Critique of Intelligent Design

[hadit]

No, your claim of substance not existing before it was created is pure speculation on your part and can't be proven.

It's the prevailing scientific opinion that the universe has not always existed. Are you saying that's pure speculation? Tell you what, post for me the scientific minds who say the universe has always existed. I'd like to see what they have to say.

 

[Libby von H]

This thread will develop a critique of intelligent design, otherwise known as religious creationism. We choose the Broocks-Hedin assemblage because they will be speaking on 25 Oct 2023 in the very town that called them on their supposed "evidence."
4 Mar 2021 A Creationist Writes In

A creationist writes in: Eric Hedin resurfaces

This morning I got the following email, occasioned, I suppose, by the appearance of a new book by Eric Hedin published by the ID creationist outfit The Discovery Institute. The DI is promoting it h…

whyevolutionistrue.com

Well , I accuse of 2 errors right off the bat, 3 really

1) that there is a Creator is an assured result in Perennial Philosophy. if you deny that too then you admit that the question is not resolvable by reaon (and thus forfeit the whole argument)

2) Dembski's revised book on ID (just came out) refutes your equation of ID with religion so that is just dishonest of you

The Design Inference: Eliminating Chance through Small Probabilities​

by William A Dembski and Winston Ewert | Nov 16, 2023 <========
3) you don't even the logically inconstestable basis that there can be dual causaliites -- and in real life it is always that way
LEt's say someone hires a man to kill someone
The gun kills the man
The hired gunman kills the man
The man who hired kills the man

You are trying to sneak by a thoroughly unscientific premise UNI-CAUSALITY

PS at least Dembski avoids your sneakiness as he put in a separate recent book the religiouis case that you are trying to conflate with the scientific case

The Patristic Understanding of Creation: An Anthology of Writings from the Church Fathers on Creation and Design​

by William A Dembski , Wayne J Downs, et al. | Nov 14, 2019

 

[Libby von H]

You conflate ID with Creationism and that is legally and rhetorically a 'no no'
ID was meant to be a rebuttal of the proposed mechanism of Evolution, whatever other uses people put it to.
Creationism should not be represented as a contention that there is a Creator, of course there is. Say there isn't and refuse to prove that then you admit that you are only working from a 'faith' yourself

 

[ChemEngineer]

Very little about Intelligent Design, is actually intelligent. It's right up there with The Flat Earth nonsense.

Your remark demonstrates that you simply parrot nonsense handed down to you by the likes of Richard Dawkins and the head of the Teachers' Union.

My book describes many profound fortuitous interdependencies reflecting intelligent design. I sent my critique of Richard Dawkins' fatuous monkey business analysis to biochemist Doug Axe, head of computational biochemistry at Biola College and he agreed with me emphatically. Then I learned about his book, Undeniable, and purchased it. You could learn a lot from biochemists and biologists and statisticians. But you have to think, and try.

Now this, related to ID:

A wonderful website created by a Rabbi in Jerusalem years ago. Two years ago, I found a typographical error and notified them via email. Rabbi Geduld replied to thank me and tell me he corrected it.

Now just last week I went back and the website was GONE! What are the odds that the one person in the world who reported the error would two years later report that the website was gone?
Rabbi renewed it immediately. Study it and learn:

2001Principle.net

 

[Donald H]

Your remark demonstrates that you simply parrot nonsense handed down to you by the likes of Richard Dawkins and the head of the Teachers' Union.

My book describes many profound fortuitous interdependencies reflecting intelligent design. I sent my critique of Richard Dawkins' fatuous monkey business analysis to biochemist Doug Axe, head of computational biochemistry at Biola College and he agreed with me emphatically. Then I learned about his book, Undeniable, and purchased it. You could learn a lot from biochemists and biologists and statisticians. But you have to think, and try.

Now this, related to ID:

A wonderful website created by a Rabbi in Jerusalem years ago. Two years ago, I found a typographical error and notified them via email. Rabbi Geduld replied to thank me and tell me he corrected it.

Now just last week I went back and the website was GONE! What are the odds that the one person in the world who reported the error would two years later report that the website was gone?
Rabbi renewed it immediately. Study it and learn:

2001Principle.net

The Intelligent Design theory was destroyed and taken down.

Judgment Day: Intelligent Design on Trial - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

That leaves them with credibility they have to regain.

 

[Dagosa]

Your remark demonstrates that you simply parrot nonsense handed down to you by the likes of Richard Dawkins and the head of the Teachers' Union.

Nah, he was talking about you and yours. Pretending that somehow mankind was planned by a superior being has no evidence what so ever. None, nix….

 

[Woodznutz]

Nah, he was talking about you and yours. Pretending that somehow mankind was planned by a superior being has no evidence what so ever. None, nix….

It is impossible for mankind to have come into being any other way. Evolution is the biggest fairy tale ever told.

 

[Dagosa]

It is impossible for mankind to have come into being any other way. Evolution is the biggest fairy tale ever told.

Really ? You have proof other than your assertion ?
Evolution has millions of examples of evidence. Otherwise, every baby born would look exactly the same as your “god”.
They don’t

 

[BlindBoo]

It is impossible for mankind to have come into being any other way. Evolution is the biggest fairy tale ever told.

With 99% of all species having gone extinct, where is the intelligence in intelligent design. More like hit and miss design.

 

[Woodznutz]

Really ? You have proof other than your assertion ?
Evolution has millions of examples of evidence. Otherwise, every baby born would look exactly the same as your “god”.
They don’t

The evidence is overwhelming.

 

[Woodznutz]

With 99% of all species having gone extinct, where is the intelligence in intelligent design. More like hit and miss design.

That's just built-in obsolescence. Eternal life comes after death, not before.

 

[Dagosa]

The evidence is overwhelming.

Overwhelmingly missing.

 

[Dagosa]

That's just built-in obsolescence. Eternal life comes after death, not before.

Really ? Are you sure ? It’s just as likely that everything exist now including time and you simply move from one place to another and back again when you die or are born. And not just us, but all living creatures. .

. After all, if what the believers say is true, “ god” is well beyound our understanding so why do they go about making up stuff and pretending they do understand everything ?

 

[Weatherman2020]

Very little about Intelligent Design, is actually intelligent. It's right up there with The Flat Earth nonsense.

Anyone who thinks the Periodic Table writes concertos is nonsense.

 

[Dagosa]

Anyone who thinks the Periodic Table writes concertos is nonsense.

No one in science does. It’s simply a table of the chemical elements with similar chemical properties which appear in vertical columns and horizontal rows. No more. No less. Never heard it had much to do with classical music.

 

[Weatherman2020]

No one in science does. It’s simply a table of the chemical elements with similar chemical properties which appear in vertical columns and horizontal rows. No more. No less. Never heard it had much to do with classical music.

Everyone believes in ID?
Since when?

 

[Dagosa]

Everyone believes in ID?
Since when?

That makes less sense then your previous post.

 

[ChemEngineer]

Anyone who thinks the Periodic Table writes concertos is nonsense.

I never saw the idea phrased that way but I do agree with you except for the name that every scientist on earth calls incorrectly.
The Table is not periodic. The elements are. It is really The Table of Periodic Elements.
Adjectives modify the noun immediately following, as in "A man's black eye."
"A black man's eye" is entirely different.
Scientific precision has faltered lo these many decades after Mendeleev fashioned his table.

 

[Weatherman2020]

That makes less sense then your previous post.

You really don’t know science much.
You don’t even know you’re just a bunch of atoms.

 

[Dagosa]

I never saw the idea phrased that way but I do agree with you except for the name that every scientist on earth calls incorrectly.
The Table is not periodic. The elements are. It is really The Table of Periodic Elements.
Adjectives modify the noun immediately following, as in "A man's black eye."
"A black man's eye" is entirely different.
Scientific precision has faltered lo these many decades after Mendeleev fashioned his table.

Ha ha
Youre such a fraud foolish. A “period” in chemistry represents a row of elements with a similar chemical make up. It doesn’t mean “ a period if time” like you claimed before. or individual elements. It’s their arrangement,you freaking illiterate.
Periodic is adjective for the word, table…it is appropriate.
But you’re getting closer.

You really don’t know science much.
You don’t even know you’re just a bunch of atoms.

Much ? You’ve yet to post anything of any worth.
Bunch of atoms ? Hilarious.