intelligent design
- Started
- Last post
- 383 Responses
- discipler0
your = you're
- Nairn0
"you have the fact that life at it's core, is information and complex machinery and therefore requires a designer."
that is not 'fact'. that is your interpretation, from your limited understanding. Order and Complexity do not have to be designed, they can quite simply 'occur' without any outside intervention. That is The Wonder of our universe.
Yours is the typically spurious thought process of every sodding christian I have ever met. Just admit it - you don't understand the world, and have settled for this philosophy. That's fine, I couldnt give a shit about it - just stop arguing your limited reasoning with disinterested arties on a design forum.
And yes, the UK has its fair share of crackpot authors too.
- mrdobolina0
whatever discipler, who gives a shit.
- Nairn0
:)
that should've read 'disinterested Parties', but I kind of like the mistake!
- Baskerville0
It is a conflict of interests to try and join science and religion. They are polar opposites.
A scientist by definition has to be impartial. He is simply looking and analysing, not looking for a specific answer. A scientist can NEVER prove his theory to be totally correct, only disprove a number of options.
The difference between scientists and religious fanatics is that scientists will always admit they are wrong if shown evidence. But religious fanatics will NEVER admit that they were wrong about god despite the fact that there has never been and will never be even a single shred of proof of his existence.
If you believe in science you cannot believe in god. Science and other intellectual studies eg psychology have explanations for why the human brain invented the concept of 'god' (1000s of years ago) to deal with ideas too complex for the brain to comprehend (death, infinite universe etc.). We are now actually getting some way to understanding those difficult concepts despite our feeble brains. Therefore the simplified 'easy' answer for everything (god) is not needed anymore.
sorry for the rant but this stuff pisses me off. Long live the flying spaghetti monster!
- discipler0
"Order and Complexity do not have to be designed, they can quite simply 'occur' without any outside intervention. "
Pure fantasy and uttern nonsense, Nairn. Have you thoroughly studied this issue? Clearly not. Or else your terribly dishonest. Produce for me the mechanism that is sufficient.
and your reasoning is classic - I don't agree with them so they are crackpots. Lovely.
- discipler0
Baskerville, you make the common error of seeing this as an issue of religion vs. science. Wrong. It is new science vs. old science. Just ask any biochemist or bioengineer about the digital code of DNA and the machines in the cell.
So, you have an incorrect presupposition.
- mrdobolina0
blah blah blah blah blah blah blah
- discipler0
blah blah blah blah blah blah blah
mrdobolina
(Sep 30 05, 06:17)interpretation: I can't defend my position affectively, so I'll resort to ridicule and vitriol.
- Baskerville0
BTW if god is a designer does he wear Bape t-shirts and carry an iPod. Does he also try and sell rubbish screenprinted t-shirts
- mrdobolina0
i thought I was ignored, you lied! you're not a good little christian.
- discipler0
i didn't put you on ignore. I should I have said I would not respond to your questions.
On with your vitriol.
- mrdobolina0
will muslims and jews go to heaven?
- vwsung18t0
is vitriol the word of the day in the word of the day calender?
- ********0
please, someone stick a fork in my eye when this is done.
- Baskerville0
discipler. I understand the debate in the scientific community. The point is there is always debate within the scientific community, that is the entire point of science. There are other debates going on and always have been. An example - the earth being flat or round. There was debate about that for a long time until there was enough proof for everyone to agree.
Currently there is a debate about evolution and that's good and healthy and I'm sure in a while one side of the debate will be stronger and become the popular belief until someone else questions it.
But the debate is not saying that evolution is wrong as a concept, just that it needs developing.
The fact that the religious right (I'm assuming you fall into that category) has jumped on this as meaning that evolution is not true and that means that god is the only explanation is just stupid
- Nairn0
"I clearly have not studied the subject" Actually, trying to understand the universe through scientific philosophy is the only subject on this planet I think has *any* importance, and have genuinely spent much of my life reading up upon - including an awkward Christian phase when I was about 12.
But then I grew up, realised there was more to the universe than I could ever hope to understand, that my (and humanity's) capacity for Ultimate Truth is and will for a long time be, limited by our physical means of perspective.
The very concept of Your God is "Pure fantasy and uttern nonsense", discipler - Jesus Christ, even our limited understanding of complex systems, written in BASIC and represented by 2D binary-result matrices shows proof enough that there is so much to Complexity that we're going to spend centuries rooting out The Truth.
I couldn't care less what you think until your opinion impinges on other people's freedom to make up there own mind, in which case "Come the Revolution, I'll put your backs against the wall" - If I could, I'd quite happily go jihad against religion (irony accepted) if I thought my life could purge humanity of these rancid thought processes.
And as for my poor classic reasoning - prove me wrong. Go on... PROVE IT.
- ********0
Discipler (and his cohorts) set up a strawman. There is NO controversey in the scientific community about evolution. There are ongoing theoretical investigations into it's operation, but there's no controversey over it as a general model. Except of course those paid by the institutions that Discipler quotes.
- Nairn0
nngh.. you make me so mad.
*simmer*
Time, I think, for a joint and a cup of tea. Good old Agnostic Tea.
- Baskerville0
Discipler (and his cohorts) set up a strawman. There is NO controversey in the scientific community about evolution. There are ongoing theoretical investigations into it's operation, but there's no controversey over it as a general model. Except of course those paid by the institutions that Discipler quotes.
TheTick
(Sep 30 05, 06:29)_________________________
THANK YOU! that's exactly what I was trying to say but much more eloquently put. Now I can go back to work