ushome, especially in light of all the technical knowledge of evolution that I have shared with you over the last months, do you ever consider that you are wrong? The fact that you have ignored most of it suggests that you don't.
And don't bother directing the same question at me. I know I have, because I take each topic and view the best arguments for both sides then decide, rather than picking a side then finding anything to support it while ignoring the rest or acting like it proves nothing.
Originally posted by ushomefree
I read the article you provided entitled, "Intelligent Design: An Ambiguous Assault on Evolution." Shakyamunison, dear Sir, the entire article was the product of bias views; the author made grand claims, but didn't even attempt to substantiate them. For crying out loud, the article didn't even contain a bibliography (ha ha ha)! The last article that I provided--or provided excerpts from--contained 58 references!! But anyway.... in what way is Intelligent Design (ID) munipulation? Don't you understand, at minimum, it is simply a different interpretation of the facts, namely the fine-tuning of the universe (or biochemical information, nonetheless)? And how in the world does that even compare to Christianty? C'mon Shakyamunison, why don't you think about what you post on this forum? All you provided are blanket statements. Whether right or wrong, can you admit that?
LiveScience.com is a great wed site.
The bias you saw was a bias for the truth. I'm not going to provide references for an article from a reputable wed site. If you have a problem with the site, you should take that up with the site, not me.
In what way is Intelligent Design (ID) manipulation? I am glad you asked: ID is a code word for Christian fundamentalist dogma. The Christian right has found, over the years, that their influence in society has been diminished. Court cases after court cases have been lost by those who would wish the bible to be a source of power in society. As a response to this trend, they have taken the old saying “if you can’t beet them, join them” to its fullest extent. The idea is to corrupt Science by inventing a pro-religious theory that can, at a later date, be discarded. The end game is to eradicate evolution and any other science that would dear to contradict the bible.
If what you are saying is correct, then you would not have a problem with this post:
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
I would be fine with ID if it was more like: the universe is a living being that has grown and designed the universe like a plant would design a leaf. However, to conclude that some white man on a cloud designed the universe from outside it, is just silly.
But ID supporter would reject an interpretation of ID that had a God that was more plant like then man like.
ushomefree you are starting to sound like Bardock42
Shakyamunison-
Without a doubt, people with theistic views are rallying around the theory of Intelligent Design; but these theists did not create (or form) the theory. Theists embrace Intelligent Design simply because it has <drum roll> religious implications. The theory of Intelligent Design is being substantiated by scientists in such fields as astronomy, astrophysics, and molecular biology for instance--even mathematicians are on board. And the theory of Intelligent Design--or the premise thereof--goes back centuries. Albert Einstein himself embraced the theory, not to mention Stephen Hawking! So whoops goes your theory on Intelligent Design being a code word for--as you put it--"Christian fundamentalist dogma."
Is a fight being forced by theists? Absolutely! But the theory of Intelligent Design "itself" and the manner in which theists "handle" it are completely different. You know (as well as I know) that people have the capacity to develope extreme views covering a host of subjects; but let's be fair.
And regarding Intelligent Design being taught in public school--the disposition of such--is a no-brainer; in keeping with history, all new ideas having profound implications (at odds with social norms) are attacked in some way, shape, or form. Society simply isn't ready. Why? Because the vast majority are simply uneducated on what Intelligent Design--not to mention Darwinian evolution--encompass. You are a prime example of how the media and shoddy internet articles bring the issues out of focus--Intelligent Design being "Christian dogma" or whatever. Wake up!
Within our life time, we will see Intelligent Design introduced into high school curriculum; I guarantee it.
Originally posted by ushomefreeNot everywhere. I guarantee.
Shakyamunison-Without a doubt, people with theistic views are rallying around the theory of Intelligent Design; but these theists did not create (or form) the theory. Theists embrace Intelligent Design simply because it has <drum roll> religious implications. The theory of Intelligent Design is being substantiated by scientists in such fields as astronomy, astrophysics, and molecular biology for instance--even mathematicians are on board. And the theory of Intelligent Design--or the premise thereof--goes back centuries. Albert Einstein himself embraced the theory, not to mention Stephen Hawking! So whoops goes your theory on Intelligent Design being a code word for--as you put it--"Christian fundamentalist dogma."
Is a fight being forced by theists? Absolutely! But the theory of Intelligent Design "itself" and the manner in which theists "handle" it are completely different. You know (as well as I know) that people have the capacity to develope extreme views covering a host of subjects; but let's be fair.
And regarding Intelligent Design being taught in public school--the disposition of such--is a no-brainer; in keeping with history, all new ideas having profound implications (at odds with social norms) are attacked in some way, shape, or form. Society simply isn't ready. Why? Because the vast majority are simply uneducated on what Intelligent Design--not to mention Darwinian evolution--encompass. You are a prime example of how the media and internet articles bring the issues out of focus--Intelligent Design being "Christian dogma" or whatever. Wake up!
Within our life time, we will see Intelligent Design introduced into high school curriculum; I guarantee it.
Originally posted by ushomefree
Shakyamunison-Without a doubt, people with theistic views are rallying around the theory of Intelligent Design; but these theists did not create (or form) the theory. Theists embrace Intelligent Design simply because it has <drum roll> religious implications. The theory of Intelligent Design is being substantiated by scientists in such fields as astronomy, astrophysics, and molecular biology for instance--even mathematicians are on board. And the theory of Intelligent Design--or the premise thereof--goes back centuries. Albert Einstein himself embraced the theory, not to mention Stephen Hawking! So whoops goes your theory on Intelligent Design being a code word for--as you put it--"Christian fundamentalist dogma."
Is a fight being forced by theists? Absolutely! But the theory of Intelligent Design "itself" and the manner in which theists "handle" it are completely different. You know (as well as I know) that people have the capacity to develope extreme views covering a host of subjects; but let's be fair.
And regarding Intelligent Design being taught in public school--the disposition of such--is a no-brainer; in keeping with history, all new ideas having profound implications (at odds with social norms) are attacked in some way, shape, or form. Society simply isn't ready. Why? Because the vast majority are simply uneducated on what Intelligent Design--not to mention Darwinian evolution--encompass. You are a prime example of how the media and shoddy internet articles bring the issues out of focus--Intelligent Design being "Christian dogma" or whatever. Wake up!
Within our life time, we will see Intelligent Design introduced into high school curriculum; I guarantee it.
If the intelligence you are talking about is not the god of the bible, but something more like the universe its self, then I too believe in ID, but I don't think we would agree on what this ID is.
I have no problem with ID introduced into high school curriculum as long as it is reviewed in leading scientific journals and does not teach or even mention Christianity.
What do you say about that?
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
If the intelligence you are talking about is not the god of the bible, but something more like the universe its self, then I too believe in ID, but I don't think we would agree on what this ID is.
When discussing Intelligent Design theory--the majority of the time--I have presented the idea of an Intelligent Agent creating the universe. Nevermind the God of the Bible; who (or what) the Intelligent Agent may be is irrelevant in this discussion. Such answers do not fall within the scope of science. But science does warrant "cause" to "effect." We already know the effect--the universe--what caused it? I view the cause as an Intelligent Agent (or Supreme Being). Yes, I do disagree with you; I think a cause "transcendent" of the universe "itself" is the most plausible option. It is my view--based on natural phenomena we observe and the theory of General Reletivity--that nothing wills itself.
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
I have no problem with ID introduced into high school curriculum as long as it is reviewed in leading scientific journals and does not teach or even mention Christianity.What do you say about that?
Sir, I completely agree.
Originally posted by ushomefree
When discussing Intelligent Design theory--the majority of the time--I have presented the idea of an Intelligent Agent creating the universe. Nevermind the God of the Bible; who (or what) the Intelligent Agent may be is irrelevant in this discussion. Such answers do not fall within the scope of science. But science does warrant "cause" to "effect." We already know the effect--the universe--what caused it? I view the cause as an Intelligent Agent (or Supreme Being). Yes, I do disagree with you; I think a cause "transcendent" of the universe "itself" is the most plausible option. It is my view--based on natural phenomena we observe and the theory of General Reletivity--that nothing wills itself.Sir, I completely agree.
buddy, you realize id is circular correct? if something intelligent designed the universe, what designed the intelligent creater. and what designed that, and on and on and on. its a loop dude, realize it
Originally posted by ushomefree
When discussing Intelligent Design theory--the majority of the time--I have presented the idea of an Intelligent Agent creating the universe. Nevermind the God of the Bible; who (or what) the Intelligent Agent may be is irrelevant in this discussion. Such answers do not fall within the scope of science. But science does warrant "cause" to "effect." We already know the effect--the universe--what caused it? I view the cause as an Intelligent Agent (or Supreme Being). Yes, I do disagree with you; I think a cause "transcendent" of the universe "itself" is the most plausible option. It is my view--based on natural phenomena we observe and the theory of General Reletivity--that nothing wills itself.Sir, I completely agree.
What if we are mistaking growth for design. What if the universe is a living being that is growing and changing, kind of a Non-Intelligent Design?
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
What if we are mistaking growth for design. What if the universe is a living being that is growing and changing, kind of a Non-Intelligent Design?
I'm open to that. In fact that reminds me of something Devil King once said: "Well I never said that I believe god created humanity...at least not intentionally anyway. If an all-knowing superbieng was behind our creation, he would've designed us a little better. That's why I don't subscribe to the idea of intelligent design." Not an outlandish claim, I think. I've always wondered why the hell we have wisdom teeth.
What the hell does general relativity have to do with "intelligent design"?
"There is no evidence for intelligent design. The laws of physics and chemistry, and Darwinian evolution, are sufficient to account for everything in the universe." Steven Hawking.
“It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it.” Albert Einstein. Nor did he believe the universe was designed for us.
Space-time and what we refer to as the universe may have begun at the Big Bang and expanded from there, but the universe existed prior to that expansion. Time may begin at a certain point, the universe as we know it may begin at a certain point, but current modeling is unable to investigate the universe outside of time, so there's no certainty it has a beginning at all.
And yes something can come from a vacuum, see quantum electrodynamics.
And no "intelligent design" will never be a scientific theory even if you tag the word theory onto the end you will still be nothing more than a cdesign proponentsist. It's not a new idea, it's an old idea repackaged.
Originally posted by xmarksthespot
What the hell does general relativity have to do with "intelligent design"?"There is no evidence for intelligent design. The laws of physics and chemistry, and Darwinian evolution, are sufficient to account for everything in the universe." Steven Hawking.
“It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it.” Albert Einstein. Nor did he believe the universe was designed for us.
Space-time and what we refer to as the universe may have begun at the Big Bang and expanded from there, but the universe existed prior to that expansion. Time may begin at a certain point, the universe as we know it may begin at a certain point, but current modeling is unable to investigate the universe outside of time, so there's no certainty it has a beginning at all.
And yes something can come from a vacuum, see quantum electrodynamics.
And no "intelligent design" will never be a scientific theory even if you tag the word theory onto the end you will still be nothing more than a cdesign proponentsist. It's not a new idea, it's an old idea repackaged.
intelligent design is evolution with a twist lol. its just everything happened the same way, cept god intended that to happen. technically intelligent design cant be disproved(unfortunately) since we cant prove or disprove the existance of god, really makes this argument retarded.its all personal belief. debating scientific theory is retarded. if you believe in id you believe in evolution but with intent.