Intelligent Design Theory, is gaining more acceptence.

Discussion in 'Science and Technology' started by 52ndStreet, Jan 7, 2010.

  1. 52ndStreet
    Offline

    52ndStreet VIP Member

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2008
    Messages:
    2,883
    Thanks Received:
    147
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings:
    +170
    I saw a show the other night about the how scientist were at a lost to explain the tremendous amount of new species of animals and plants that suddenly appeared during the Cambian period millions of years ago on Earth.

    They stated the info from the fossils , puts in question Darwins theory of Evolution. Darwins theory states that species developed from small single cell life forms , to more
    complex advanced life forms. "From the bottom up".

    The intelligent design theory, which the Cambian period in the Earths development shows,was from the "Top down". Which showed that they were many complex life forms
    already developed, that then evolved into more complex life form. And this indicates some form of intelligent design with regards to life forms here on Earth.

    The program stated that Darwin could never fully explain the abundance of new life forms
    that were on the Earth during this Cambain period. And he felt it would eventually challenge his theory of evolution and natural selection.

    I for one accept the intelligent design theory. It seems more logical and practical for todays world and for the world of the past.

    Any other opinions?
     
  2. rdean
    Offline

    rdean rddean

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2009
    Messages:
    60,148
    Thanks Received:
    6,898
    Trophy Points:
    1,840
    Location:
    chicago
    Ratings:
    +14,996
  3. Jay Canuck
    Offline

    Jay Canuck by Crom you'll pay!

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2009
    Messages:
    3,090
    Thanks Received:
    212
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +212
    what did God have in mind when he shit 52nd street out?
     
  4. rightwinger
    Online

    rightwinger Paid Messageboard Poster Gold Supporting Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2009
    Messages:
    120,420
    Thanks Received:
    19,856
    Trophy Points:
    2,190
    Location:
    NJ & MD
    Ratings:
    +45,448
    Ummm...no its not
     
  5. Old Rocks
    Online

    Old Rocks Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2008
    Messages:
    46,488
    Thanks Received:
    5,416
    Trophy Points:
    1,840
    Location:
    Portland, Ore.
    Ratings:
    +10,324
    No, there was life before the Cambrian. Very interesting life.


    Vanished Precambrian Life Forms Were Like Nothing Before or Since - Ediacarans - io9

    For a brief span of time, about 542 million years ago, the world belonged to the Ediacarans, a group of life forms so physiologically unique that biologists have considered giving them their own taxonomic kingdom.

    An essay by Richard Corfield in Astrobiology Magazine points up the strange history of the Ediacarans, a group of anatomically diverse organisms that lived during the Ediacaran period (between 635 and 542 million years ago). These creatures, which predated nearly every form of animal life that exists today, stood rooted in bacterial bases on the seafloor, drawing nutrients from the water.

    As best we can tell, the Ediacarans lacked mouths and recognizable digestive systems, and their bodies are thought to have looked like "sacks of mud, disks, hubcaps and mattresses." They were among the first complex life forms to appear on the planet, but they bear no discernible resemblance to anything else in the fossil record:
     
  6. Old Rocks
    Online

    Old Rocks Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2008
    Messages:
    46,488
    Thanks Received:
    5,416
    Trophy Points:
    1,840
    Location:
    Portland, Ore.
    Ratings:
    +10,324
    From abiogenisis to the present, there is no period where there is a need to resort to mythology, either primitive, or the modern primitive, ID, to explain the developments in evolution on this planet.
     
  7. José
    Offline

    José Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2004
    Messages:
    3,243
    Thanks Received:
    314
    Trophy Points:
    178
    Ratings:
    +360
    Just a small correction, 52ndStreet.

    Intelligent Design, aka, God, is not a scientific theory, it is philosophical speculation.

    Just like Quantum Cosmology, a "scientific" attempt to explain the cause of the Big Bang, is not a theory either but only "scientific" speculation. The result of cosmologists letting their imagination run wild in their free time.

    I'm not trying to disparage Intelligent Design and Quantum Cosmology just making an important distinction.

    If every crazy idea (and not so crazy speculation) people have is a scientific theory then NOTHING is a scientific theory.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  8. Bill O'Olberman
    Offline

    Bill O'Olberman Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2009
    Messages:
    818
    Thanks Received:
    124
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Location:
    Virginia
    Ratings:
    +124
    Well here me out on this one... As the global population increases so does the number of stupid people. So naturally the number of people who believe in intelligent design will increase. Now this is not to say that every one who believes in intelligent design is an idiot and everyone who believes in evolution is a genius but just that there is a propensity for the unintelligent and/or generally ignorant to subscribe to intelligent design.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 2
    Last edited: Jan 7, 2010
  9. Lee Bowman
    Offline

    Lee Bowman Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2010
    Messages:
    8
    Thanks Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    1
    Ratings:
    +0
    Interesting logic. :clap2:

    I regard ID (not IDC or Creationism) as a logical response to the evidence. Not faith based, but evidentiary.

    Regarding the Cambrian, there have been various answers to no pre-cambrian fossils to speak of, but the prime evidences of 'design' are design inferences in biologic systems.

    But regardless, I agree with 52nd St. ID IS gaining ground. Not necessarily with working scientists, however, for obvious reasons. But of the new generation of 'rational thinkers', i.e. skeptics of the current NDE synthesis.

    Rational thinking may be moving in a new direction, that of truly analyzing data objectively, rather than as being instructed to in a classroom. Or becoming a fan of David Hume, Bertrand Russell or Richie Dawkins. And regarding the holy holy Darwinian Dogma, does a tenured PhD prof necessarily hold-these-truths to be self-evident? Meaning the ones being proferred? Remember, s/he may have been 'indoctrinated' in a like way.

    So what may alter instructional methods in today's world? The Internet, self study, and most important of all, rational thot.

    I couldn't help noticing that all responses to Mr. 52 were negative, and that the first commenter equated ID with Republican idiots. That may be true in some cases, but regarding ID support, the majority would primarily consist of the ones with a religious agenda. True rational thinkers like myself, a staunch liberal, have found that the evidence points to cosmic intervention in bio designs, but I'm open to any new evidences that might contravene my stance, and am willing to address any presented here.

    So whether it's the Omni Hotel or Club '21', 52nd Street rocks! :beer:
     
  10. IanC
    Offline

    IanC Gold Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2009
    Messages:
    9,198
    Thanks Received:
    1,071
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Ratings:
    +2,448
    evolution is just the tip of the cone of the mechanics needed to understand how life started and developed on earth. evolution is obviously insufficient to explain a great many things and will obviously be supplanted by another theory that explains darwinian evolution as well as many other things. not unlike how Newtonian physics was shown to be wrong but useful by quantum mechanics.
     

Share This Page

Search tags for this page

glial cells what minerals are requiered