One in the eye for intelligent design

[Jerry!]

"Listen up, maggots. You are not special. You are not a beautiful or unique snowflake. You're the same decaying organic matter as everything else."

I always liked that part in the movie. But really, it does come down to that. People want to make more of mankind's existence, as if there was a deeper meaning that life started, that there was a reason beyond our comprehension of why we are existing on Earth. I guess thats understandable, albeit a bit arrogant. Fills people with hope, makes them more content in their life. That works for some people, for some people, that is important, and thats fine, I have no problem with them believing that. But when they start trying to push the issue in school, trying to get it included in class, thats where the bull**** starts.

Because Slim, and I can say this untill Doomsday and you will still probably ignore it, since there is no proof of Intelligent Design and the whole point of it is not having to rely on logical reasoning to support it but instead on faith, it is not science. It does not belong in school. Do you understand that?

 

[Gilpesh]

I don't think it says that. It just provides a reason for those changes.

No. Intelligent Design = Creationism with new title.

Creationism is basically the story of Genesis taken as fact and as science. It's not a fact, not a science, and should never be material for a SCIENCE class.

 

[Abaddon]

It just states that the complexity of existence points to an intelligent creator, not that things suddenly poofed into existence as they are now.

 

[Gilpesh]

Creationism by any other name is still ******ed to teach to children.

 

[Abaddon]

they already have that **** in Sunday school, it doesn't need to be taught anywhere else.

 

[sithgoblin]

But by teaching it in the science class, it gives it more credibility, so more people will supposedly become religious.

 

[Jerry!]

they already have that **** in Sunday school, it doesn't need to be taught anywhere else.

Then they would keep in Sunday school. I went to that CCD **** for almost 10 years every Sunday or Saturday when I was a kid. Communion, confession, confirmation, all that. But not everybody goes through it that way. The point of Intelligent Design, its function, is to eliminate evolution from being taught. That is its ultimate purpose. That isn't just speculation or rumors, there are documents, memos, stating exactly that.

 

[Lighthouse]

I just don't get intelligent design because you can't test it. Could a designer have made the universe? Heck I think its possible, but there is no way to test it. You can test evolution. There is absolutely no way to confirm or deny the existence of a designer, so in the realm of science its useless.

 

[Bill]

No one is denying "micro-evolution within a species. It's the Macro-evolution that has not been proven. A species jumping to another has not been proven. Ape to man......snake to bird. That has not been proven. No transitional forms have been found to validate this.

Question: Do you have to see the designer of a pocket watch if you found it on the ground, to know that someone made it? Of course not. You know that a mind....an intellect went into the constructing of it. Why? The parts working in harmony. The detail. The molded casing...the crystal face....the clasp. All of this did not come together out of some random chance. The complexity of that watch demands that "common sense" tells us somebody designed it.

Now as complex as a watch may be, how much more so the universe....the eco-system, our bodily functions down to a cellular level. The functions....the harmony.....the precise balance. An infinite intellect is at work. The complexity of all of this screams it. We've all seen what explosions do. Ever seen an explosion leave "order" in its wake? Ever seen perfect harmony after and explosion?? Ever seen everything just stay in it's place after an explosion?? But that's what we are being told to believe. The big bang!!

I think it takes more faith to not believe in a creator than to believe.


Man...how many times have we had this discussion?

And how many times have we explained that man didn't come from apes, species don't suddenly "pop" into one another and that the Big Bang wasn't an explosion, but an expansion?

No wonder you have so many problems accepting science. You have yet to actually learn any. Sadly enough, you're not alone.

 

[Danalys]

Has anyone ever taken the time to think that maybe, evolution is the intelligent design? Perhaps a higher power created life on this planet with evolution already in the plan. This would make perfect sense, creating life-forms that would have the ability to evolve and adapt as their environments, needs and resources changed. This seem to make more sense than the whole Genesis line of, God said so, and there it was.

how come every one who floats this admittedly fair view treats it like it's some profoundly new thing?

 

[Danalys]

It just states that the complexity of existence points to an intelligent creator, not that things suddenly poofed into existence as they are now.

i'm of the impression that if everything were simple people would say that ponits to an intelligent creator aswell.

 

[demento]

i'm of the impression that if everything were simple people would say that ponits to an intelligent creator aswell.

Funny you should mention it, because I'm convinced that many people are the result of Dumbass Design.

 

[hippie_hunter]

I'm not going to go all philosophical on this topic, but I fail to see how anyone can believe that there's no higher power at work in the universe. The complexity of our world alone, and just the fact that it even exists and how perfectly it's oriented in our solar system, is proof enough for me.

At the end of the day, either everything came from something or everything came from nothing. It takes *more* faith to believe everything came from nothing.

There is an intelligent 'Creator' - your belief or disbelief doesn't change anything.

Really it all comes down to a person's personal beleifs. It's up to all of us on a personal level to beleive or not to beleive in an intelligent Creator. Some people do and some people don't.

I beleive in evolution, I beleive that life on Earth was created by mere chance and pure luck. I don't beleive in a Creator. But is there really any harm in that? Is there any harm in a person beleiving in a Creator who created life and is actively taking part in all creation. Absolutely not.

 

[Danalys]

Funny you should mention it, because I'm convinced that many people are the result of Dumbass Design.

well the coccyx would seem to be bad design for one.

 

[Abaddon]

no problem with my coccyx

 

[primemover]

I beleive in evolution, I beleive that life on Earth was created by mere chance and pure luck.

Then you don't believe in evolution, because that is not evolution.

 

[hippie_hunter]

Then you don't believe in evolution, because that is not evolution.

I beleive in evolution in terms that life started as simple celled organisms and evolved over billions of into more complex organisms to what we see today.

However, the fact that Earth managed to form into a solar system capable of supporting life in the habitable zone for it and the planet itself met the conditions to form life was pure coincidence. No creator. Just luck of the draw. That is what I meant by the pure luck and mere chance.

 

[chaseter]

Then you don't believe in evolution, because that is not evolution.

Evolution is pure luck through beneficial mutations

 

[primemover]

Evolution is pure luck through beneficial mutations

Nothing 'luck' about it, 'random' mutations of genes cause phenotypic changes that result in some gene vehicles being able to survive better than others, causing the mutated genes to flourish while the others fade away.

If you want to make a case for 'luck', there might be a fraction of a percent of more successful mutations residing in vehicles that get squished by a falling tree or zapped by lightning while on it's way to making more copies of itself.

 

[primemover]

However, the fact that Earth managed to form into a solar system capable of supporting life in the habitable zone for it and the planet itself met the conditions to form life was pure coincidence. No creator. Just luck of the draw. That is what I meant by the pure luck and mere chance.

Nah, just probability. You have to understand there are billions of billions of stars, so even if a planet viable to organic life were so rare as to be a billion to one, there are plenty of chances, especially when you add billions of years into the equation.

 

[Danalys]

no problem with my coccyx

it has a habit of getting broke. and doesn't really serve any usefull purpose.

 

[CorpusBlack]

Intelligent design is damn silly. There is no way to apply a scientific method to a "designer". To paraphrase Einstein, any theory that can't be proven false has no use for science.

Just because it has no use for science doesn't mean there isn't a possibility that it exists. I agree with Einstein's statement within the parameters of the statement but science itself is limited and unopened to ideas unless they have been somewhat proven or follow a theoretical pattern. I think a lot scientists put themselves in a box because of this and the scientific community needs to be more open to looking at possibilities without fear of scrutiny from their peers. Many of which, come off just as radical as a lot of religious nuts.

 

[CorpusBlack]

I'm not going to go all philosophical on this topic, but I fail to see how anyone can believe that there's no higher power at work in the universe. The complexity of our world alone, and just the fact that it even exists and how perfectly it's oriented in our solar system, is proof enough for me.

At the end of the day, either everything came from something or everything came from nothing. It takes *more* faith to believe everything came from nothing.

There is an intelligent 'Creator' - your belief or disbelief doesn't change anything.

*touche.

 

[Gilpesh]

Just because it has no use for science doesn't mean there isn't a possibility that it exists. I agree with Einstein's statement within the parameters of the statement but science itself is limited and unopened to ideas unless they have been somewhat proven or follow a theoretical pattern. I think a lot scientists put themselves in a box because of this and the scientific community needs to be more open to looking at possibilities without fear of scrutiny from their peers. Many of which, come off just as radical as a lot of religious nuts.

The box they put themselves in is called the scientific method, which is the best way to prove/disprove something in the realm of science. If you want them to disregard that and go all stupid f**kin hippie new age crap, then go round up your crystals and head out to a vortex in the desert.

 

[SuBe]

Maybe it's because you're so limited though. What we call "nothing" and "something", "before" and "after" may have little to do with anything.

I was being somewhat sarcastic. But, you can not argue that "Science" has all the answers.