Why do people say intelligent design is not scientific?

reply to post by sirnex


Just curious,but where did you first learn about the existence of Satan?

reply to post by On the Edge


You mean climate change, yes? Of course. Of course for a long time I had the benefit of having a glacier in the ol' backyard, and watching it turn from a giant wall of ice, to a dirty hill of snow in about seven years' time was pretty enlightening.

Oh, that and the sea level rising enough to, y'know, eat a few coastal villages.

And there's the whole "The Arctic Ocean has open water in winter now" thing.

And of course the fact that the Sahara is growing, the American southeast is becoming a monsoon region, the Antarctic ice cap is shifting, and the Gobi is shrinking also point to things being in a bit of a fluc, in terms of global climate.

Now if you're asking whether I believe it's due to humans... Well, certainly partially. To put it crudely, pretending humans have no part in climate change is like thinking if you fart underwater it won't stink.

reply to post by TheWalkingFox


You do know then that certain humans have a nasty little agenda regarding the whole "global warming" scenario,right?

I'm sure you would never consider the possibility that Satan has an agenda behind the theories of evolution?

reply to post by On the Edge

people use everything for some sort of agenda. global warming is blown out of proportion and played up by politicians and the media (you can tell when it snows in winter and people go "i thought there was global warming").


and why would we think satan was behind evolution? or anything?
if that was true, would that be bad?

oh and walkingfox, you actually had a glacier in your back yard? that. is. awesome. if some of it still exists you should take some of it and keep it in your freezer in a tupperware container. who knows, maybe in the future a museum will buy it off of you.



[edit on 4-11-2009 by ELECTRICkoolaidZOMBIEtest]

www.evolutionnews.org...

You'd think a man so firmly rooted in his convictions would be able to stand up to a little debate?!

Or,if like the saying goes,"If you repeat a lie often enough,eventually people will believe it!" (Also,"The bigger the lie,the better!")-I think this was written by a leading propagandist,Goebbles?(I probably didn't spell that right! I could come back later and get it straight!)

C'mon,this is a Conspiracy site,right? Look a little deeper!

reply to post by ELECTRICkoolaidZOMBIEtest


Well,Satan is "the Father of all Lies".

Lies are bad,"m'kay?!"

reply to post by On the Edge


really? REALLY? youre telling us to dig deeper?
your own article

Dawkins declined through his publicists, saying he does not debate “creationists.”

he doesnt debate creationists. why?
because it creates the false impression that there is something to debate. it gives creationists the attention they want and need for profits and it seems to lend credibility to creationism. you sir, need to dig deeper.


here. i did the digging for you. all you gotta do is just jump into the hole.
richarddawkins.net...

Well,Satan is "the Father of all Lies".

Lies are bad,"m'kay?!"

wow.
well heres a fun little idea.
you dont know satan was the bad one. for all we know the evil one is god and interfered with people writing the bible and reversed the roles.

also supernatural beings havent been substantiated at all.
another thing...what do you even mean by saying the devil is the source of evolution?

oh an also....i noticed this...the people saying that ID has nothing to do with religion (specifically christianity) do a pretty bad job of making us aware that. this is like....the 50th time the bible was used in this thread.



[edit on 4-11-2009 by ELECTRICkoolaidZOMBIEtest]

I'll tell you a secret! if your female, look down to your you-know-what.
There is something there that PROVES BEYOND A SHADOW OF A DOUBT THAT WE WERE CREATED!
It's called a HYMEN, it's sole function is as a chastity detector!
It is debatable whether it it fool-proof, but it's reliability is astronomical!
Also, there is NO OTHER ANIMAL ON THIS PLANET WITH ONE!
Think about it.
If anyone can PROVE ME WRONG, I WILL RELENT AND WILL GIVE EVOLUTION A CHANCE, until then, CASE CLOSED!
And please tell everyone this, and maybe we can end this stupid debate.

reply to post by Keymaster1






That is the first time i heard that. and its one of the lamest arguments ever.

Since hymens come in so many shapes and forms, it's important to realize that the hymen is not a reliable indicator of whether a person has been sexually active or not....t it's possible to tear or stretch the hymen during non-sexual strenuous activity (such as horseback riding, gymnastics, or dance) or from trauma directly to the vaginal area. There are also women whose hymen tissue is so flexible that it moves aside during penetration.

www.goaskalice.columbia.edu...

nice astronomically accurate sign of chastity. i dont even know where you got the idea that it is even debatable that it's fool proof
its not something completely understood, but a good estimation is that it helps keep dirt out.


yet-a freaking-gain

evidence for Intelligent design.

where is it?

this thread is pretty much "Did jesus exist and terrible reasons evolution is bad"



[edit on 4-11-2009 by ELECTRICkoolaidZOMBIEtest]

I take one look at the humans/animals on this planet and i am amazed, how can something so perfect and so well balanced be regarded as a creation? in my eyes it simply can't be a creation! since the records began so much has changed, anyone can predict but no one can KNOW what the future brings. So why are we still alive? we have adapted/evolved to everything that had potential to hamper our way of life and that my friend is called evolution... i.e. changing/adapting/evolving to live with something you cannot change.

Many of you guys/girls think humans are influencing global climate change, LOL please back it up with PROOF... and sorry YouTube is not proof and nor is the bible… please prove to me that this not NOT the natural life cycle of a planet…. Global warming or not we will live on, I live in New Zealand and where I live the temperatures range from – 20c to +30c, I hate the heat and am comfortable around the 10c mark, if the planet warmed to a general temp of 40c – 50c I would adapt to that temperature and given 1000 years that adaption would be know as evolution.

To me Evolution is a beautiful and flawless thing….

Hello all, while I don't think that evolution and ID are necessarily mutually exclusive, I want to know, just what exactly is the proof for species to species evolution?

As far as proof for ID, just what exactly should be considered proof? Supposed that one considers all events that don't seem to fit with our "known common sense" as proof of ID, then is the fact that "matter curves space" proof? What about the fact that this universe started out as an "infinitely hot" atom? What about an event that is too statistically impossible to happen by chance? If the only proof acceptable is the physical representation of God, then really, nothing can be proven. I mean, you could show me all the fossils in the world, with all the intermediate fossils required, but without making an inference that the fossils represent successive species, then I can just simply ask, so how do you know that these species, which you have never seen, are derived from that one? Unless you can teleport me back in time, send me to the scene to show two animals of a species having sex and conceive another species, then there's no proof. Eventually, you have to make inferences based on certain observations, and to me, to conclude that an event is too impossible to happen by chance, therefore it must be by ID, is as good any.

Actually, it's said that nothing in science is really proven, and indeed, what we see is what our eyes and brains have developed to interpret, when in fact, there may simply be nothing around us. To me(and as someone pointed out), science is logic. So to me, proof is pretty much limited to what "sounds logical"(with our "known" or previously accepted common sense of course.)

Mostly they claim Intelligent Design (ID) isn't science, because it is a thinly disguised attempt to force the Bible's version of creation onto schoolchildren. There is no scientific evidence to back up the claims of ID. There are some philosophical ones, true. The Universe is a complex place, far more complicated than a watch. How could this Universe exist, through blind chance? Just as you don't find a watch lying around that just randomly came into being, how could the Universe, and life itself, come into being randomly? No Watchmaker, no watch.

I sympathize with that sentiment to a certain degree. I'm not convinced that Darwin's theory is quite correct. However, that theory - with modifications introduced as new facts were learned - covers the facts better than any other theory. It certainly isn't perfect. It has plenty of holes. However, it has fewer holes, and requires less special pleading, than any other theory. It also doesn't require the intervention of an otherwise unknown, undetected Watchmaker or Intelligence to explain things.

Another reason why ID isn't considered scientific is that it doesn't offer any way of testing the idea. The Intelligence made things as they are. No reason, no explanation, that's just the way He did it. This doesn't make ID untrue or incorrect. It simply removes it from the realm of science. Science requires that a theory be testable, at least in theory. ID doesn't do this.

There is even a philosophical reason to object to the ID notion. If, as they claim, the Universe is too marvelous to have been blindly created by chance, then what of the creating Intelligence? How was that Intelligence created? Would It not also be to marvelous to have arisen through chance? Would not there need to be another Intelligence, even greater, to have made the One Who made us?

You can't evade this by claiming that this first Intelligence has always existed. If that is true, then why couldn't the Universe have always existed, without the Intelligence?

reply to post by ELECTRICkoolaidZOMBIEtest


Never said it was fool-proof, but you haven't addressed the main point.
That NO OTHER ANIMAL ON EARTH HAS ANYTHING EVEN REMOTELY SIMILAR.
Point being ape/chimps DO NOT HAVE HYMENS! they can be penetrated without any adverse effects as young as 6 mos. old
I actually saw it happen on a National Geographic show, they showed a chimp in her mothers arms, very cose-up shot, you could not tell what was happening, then they pulled back, and MY GOD, (don't get upset, just an exclamation, not religious) an adult male was "doing" the little baby chimp WHILE IT'S MOTHER WAS HOLDING IT!
Can't be done to a human,(better not), without killing or severely harming the child.
And, also the cases the article was refering to are RARE and ABERANT(not typical) to humans.
And Yes, I did take 1 and 1 half years pre-med, and we spent months on the female reproductive system.
I really sometimes have nightmares because of it, but such is life!

Also, in the quantum world, the rules of cause-and-effect are suspended, that is, "something" can come from "nothing." So to say God came from nothing is perfectly logical.

Of course, we have to define just what exactly "something" and "nothing" is. According to Einstein, matter is energy that curves space-(time). If space and energy are nothing, then we may in fact still be nothing. It's just the interaction between space and energy that gives the illusion of matter(something.) Do people remember this guy?

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Read the part about creation(I think pg2) carefully. According to him, Intelligent Infinity, or God, basically manifests as both Space and Energy. It's very interesting because the Big Bang is said to include all of space-time and the universe's energy. Time, however, is said to have arose from space(it's said that for a very short time right at the Big Bang, time can be considered as another part of space). Either he's done his research, or he really knows something.

Finally, it's said that the Bible has been altered, so I wouldn't use any part of it to try to prove or disprove God, especially the one about the Earth being 6000 years old.

Originally posted by Keymaster1
reply to post by ELECTRICkoolaidZOMBIEtest

 

Never said it was fool-proof, but you haven't addressed the main point.

excuse me? i referred to it in the EXACT SAME TERMS you used.

That NO OTHER ANIMAL ON EARTH HAS ANYTHING EVEN REMOTELY SIMILAR.
Point being ape/chimps DO NOT HAVE HYMENS! they can be penetrated without any adverse effects as young as 6 mos. old
I actually saw it happen on a National Geographic show, they showed a chimp in her mothers arms, very cose-up shot, you could not tell what was happening, then they pulled back, and MY GOD, (don't get upset, just an exclamation, not religious) an adult male was "doing" the little baby chimp WHILE IT'S MOTHER WAS HOLDING IT!
Can't be done to a human,(better not), without killing or severely harming the child.
And, also the cases the article was refering to are RARE and ABERANT(not typical) to humans.
And Yes, I did take 1 and 1 half years pre-med, and we spent months on the female reproductive system.
I really sometimes have nightmares because of it, but such is life!

um. ok. your point is no other animal has a hymen.

i am addressing that here
so what?

Also, his idea of "step-down" creation or thoughts can create reality is pretty similar to the Vertical Theory of quantum physics, which says that there are an infinite "layers" of universes, and that a universe is merely a thought from someone from a "higher" dimension. Someone said that we could just be a computer game, I wouldn't rule that out actually.

reply to post by np6888


im not sure who you are referring to...

if you mean hidden hand, i tried to read what he was saying...a lot of it had no meaning to me. he created a bunch of rules and ideas about a creator...which mostly confused me. he created a lot of new terms ways to use old terms. its hard for me to follow. if you meant someone else i apologize.

reply to post by ELECTRICkoolaidZOMBIEtest


Just to be nice,I checked out your reference. But my thinking is obviously biased,because I don't like his whole "ungodly" premise.

Ya know,there are those who believe the Bible is the word of God and there are those who don't.

Agreed?

It's really a matter of faith anyway. Some people want to believe and some don't.

Peace!

reply to post by ELECTRICkoolaidZOMBIEtest


And by the way, that entry in "go ask alice " appears to be written by a retard, The first sentence practically SCREAMS "WE DON'T WANT TO ADMIT IT, BUT IT DEFINATELY APPEARS TO BE A VIGINITY DETECTOR, AND SINCE WE'RE COMMIE PSYCHO-POLITICAL OPERATIVES SPECIFICALLY INSTRUCTED TO DESTROY AMERICA BY INFILTRATING AND DISRUPTING/DESTROYING/TURNING EVERYTHING GOOD TO BAD-AND EVERYTHING BAD TO GOOD (hence homo-sexuality/pedophilia/drug/alcohol abuse=GOOD- religion/morality/self-reliance/ethics/self-control=BAD) WE WON'T ACTUALLY SAY ANYTHING TRUTHFUL IN THIS SECTION!".
It states that it is "AN ETERNAL MYSTERY" Gosh, could they be hinting something(maybe there is a creator,oops). And it doesn't APPEAR(open eyes before thinking) to have a specific duh, I just TOLD you what the PURPOSE is).
To keep out dirt? Ever heard of a douche? Soap/Water?
Oh WOW! It states It could be there to PREVENT THINGS FROM BEING PUSHED INTO THE VAGINA'. Good God! could it be more obvious!
And lastly, do you know what anecdotal evidence means? (here-say/not imperical/somebody just said that strenuous activity caused the hymen to tear? Wow, I've NEVER EVER even HEARD of a Woman/Girl Lying about how her hymen got tore!)

reply to post by On the Edge


so you looked at my link on why he doesnt debate creationists and you decided to say "this is all a matter of faith"

you didnt read it did you?
if you did you could at least retract your statement about him "not defending" his "theory"