Creationism vs Intelligent Design?

[manifold]

Some dupe just told me they're wicked different.

Anyone want to take a stab at explaining exactly where the two disagree?

 

[slackjawed]

My understanding is that ID recognizes the valid points of the theory of evolution, and creationism does not.
Since the 'Darwin did not address how life starts, ID says it started by some 'inteligent interference', some directing 'force with a plan'.
That's my understanding anyway.

 

[geauxtohell]

Some dupe just told me they're wicked different.

Anyone want to take a stab at explaining exactly where the two disagree?

They are really not. Once you understand that ID came about as a reaction to Edwards V. Aguillard as a means to try and insert creationism into the classrooms, ID is "creationism lite" for all intensive purposes. This was the conclusion of the court in Dover and why they lost in 2005.

This is from Wiki, but the first paragraph does a pretty good job of summing it all up:

Intelligent design - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[manifold]

My understanding is that ID recognizes the valid points of the theory of evolution, and creationism does not.

Exactly which points are those?

Is one of them the notion that humans evolved naturally from some other species?

 

[slackjawed]

My understanding is that ID recognizes the valid points of the theory of evolution, and creationism does not.

Exactly which points are those?

Is one of them the notion that humans evolved naturally from some other species?

The part that the id people recognize is the part that shows different species have common traits. At least that's what I have been able to gather.
The ID theory seems to be a way for religious people, christians especially, to reconcile their religous beliefs with science.

It might be helpful to get someone who actually holds this opinion to answer these kind of questions.

Of course if you simply want to attack someone, then it doesn't matter who answers your questions.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

My understanding is that ID recognizes the valid points of the theory of evolution, and creationism does not.
Since the 'Darwin did not address how life starts, ID says it started by some 'inteligent interference', some directing 'force with a plan'.
That's my understanding anyway.

You got your answer on the very first post and got the person you wanted to respond to post on the very first page.

Its a good day for manifold.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

Some dupe just told me they're wicked different.

Anyone want to take a stab at explaining exactly where the two disagree?

They are really not. Once you understand that ID came about as a reaction to Edwards V. Aguillard as a means to try and insert creationism into the classrooms, ID is "creationism lite" for all intensive purposes. This was the conclusion of the court in Dover and why they lost in 2005.

This is from Wiki, but the first paragraph does a pretty good job of summing it all up:

Intelligent design - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The red part is your strawman

 

[☭proletarian☭]

Pilg, facts are not stawmen.

Nice fail, though.

 

[geauxtohell]

Some dupe just told me they're wicked different.

Anyone want to take a stab at explaining exactly where the two disagree?

They are really not. Once you understand that ID came about as a reaction to Edwards V. Aguillard as a means to try and insert creationism into the classrooms, ID is "creationism lite" for all intensive purposes. This was the conclusion of the court in Dover and why they lost in 2005.

This is from Wiki, but the first paragraph does a pretty good job of summing it all up:

Intelligent design - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The red part is your strawman

I don't think so, Skippy.

Read Judge Jones' opinion of the matter.

Then research the Wedge Document.

I have no problem with ID. I have a problem with ID being introduced as a competing scientific theory for evolution.

Why?

Because it is not a scientific theory.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

Pilg, facts are not stawmen.

Nice fail, though.

Which is why i left the rest of that post alone.

The part in red is the strawman though.

ID came about because some scientists realized that Darwin can't explain everything. They want to find out the scientific answers to explain the gaps.


Then you have flat-earthers who try to tear down these people who want to do research because they are closed minded flat-earther types.

If we never questioned science then We would still be using newtonian physics.

 

[☭proletarian☭]

ID came about because some scientists realized that Darwin can't explain everything. They want to find out the scientific answers to explain the gaps.

Honest question: Are you retarded?

'It must be fucking magic! All hail the god-er, the magician!' ias not science. It's religion, stupidity, mythology, fables, folklore- whatever terminology makes you feel a little bit better about clinging to a childish assertion lacking any supporting evidence whatsoever.

Then you have flat-earthers who try to tear down these people who want to do research because they are closed minded flat-earther types.

Who was it who killed people for questioning whether the Earth was flat? Oh yeah, the church!

 

[geauxtohell]

Pilg, facts are not stawmen.

Nice fail, though.

Which is why i left the rest of that post alone.

The part in red is the strawman though.

ID came about because some scientists realized that Darwin can't explain everything. They want to find out the scientific answers to explain the gaps.


Then you have flat-earthers who try to tear down these people who want to do research because they are closed minded flat-earther types.

If we never questioned science then We would still be using newtonian physics.

"Flat-earthers" LMFAO! The existence of a diety is not testable. That's the end of it. They won't "allow them to do research", because they can't do research on the matter. You can't create a null hypothesis for the existence of an intelligent force that has guided our development. It's an article of faith that can not be quantified by scientific experiment.

Be that as it may, organizations like the Discovery Institute have their own funding and are dedicated to ID. Nothing is stopping them from doing research. Yet, they spend all their money on political lobbying. Why? Because this is a political issue, and not a scientific one.

If ID fit within the parameters of the scientific method, your post would have a point. Since it does not, you only demonstrate you are completely ignorant on the matter.

As for the "straw man", you are, once again, incorrect. Philip Johnson created the modern "Intelligent Design" movement directly after and, by his own admission, as a result of the aforementioned SCOTUS ruling.

I don't have a problem with Christian Apologists. Most of them are great minds (i.e. C.S. Lewis). In fact, they were smart enough to know the difference between theology and science. Which is more than I can say for Johnson and the rest of the politicians and lawyers who make up the Discovery Institute.

Those of you who choose to remain ignorant of basic science have a right to do so. However, by choosing ignorance, your opinions on such matters become irrelevant.

 

[manifold]

My understanding is that ID recognizes the valid points of the theory of evolution, and creationism does not.

Exactly which points are those?

Is one of them the notion that humans evolved naturally from some other species?

The part that the id people recognize is the part that shows different species have common traits. At least that's what I have been able to gather.
The ID theory seems to be a way for religious people, christians especially, to reconcile their religous beliefs with science.

It might be helpful to get someone who actually holds this opinion to answer these kind of questions.

Of course if you simply want to attack someone, then it doesn't matter who answers your questions.

A little of both... that's what makes this worthwhile IMO.

When I first heard the term "intelligent design" it made perfect intuitive sense to me. But my conceptualization of the term turned out to be completely at odds with the "official" ID theory. Like you, I assumed that it was consistent with evolution in that it merely meant that evolution itself may have been guided and not completely random. I still think that is a very real possibility. But that's not at all what the official ID theory is all about. If you educate yourself about the history of ID and how the theory has been officially written up, it's repackaged creationism, pure and simple.

 

[slackjawed]

ID came about because some scientists realized that Darwin can't explain everything. They want to find out the scientific answers to explain the gaps.

Honest question: Are you retarded?

'It must be fucking magic! All hail the god-er, the magician!' ias not science. It's religion, stupidity, mythology, fables, folklore- whatever terminology makes you feel a little bit better about clinging to a childish assertion lacking any supporting evidence whatsoever.

Then you have flat-earthers who try to tear down these people who want to do research because they are closed minded flat-earther types.

Who was it who killed people for questioning whether the Earth was flat? Oh yeah, the church!

Yep, and just a few years ago they offered an official apology for it. While I am not christian I do recognize the value of repentance and changing your ways.
A 400 year old sin does not mean that church is acting the same way today. In fact, from what I know, the reason there is so many different churches is that all of them don't agree enough to have one. Lumping them all together seems more authoritarian than the principles that this country was founded on.
Anyway, science-all science is meant to be questioned from every 'angle' that can be thought of, it's kind of what makes science science.
It doesn't bother me if people study ID, I mean, I have different priorities. I would spend much more time studying what can be done about the inevitable human enslavement by evil alien midgets, but that's just me. See my post entitled"prepare to meet your new midget masters"

 

[Ravi]

ID came about because some scientists realized that Darwin can't explain everything. They want to find out the scientific answers to explain the gaps.

Honest question: Are you retarded?

'It must be fucking magic! All hail the god-er, the magician!' ias not science. It's religion, stupidity, mythology, fables, folklore- whatever terminology makes you feel a little bit better about clinging to a childish assertion lacking any supporting evidence whatsoever.

Then you have flat-earthers who try to tear down these people who want to do research because they are closed minded flat-earther types.

Who was it who killed people for questioning whether the Earth was flat? Oh yeah, the church!

For once I agree with you...what a complete embarrassment Pilgrim made of himself.

 

[slackjawed]

Exactly which points are those?

Is one of them the notion that humans evolved naturally from some other species?

The part that the id people recognize is the part that shows different species have common traits. At least that's what I have been able to gather.
The ID theory seems to be a way for religious people, christians especially, to reconcile their religous beliefs with science.

It might be helpful to get someone who actually holds this opinion to answer these kind of questions.

Of course if you simply want to attack someone, then it doesn't matter who answers your questions.

A little of both... that's what makes this worthwhile IMO.

When I first heard the term "intelligent design" it made perfect intuitive sense to me. But my conceptualization of the term turned out to be completely at odds with the "official" ID theory. Like you, I assumed that it was consistent with evolution in that it merely meant that evolution itself may have been guided and not completely random. I still think that is a very real possibility. But that's not at all what the official ID theory is all about. If you educate yourself about the history of ID and how the theory has been officially written up, it's repackaged creationism, pure and simple.

Well, yeah, basically. I knew that when I heard it. It has always been my understanding that it is a theory that came christian research as a way to acknowledge that there is valid points to science, while keeping a faith in god. One who believes in God always believes in creation, this was designed as a way to make it possible to recognize both.
Id was designed to make religion and the theory of evolution compatible, of course it has creation in it.

 

[geauxtohell]

ID came about because some scientists realized that Darwin can't explain everything. They want to find out the scientific answers to explain the gaps.

Honest question: Are you retarded?

'It must be fucking magic! All hail the god-er, the magician!' ias not science. It's religion, stupidity, mythology, fables, folklore- whatever terminology makes you feel a little bit better about clinging to a childish assertion lacking any supporting evidence whatsoever.

Then you have flat-earthers who try to tear down these people who want to do research because they are closed minded flat-earther types.

Who was it who killed people for questioning whether the Earth was flat? Oh yeah, the church!

Yep, and just a few years ago they offered an official apology for it. While I am not christian I do recognize the value of repentance and changing your ways.
A 400 year old sin does not mean that church is acting the same way today. In fact, from what I know, the reason there is so many different churches is that all of them don't agree enough to have one. Lumping them all together seems more authoritarian than the principles that this country was founded on.
Anyway, science-all science is meant to be questioned from every 'angle' that can be thought of, it's kind of what makes science science.
It doesn't bother me if people study ID, I mean, I have different priorities. I would spend much more time studying what can be done about the inevitable human enslavement by evil alien midgets, but that's just me. See my post entitled"prepare to meet your new midget masters"

Questioned from every angle on aspects that can fit within the methodology of science. That purposely excludes an omnipotent God, because (if you think about it), once you make provisions for an all powerful supernatural force, the answer to every scientific question automatically becomes "because God did it".

It doesn't bother me if people study ID, it bothers me if they call it science.

It is not.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

if i got you that fired up with just a few words give me 10 min to write you something substantial.

 

[manifold]

what a complete embarrassment Pilgrim made of himself

Yep.

But of course it still only takes third place to his previous assertion that keeping religion out of public schools is unamerican and your gem today about Brown being a liar.

 

[geauxtohell]

if i got you that fired up with just a few words give me 10 min to write you something substantial.

Based on your previous posts, I doubt you have anything substantial to add to this issue.

Posters on here don't even understand the scientific method, to include how it works and why it works.

No wonder our nation sucks at math and science.