Intelligent design
- Started
- Last post
- 690 Responses
- discipler0
pavlov, would you like me to link up the numerous conteroversies within the evolutionary community alone? Things they argue about like geological dating? The rise of Dimorphic sexuality? Which alleged dino-birds are truly transitions? etc...
It's propaganda that says there's no debate in the evolution community. In this ID debate, they don't want you to think that there is.
- Baskerville0
mrdobs, DNA is matter/energy, so it required a cause. God stands outside the realm of matter/energy, as it's cause.
The bigger question is how do you avoid an infinite regression of causes (and effects) when you take an atheistic position?
discipler
(Oct 7 05, 09:28)Discipler, the point of all this is that you can't imagine the conecpt of an effect without a cause, your brain (and by that I mean all human brains) are not built in a way that lets us fully understand or visualise that concept. We are limited by the power of our brains and so are forced to create illogical loopholes to continue our lives without worrying about these issues too much.
Ocasionally you get a thinker who can break out of the limitations of the average brain - someone like Einstein who created thought experiments to help him understand complex problems. But the truth is we are so far away from undertanding the origins of space and time. The fact that we all want there to be a 'beginning' only highlights how poorly equiped out minds are for dealing with the concept.
So in conclusion either become a physicist and devote your life to trying to solve the problem of the origin of the universe or admit defeat and realise that your brain can't cope and go for the easy option - god.
- bk_shankz0
I think Discipler is going to break. Maybe just a few more good arguments.
- discipler0
mrdobs, both of your questions indicate that you aren't listening to me. Or you don't understand the arguments.
- mikotondria20
Everything we know of is neither matter nor energy: All we ever experience are ideas that our minds use to overlay and represent raw sense data coming in from our bodies..We do experience the sensations, merely the interpretations that are presented to our conciousness.
These representational constructs are neither matter nor energy.
The only thing that ever exists, or ever can, is concious experience.
Concious experience of ideas about, or even of God have the same fundamental, irreducable nature as those of atheism.
All is paradox, illusion; at this moment, the only thing in existence is you reading this post.
- pavlovs_dog0
man discipler is so lunatic fringe he actually cares about proving this bullshit.
the average i.d. fan just wants to inject ambiguity (no matter weak) so faith can take over.
they have an agenda. the answer existed before the question. they are special and will live forver if they please the old, white, bearded man in the sky.
blah.
- RedFoxxworth0
Intelligent design is REAL.
BUT IT WAS ALIENS NOT GOD.
- mrdobolina0
no you said that all things need a designer because they are too complex to not be designed.
who designed the designer?
you dont understand my question?
if DNA is so complex that it needs to be designed, surely the designer of DNA is equally or more complex than DNA is, wouldnt you agree?
The point of all of this is to show you that ID has all to do with religion.
- pyeaton0
Well, I am not too happy I caused such and outrage. I apologize.
the reason i posted this was more of a political thread than a faith based one.
What I was trying to stir was the age-old seperation of church and state on this. They want to teach this in schools. Why dont they also teach us about the boogie man and unicorns too.
The whole point is that evangelical politicians are once again trying to stuff their Christian idealism down our throats. Reminds me of the conquests of African countries where they were forced into Christianity, and also of the Taliban.
I also want it known that I am the first person to voice up about people that want to rename Christmas and will not let Christian students celebrate Christmas. To each their own.
No one should be forced to learn about a belief system that they don't comply with, but at the same time, they should be allowed to beive and practice their religions without persecution.
- discipler0
Baskerville, the point I'm making is that it is logical to infer a designer where the evidence merits it. And any attempt to explain how things came into existance without an uncaused entity, ends in an infinite regression of causes - you can't escape this.
Thinkers like Einstein introduced to concepts like general relativity, which demonstrates that matter/energy expand and thus make philosophical implications to a cause of everything.
And Physicists which you mention are also seeing the precision fine tuning to the laws which govern our planet and the universe and making the design hypothesis. So, it's not either science or God, it's more that science is pointing to God.
- ukit0
"theophany" lol
So, the fact that the intelligent designer doesn't require a cause can't be explained by science, only theology.
Intelligent design, you say, is science.
So intelligent design is incapable of explaining the origins of life.
- TheTick0
Well, I am not too happy I caused such and outrage. I apologize.
pyeaton
(Oct 7 05, 09:46)
------------------------Apology so not f**kin' accepted. Just look at the fine mess you've gotten us into!!
;)
- pavlovs_dog0
the scientfict comunity works on concensus. you want me to find a couple degreed jackkasses that belive in the bigfoot? no problem.
the is no sceintific deabte about evolution, there never will be.
you so, so, so want jesus to be real! ...this anit the way.
- discipler0
no no, dobs. I said, and watch carefully.... all THINGS WITH A BEGINNING need a first cause. God, by definition, is without beginning so therefore does not require a cause. It's a category switch. The question is flawed, it's like saying, "To whom is the bachelor married?". Bachelors are single. God is uncaused.
DNA is information. Every example of information we have, especially sequential digital code, has a cognizant intelligent entity as it's author.
- mrdobolina0
hahahaha, pavlov.
- Baskerville0
So, it's not either science or God, it's more that science is pointing to God.
discipler
(Oct 7 05, 09:47)Hmmmm, no.
Science is not pointing to god, science is pointing to science. You're interpreting science as saying that and you're wrong. In the same way that 1000ish years ago some guys wrote a fairytale and you chose to interpret that story as real, because it was easier than a phd in physics.
- mrdobolina0
discipler, do that without god is my point.
ID has all to do with religion, wtf don't you get about my point?
- kyl30
'manpurse'
nuf said
- TheTick0
There is no serious debate in the scientific community about the theory of evolution. However there is tons of debate on Jesus existence. Should we teach that in schools? You know what, yes, let's do that...starting on the same day ID starts getting taught we should, in fairness to our students, because you know, we want to be fair and not deprive them of knowledge, in our History classes let's study the rise of christianity and the differnet theories about the existence/non-existence of the Jesus figure. And let's also teach about the Gnostic gospels, you know the gospels that got left out of the New Testament...hmmmm...wow..so much else we need to teach our young children about this stuff...oh, and as christianity as being part of a larger jewish heretical movement ongoing at the time..I mean it is historical, right? And there is controversey about the Jesus figure - we should teach the controversy, right?
- discipler0
pavlov, denial ain't just a river in egypt.
You can say til you are blue in the face that there's no debate about evolution amongst evolutionists, but you are either deliberately deceiving or just ignorant of the facts.
I'm collecting articles about such controversy. I'll post them shortly.