged determination in followers to overcome hardships.
But is it really rational to joust at windmills all the time?
I would disagree. It is impossible to say, however, because, you know, they're babies and cannot speak or even eat solid food yet. ...
Ignosticism | Atheism | Fandom
... Like I keep saying, there is not a right or wrong answer. ...
ah ... you don't know ... good.
... You can be a positive skepticist and I can be a negative skepticist and we will usually come to the same conclusions. For example, we can both agree on the existence of gravity, Newton's laws of motion, light's wave and particle properties, and what wavelength of light the color red is (supposedly ...
positive, impartial, negative ... it's a spectrum not a dichotomy. Being open-minded ≠ positive or negative, but considers both equally unproven, either is possible.
All things being equal we can have high confidence that things tomorrow will behave the way they did today.
... -- our reds could be entirely different).
But we can agree on the wavelength definition for the range of red in the spectrum, and we can measure the response of color sensing rods\cones in our eyes and ... as long as neither is red\green colorblind ... presumably determine similar nerve response.
End

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by PlanManStan, posted 12-14-2013 11:06 PM PlanManStan has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 21 by PlanManStan, posted 12-15-2013 12:20 AM RAZD has replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1512 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 22 of 638 (713667)
12-15-2013 8:55 AM
Reply to: Message 21 by PlanManStan
12-15-2013 12:20 AM


Re: Deism -- the first Intelligent Design Belief
The fact that there is no right or wrong answer is not the same as not knowing. ...
Ah, so you know the answer then. Do you know the right answer or the wrong answer?
... And Spartacus was real and a huge embarrasment to the Roman Empire (or Republic, I'm not sure). And that whole corporate facism thing is both up for debate and not an immediate "descendant" of the revolutionary war.
It's an immediate descent of the capitalist economic system, and if you don't believe it then you are living in fantasy land ... imho ...
Spartacus - Wikipedia
quote:
Spartacus ... was one of the slave leaders in the Third Servile War, a major slave uprising against the Roman Republic. Little is known about Spartacus beyond the events of the war, and surviving historical accounts are sometimes contradictory and may not always be reliable. ...
This rebellion, interpreted by some as an example of oppressed people fighting for their freedom against a slave-owning oligarchy, has been an inspiration to many political thinkers, and has been featured in literature, television, and film. Although not contradicted by classical historians, no historical account mentions that the goal of the rebels was to end slavery in the Roman Republic, nor do any of the actions of rebel leaders, who themselves committed numerous atrocities, seem specifically aimed at ending slavery.[2]
Doesn't look like the Kirk Douglas movie character ...
... And war can definitely be rational, but only under given, subjective circumstances -- but justied and rational nontheless to the people at hand.
That war can be rationalized does not make it rational. The rationalization process is the cognitive dissonance resolution of contradictory ideas.
As for "jousting at windmills", it can definitely have an effect on people. Religion gives comfort gives happiness gives more productivity gives better surival. And with my gravity example. Gravity is bad example becaues we know it to be true. I said that I would not believe in gravity because I hadn't seen evidence for it. While this doesn't stop it from happening if it really did exist, it does change my perspective of the world quite a bit.
What is true is true whether you believe it or not. Reality doesn't know or care about your beliefs. Learning about gravity is learning the details of how we currently think\understand it operates, a process that is still under development.
I think you take "open-mindedness" a bit too far. ...
Thank you.
... You can think something is true based on evidence but still have an open mind, like I have demonstrated with examples from my own life. ...
Yet that is how your worldview operates. Everyone has a set of opinions, beliefs, learned facts, education and experiences, etc. that all go in to how they interpret what they see, both on a day to day level and when confronted with new information.
The more new information fits into your existing worldview the easier it is for you to accept it without question ...
Such as your comment that babies are atheists -- sounded reasonable to you so you accepted it and did not question that to be an atheist you need information about what you are not believing, that until you have such information you would be ignostic.
There are many things you would be ignostic about growing up -- RNA and the RNA world for one
The more new information conflicts with your worldview the harder it is for you to accept it without question ... and this can result in denial and disbelief of the new information if the conflict is great enough.
Being open minded means lower those barriers to new information.
Enjoy.

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 21 by PlanManStan, posted 12-15-2013 12:20 AM PlanManStan has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 23 by PlanManStan, posted 12-15-2013 9:07 AM RAZD has seen this message but not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1512 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 57 of 638 (720193)
02-20-2014 6:51 PM
Reply to: Message 56 by dadman
02-20-2014 6:27 PM


Re: For the last time -- don't let the door hit you ...
We're still trying to get you to provide evidence for that statement. You're jumping the gun
not at all . . . you still haven't displayed the third element .. hint: .. it has nothing to do with matter or energy
You'll probably say "intelligence" when you finally get around to it.
But of course all you have are assertions rather than facts, or you would be able to provide them ... and I'll bet you don't really want to debate your position.
So if you leave it is no loss.
Enjoy.
[blockcolor=navy]... as you are new here, some posting tips:
type [qs]quotes are easy[/qs] and it becomes:
quotes are easy
or type [quote]quotes are easy[/quote] and it becomes:
quote:
quotes are easy

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 56 by dadman, posted 02-20-2014 6:27 PM dadman has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 58 by dadman, posted 02-20-2014 7:13 PM RAZD has replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1512 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 59 of 638 (720198)
02-20-2014 7:29 PM
Reply to: Message 58 by dadman
02-20-2014 7:13 PM


will you?
and I'll bet you don't really want to debate your position
sure I do . . . as soon as you can display the 3rd element or admit you do not know (that's okay) we can continue . . . as I have stated before .. this is an exercise in scientific logic and reason .. not to be derailed or diverted . . . peace & love
I'm thinking of a number between 1 and 10 and when you guess it we can move on ... and I'll let you have 10 guesses.
No, you want to play games. Let me know when you get around to something to debate.
Enjoy
Edited by RAZD, : ...

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 58 by dadman, posted 02-20-2014 7:13 PM dadman has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 60 by dadman, posted 02-20-2014 7:35 PM RAZD has replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1512 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 64 of 638 (720216)
02-20-2014 11:15 PM
Reply to: Message 60 by dadman
02-20-2014 7:35 PM


got milk?
I do believe your pride and your unwillingness to admit you do not know the 3rd element has derailed you . . . science is indeed very interesting .. especially when you have the courage to follow it to its logical conclusion . . . you'll need patience and an attention span
Still playing games. Curiously I don't see your first number guess, so I guess ... your pride and your unwillingness to admit you do not know the number has derailed you . . . science is indeed very interesting .. especially when you have the courage to follow it to its logical conclusion . . . you'll need patience and an attention span ...
Amusingly, nothing you have said so far involves science ... or facts. You're just stale hot air.
Edited by RAZD, : ...
Edited by RAZD, : ...

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 60 by dadman, posted 02-20-2014 7:35 PM dadman has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 65 by dadman, posted 02-20-2014 11:38 PM RAZD has replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1512 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 75 of 638 (720262)
02-21-2014 9:38 AM
Reply to: Message 65 by dadman
02-20-2014 11:38 PM


science and life
Message 38: well .. before you give up .. you might think about (aside from the evolution debate) how it is now scientifically proven that all life is triune and derives from a source of intelligence . . . I would call this going from point A to B
Message 41: first of all .. you have to display the three elements of life .. matter / energy and ... xxx
Well you haven't said anything else of note since these first two posts other than to say it isn't lithium and it isn't porn.
well it does seem to me that the 3rd element is indeed your greatest fear
Nope, and here's why:
  1. you can't fear something that isn't defined -- do you fear the todal?
  2. your "definition" or "description" of life is erroneous in the first two of your "elements" ... so it doesn't matter what you think or what you claim for your mystical "3rd element" ... it won't make your claim valid.
Rocks are made of matter and they are not life.
Falling water has energy and it is not life.
The sun converts matter into energy and it is not alive.
In science when you try to describe things you do so by those aspects that differentiate what you are describing from things that are not what you are describing. So far you have failed utterly to do this, because what you list applies to non-life as well as life. That makes it a dud, man.
Thus I don't expect your "3rd element" to be anything more than a personal fantasy that is rather irrelevant to the reality of what life is. Especially if you never get off your high horse and stop playing games.
Personally I think you don't want to reveal your precious "3rd element" because you know it will be mocked, disparaged, shown to be irrelevant, and certainly discredited as any kind of scientific discovery.
Message 59:
and I'll bet you don't really want to debate your position
sure I do . . . as soon as you can display the 3rd element or admit you do not know (that's okay) we can continue . . . as I have stated before .. this is an exercise in scientific logic and reason .. not to be derailed or diverted . . . peace & love
I'm thinking of a number between 1 and 10 and when you guess it we can move on ... and I'll let you have 10 guesses.
No, you want to play games. Let me know when you get around to something to debate.
Still no number, you must really really really be afraid of guessing. It's not that hard. Or just admit that you have no clue. Of course you WILL be wrong.
That's the game dadman, so play your card or continue to be mocked and laughed at anyway.
Edited by RAZD, : sun

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 65 by dadman, posted 02-20-2014 11:38 PM dadman has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 83 by Stile, posted 02-21-2014 12:10 PM RAZD has replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1512 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 85 of 638 (720307)
02-21-2014 1:18 PM
Reply to: Message 83 by Stile
02-21-2014 12:10 PM


Re: science and life
I think dadman is trying to say that only things with all 3 of the elements would then be "life."
Therefore, he would agree with you that a rock and falling water and the sun are not life because they do not include the 3rd element (spiders).
In which case this "3rd element" is what determines life and the other two are not necessary to the description: matter and energy do not differentiate life from non-life.
Which does sound a lot like what dadman is after.
Also... it sounds like spiders. Not even scientists study spiders.
Which is what I was alluding to in Message 57:
You'll probably say "intelligence" when you finally get around to it.
As this is an "Intelligent Design" thread in the "Intelligent Design" Forum ...
... and that still won't make his position any more scientific, if all he adds is some "spiritual essence" that cannot be measured or identified.
He's welcome to his opinion, but I doubt there will be any measurable effect on reality.

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 83 by Stile, posted 02-21-2014 12:10 PM Stile has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 86 by dadman, posted 02-21-2014 2:04 PM RAZD has seen this message but not replied
 Message 88 by Stile, posted 02-21-2014 2:25 PM RAZD has replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1512 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 90 of 638 (720319)
02-21-2014 2:30 PM
Reply to: Message 88 by Stile
02-21-2014 2:25 PM


Re: science and life
What would put me on the edge of my seat? Spiders.
Yeah, back in the '60s you could get a regular corvair or a special fast version ... what made it special? It had a spider engine ...
Smokin.

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 88 by Stile, posted 02-21-2014 2:25 PM Stile has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 101 by JonF, posted 02-21-2014 3:55 PM RAZD has replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1512 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 92 of 638 (720323)
02-21-2014 2:37 PM
Reply to: Message 87 by Theodoric
02-21-2014 2:23 PM


Re: Stop feeding the troll
He won't go away if we keep feeding him.
Was a little curious about the 3rd element though because the 5th element is hot. I mean smoking.
or ... wood, fire, earth, metal and water ... I'm sure we can keep stringing him along ...
Indeed. He has been given enough answers, so it's time to show and tell ... or confirm he is a troll by continuing to behave like a prepubescent child ...
... and either way he will suffer the consequences of his juvenile approach. Respect is earned.
So we can have fun trolling the troll.
Edited by RAZD, : ...

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 87 by Theodoric, posted 02-21-2014 2:23 PM Theodoric has not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1512 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 95 of 638 (720327)
02-21-2014 2:49 PM
Reply to: Message 91 by Stile
02-21-2014 2:34 PM


pratt trolling
Or Information?
Yep -- that hoary old chestnut ... no surprises at all. Another dud, man ... but you weren't supposed to give it away, we could probably string him out another hundred posts ...
Edited by RAZD, : ..

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 91 by Stile, posted 02-21-2014 2:34 PM Stile has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 96 by dadman, posted 02-21-2014 2:50 PM RAZD has seen this message but not replied
 Message 99 by Stile, posted 02-21-2014 3:16 PM RAZD has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024