(not really) intelligent design

[Mulhollanddose]

Originally posted by BlueSkyJaunte
A theory is based on observation of facts, experimentation, and has been verified multiple times and can be verified by impartial researchers.

Not in the case of evolution...unverified, unproven and unobservable...Defies the very scientifically immutable laws it purports to hang its hat on.

[Shaun @ Tru6]

Originally posted by Nathans_Dad


If you don't believe in God and are wrong, then you spend eternity in damnation...I'll err on the side of God.

Ummm, exactly why do you think this? Why on earth, or heaven for that matter, would God have such weakass HUMAN emotions so as to be petty, mean-spirited, and puerile?

You do God a great disservice with this statement.

[Shaun @ Tru6]

Originally posted by scottmandue
Why do you Darwinian evangelist make ID a religious issue anyway, are there not scientists spending millions of dollars searching for intelligent life somewhere out in the universe?

Are you in the deity camp or the super-smart aliens camp of ID?

[Superman]

IROC, Z-Man is right. A theory is not proven. So, if you believe that a particular theory is true, you apply an element of faith.

I don't have trouble reconciling my religions beliefs with my scientific knowledge. I notice that science doesn't know everything yet, and so I see no conflict. I think the Bible is true. In fact, I'm not ready to conclude yet that the Genesis account of creation is not correct. It's possible that it is, and that natural selection is a mechanism that occurs in nature. But in my mind, there is no question whether we, and the Universe, are God's handiwork in some fashion or another. I just don't know how he did it. And neither do you. And anybody who asserts that God's hand is NOT in the universe......is going WAY beyond the evidence to make that conclusion.

[Mulhollanddose]

"Scientists who go about teaching that evolution is a fact of life are great con-men, and the story they are telling may be the GREATEST HOAX ever." -- Dr. T. N. Tahmisian

[IROC]

Originally posted by Mulhollanddose
Not in the case of evolution...unverified, unproven and unobservable...Defies the very scientifically immutable laws it purports to hang its hat on.

Evolution has been verified, proven and observed! Where have you been? No one (with any credibility) disputes this. What many people do argue is whether or not the theory of evolution adequately explains the observed phenomenon of evolution.

Mike

[Mulhollanddose]

"One of the reasons I started taking this anti-evolutionary view, was ... it struck me that I had been working on this stuff for twenty years and there was not one thing I knew about it.

That's quite a shock to learn that one can be so misled so long. ...so for the last few weeks I've tried putting a simple question to various people and groups of people.

Question: 'Can you tell me anything you know about evolution, any one thing that is true?' I tried that question on the geology staff at the Field Museum of Natural History and the only answer I got was silence. I tried it on the members of the Evolutionary Morphology Seminar in the University of Chicago, a very prestigious body of evolutionists, and all I got there was silence for a long time and eventually one person said, 'I do know one thing – it ought not to be taught in high school'."

Dr. Colin Patterson, Senior Palaeontologist. British Museum of Natural History, London.

[Mulhollanddose]

Originally posted by IROC
Evolution has been verified, proven and observed!

You tell a big enough lie, frequently, people start to believe it.

[IROC]

Originally posted by Superman
IROC, Z-Man is right. A theory is not proven. So, if you believe that a particular theory is true, you apply an element of faith.

Ahhh...but it doesn't require the kind of "faith without evidence" that religion asks of it adherents (which I think was the original point when arguing something like ID is valid). It requires the faith (or I'll use the word "confidence") that if you repeat the same experiment, you'll get the same result. That isn't "faith without evidence" if the theory is sound.

I could say that I have "faith" that the Sun will rise tomorrow. It might not, but I have a large body of evidence to be confident that it will occur.

Mike

[wludavid]

Originally posted by IROC
I could say that I have "faith" that the Sun will rise tomorrow. It might not, but I have a large body of evidence to be confident that it will occur.

And you never know until you see it. Someone might be using artificial illumination above the clouds.

(Whoever knows the reference gets a cookie.)

[IROC]

Originally posted by Mulhollanddose
You tell a big enough lie, frequently, people start to believe it.

If it is a "big lie" then simply point out one instance where the theory of evolution is false. Ought to be an easy task.

Mike

[Moses]

Originally posted by HardDrive

Likewise, no one is stating that evolutionary theory is fact.

I am... Evolution is a proven, reproducable phenomenon. It should only be referred to as "theory" when it is used to explain biological phenomena.

If and how the process of evolution relates to the origin of man is theory.

[widebody911]

Originally posted by Mulhollanddose
You tell a big enough lie, frequently, people start to believe it.

Believe it? Hell, they'll send you money even! You can make millions off the suckers that believe it by telling them that [god|Great Green Arkleseizure|flying spaghetti monster] has dictated that they turn over 10% of their assets.

[Moses]

Originally posted by Mulhollanddose
Not in the case of evolution...unverified, unproven and unobservable...Defies the very scientifically immutable laws it purports to hang its hat on.

Respectfully, you are wrong. It's very easy to prove evolution in the lab. It's done every year in every genetics 101 lab in the country. It is, in fact, verifiable, provable and observable. The argument is if the process of evolution explains the origin of man. That's the question.

[s_wilwerding]

I agree with IROC, but I'll try to expand on his explanation.

I don't care whether you believe in creationism or not, but it is not science. "Science" is applying the scientific method to verify or deny certain theories. Evolution is a theory that is subject to scientific verification; creationism/intelligent design is not. To just say that the world is too complex, therefore God created everything - that's not science.

I was watching a show recently where a bunch of physicists were talking about string theory. Quite a few of them said that since strings are too small to be scientifically validated, string theory is more of a philosophy than a science. I believe the same thing about creationism/intelligent design - since it is not subject to scientific inquiry, it should not be taught in science class.

If you want to teach it in philosophy or religion class, I have no problem with that.

[Mulhollanddose]

Originally posted by Moses
Respectfully, you are wrong. It's very easy to prove evolution in the lab.

How does the micro environment of the lab explain the macro environment and the theory that randomness begat the complex interrelationship between all of creation?

Where is the half man?...New ones should be popping up regularly in the evolutionary fairy-tale.

[widebody911]

Originally posted by Mulhollanddose
Where is the half man?...New ones should be popping up regularly in the evolutionary fairy-tale.

They're called "Republicans"

[wludavid]

Mul, you've got to be kidding. I really think you must enjoy trolling this board.

[IROC]

Originally posted by widebody911
They're called "Republicans"

OK, that's better than what I had. :>)

Mike

[Mulhollanddose]

Originally posted by wludavid
Mul, you've got to be kidding. I really think you must enjoy trolling this board.

My aim is not to kid you, unlike the godless purveyors of evolutionary theory.

Enlighten me as to my error.