Evolution/Intelligent Design (1 Viewer)

Slidey

But pieces of what?
Joined
Jun 12, 2004
Messages
6,600
Gender
Male
HSC
2005
Religion in general fails basic scientific scrutiny, yet you still believe in it. :p
 

Lexicographer

Retired 13 May 2006
Joined
Aug 13, 2003
Messages
8,275
Location
Darnassus ftw
Gender
Male
HSC
2003
That's the most unintelligent post I've ever seen you make.

It is also the most intentionally controversial.
 

Korn

King of the Universe
Joined
Mar 8, 2004
Messages
3,406
Location
The Hills
Gender
Male
HSC
2004
Lexicographer said:
That's the most unintelligent post I've ever seen you make.

It is also the most intentionally controversial.
U talking to moon or slide
 

MoonlightSonata

Retired
Joined
Aug 17, 2002
Messages
3,645
Gender
Female
HSC
N/A
Lexicographer said:
That's the most unintelligent post I've ever seen you make.

It is also the most intentionally controversial.
No, seriously, they are really bad theories.

And even the basic argument from design, Palley's watch, comes up over and over again by theists even though it was killed off over two hundred years ago by Hume.
 

Frigid

LLB (Hons)
Joined
Nov 17, 2002
Messages
6,208
Gender
Undisclosed
HSC
N/A
from the article: The chair of the Board of Education, Steve Abrams, is a Young Earth creationist, which is to say he believes the world was created by the Almighty no more than 6,000 years ago.

errr, ok... but we have existence of many things which are older than 6000 years?
 

Riewe

Member
Joined
Feb 11, 2005
Messages
250
Location
Lothlorien
Gender
Male
HSC
2003
Because of the total rigidity of the universe, with its laws and such, and because nearly everything is so perfectly ordered with expected results, it has led me to believe in intelligent design, then evolution taking place.

Doing a science degree, i see all these rules and laws but wonder to myself "why are they like that? Why is that so?" And the only real logical answer i can think of is some almight being(s) who by their power created the laws which we all live by.

Then because of the evidence that the evolutionary theory brings to the table, i have to accept that evolution is a truth. But it never explains the BEGINNING. It is only explaining the process of how we came to be, not that instantaneous instant it all started.

So that is why i believe in evolution being a result/process of intelligent design.
 

MoonlightSonata

Retired
Joined
Aug 17, 2002
Messages
3,645
Gender
Female
HSC
N/A
Riewe said:
Because of the total rigidity of the universe, with its laws and such, and because nearly everything is so perfectly ordered with expected results, it has led me to believe in intelligent design, then evolution taking place.

Doing a science degree, i see all these rules and laws but wonder to myself "why are they like that? Why is that so?" And the only real logical answer i can think of is some almight being(s) who by their power created the laws which we all live by.

Then because of the evidence that the evolutionary theory brings to the table, i have to accept that evolution is a truth. But it never explains the BEGINNING. It is only explaining the process of how we came to be, not that instantaneous instant it all started.

So that is why i believe in evolution being a result/process of intelligent design.
Courtesy of talkorigins.org --

-------------------

Claim:
Intelligent design has explanatory power.

Response:
1. Merely accounting for facts does not make a theory scientific. Saying "it's magic" can account for any fact anywhere but is as far from science as you can get. A theory has explanatory power if facts can be deduced from it. No facts have ever been deduced from ID theory. The theory is equivalent to saying, "it's magic."

2. "Intelligent" and "design" remain effectively undefined. A theory cannot have explanatory power if it is uncertain what the theory says in the first place.

-------------------

Claim:
Complexity indicates intelligent design.

Response:
1. This is an argument from incredulity. Complexity usually means something is hard to understand. But the fact that one cannot understand how something came to be does not indicate that one may conclude it was designed. On the contrary, lack of understanding indicates that we must not conclude design or anything else.

2. In the sort of design that we know about, simplicity is a design goal. Complexity arises to some extent through carelessness or necessity, but engineers work to make things as simple as possible. This is very different from what we see in life.

3. Complexity arises from natural causes: for example, in weather patterns and cave formations.

-------------------

Claim:
Every event has a cause. The universe itself had a beginning, so it must have had a first cause, which must have been a creator God.

Response:
1. The assumption that every event has a cause, although common in our experience, is not necessarily universal. The apparent lack of cause for some events, such as radioactive decay, suggests that there might be exceptions. There are also hypotheses, such as alternate dimensions of time or an eternally oscillating universe, that allow a universe without a first cause.

2. By definition, a cause comes before an event. If time began with the universe, "before" does not even apply to it, and it is logically impossible that the universe be caused.

3. This claim raises the question of what caused God. If, as some claim, God does not need a cause, then by the same reasoning, neither does the universe.
 

Slidey

But pieces of what?
Joined
Jun 12, 2004
Messages
6,600
Gender
Male
HSC
2005
Riewe said:
Because of the total rigidity of the universe, with its laws and such, and because nearly everything is so perfectly ordered with expected results, it has led me to believe in intelligent design, then evolution taking place.

Doing a science degree, i see all these rules and laws but wonder to myself "why are they like that? Why is that so?" And the only real logical answer i can think of is some almight being(s) who by their power created the laws which we all live by.

Then because of the evidence that the evolutionary theory brings to the table, i have to accept that evolution is a truth. But it never explains the BEGINNING. It is only explaining the process of how we came to be, not that instantaneous instant it all started.

So that is why i believe in evolution being a result/process of intelligent design.
You believe a 'theory' is 100% correct simply because it is anthropic, nevermind how many times entities have been needlessly multiplied in comparison to competing theories?!

Talk about anthropic bias.
 

+Po1ntDeXt3r+

Active Member
Joined
Oct 10, 2003
Messages
3,527
Gender
Undisclosed
HSC
2003
"You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to MoonlightSonata again."

but
post is nice.. and i like it.. :)
 

Not-That-Bright

Andrew Quah
Joined
Oct 19, 2003
Messages
12,176
Location
Sydney, Australia.
Gender
Male
HSC
2004
MoonlightSonata said:
Courtesy of talkorigins.org --

-------------------

Claim:
Intelligent design has explanatory power.

Response:
1. Merely accounting for facts does not make a theory scientific. Saying "it's magic" can account for any fact anywhere but is as far from science as you can get. A theory has explanatory power if facts can be deduced from it. No facts have ever been deduced from ID theory. The theory is equivalent to saying, "it's magic."

2. "Intelligent" and "design" remain effectively undefined. A theory cannot have explanatory power if it is uncertain what the theory says in the first place.

-------------------

Claim:
Complexity indicates intelligent design.

Response:
1. This is an argument from incredulity. Complexity usually means something is hard to understand. But the fact that one cannot understand how something came to be does not indicate that one may conclude it was designed. On the contrary, lack of understanding indicates that we must not conclude design or anything else.

2. In the sort of design that we know about, simplicity is a design goal. Complexity arises to some extent through carelessness or necessity, but engineers work to make things as simple as possible. This is very different from what we see in life.

3. Complexity arises from natural causes: for example, in weather patterns and cave formations.

-------------------

Claim:
Every event has a cause. The universe itself had a beginning, so it must have had a first cause, which must have been a creator God.

Response:
1. The assumption that every event has a cause, although common in our experience, is not necessarily universal. The apparent lack of cause for some events, such as radioactive decay, suggests that there might be exceptions. There are also hypotheses, such as alternate dimensions of time or an eternally oscillating universe, that allow a universe without a first cause.

2. By definition, a cause comes before an event. If time began with the universe, "before" does not even apply to it, and it is logically impossible that the universe be caused.

3. This claim raises the question of what caused God. If, as some claim, God does not need a cause, then by the same reasoning, neither does the universe.
Moonlightsonata summed up my thoughts on intelligent design theory...
+rep
 

BrenKHS

Member
Joined
Nov 26, 2004
Messages
57
Gender
Male
HSC
2005
"You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to MoonlightSonata again"

Great post.

Science should be exempt from religion.
 

MoonlightSonata

Retired
Joined
Aug 17, 2002
Messages
3,645
Gender
Female
HSC
N/A
wikiwiki said:
Faith and reason are irreconcilable.

God exists because it says so in the bible doesnt cut it.
Ah, there are rational ways of attempting to prove the existence of god you know.
 

Slidey

But pieces of what?
Joined
Jun 12, 2004
Messages
6,600
Gender
Male
HSC
2005
Rationally attempting to prove something doesn't come anywhere close to actually proving it.
 

MoonlightSonata

Retired
Joined
Aug 17, 2002
Messages
3,645
Gender
Female
HSC
N/A
Not-That-Bright said:
There are alot of fairly rational arguments for the existance of a higher power, very few that back up a particular religion.
Precisely.

Slide_Rule said:
Rationally attempting to prove something doesn't come anywhere close to actually proving it.
That's true. But it can hardly be said, as implied, that (a) that a belief in some sort of supreme being and (b) reason are incompatible.

wikiwiki said:
I'm not denying that a designer exists. Im saying, prove it. In fact - prove that other people exist first. Ill give you a head start - im willing to presume that i exist.
I know you're not denying that. But you suggested that reason and god are incompatible, which they are most certainly not. To demonstrate this point I don't have to prove the existence of God, all I have to do is show you a reasonable argument for the existence of God.

Would you like me to do so?
 

MoonlightSonata

Retired
Joined
Aug 17, 2002
Messages
3,645
Gender
Female
HSC
N/A
wikiwiki said:
No, im saying reason and faith are irreconcilable.

If you can prove God exists, great. Then ill believe.

Faith means you cant prove it.
Yes, I agree with that.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 1)

Top