Critique of Intelligent Design

[Dagosa]

If you read the OP correctly, the thread is about teaching what is called science in a college class and also saying that this science is evidence of god. OP went to their presentation, you did not.

You weren’t listening, were you. It’s one man’s conjecture, nothing more. So, it isn’t science.

 

[Mac-7]

I saw a leaf on a twig of a tree swaying in a breeze. I don’t ascribe any thought to plants. But if a plant could “think” I wonder if it would consider the twig to be its home? Or might it consider the branch which had that twig on it to be its home? Maybe it would consider the whole tree it’s home? Or perhaps it would consider the plot of earth where the tree had sent down its roots to be home. Maybe, along those lines, it would consider the entire planet its home.

But let’s go in the other direction. Let’s get smaller. What about the leaf’s individual cells? What about the organelles within the cell? What about the molecules that form those cells and organelles? What about the aroma that form the molecules?
What about the subatomic structures?

All of these things exist. All things which exist came from somewhere. The seed from another tree landed on the ground and sent down some roots and the plant survived and grew. But the tree that dropped the seed also came from the seed of some earlier tree. And so forth.

Once upon a time our planet didn’t exist yet. But as we understand it, gravity caused some dust in space to meet and merge. Little space rocks. They also got effected by gravity and Little Rock’s combined to create bigger rocks which merged (perhaps violently) to create more massive rocks. This continued for quite a while. Eventually we had an orb of molten rock and metal.

Out of that violent chaotic molten mess, Earth “evolved.” Is Eaeth “home?” Or is it our solar system which is really home? Or perhaps our home is just an outer ring of our galaxy. Or maybe “home” is our entire galaxy. Or maybe there is a reason to suspect that even galaxies are component parts of a larger “structure.”

Yet no matter where you look, with some inevitable “exceptions,” everything we see in the universe seem to follow certain laws of physics. (The exceptions certainly include the cosmic question of “what got the whole thing rolling?”)

But the bigger question is this: given the basic laws of physics as we understand them, isn’t it remarkable that, from the tiniest subatomic particles to the incomprehensible size and scope of our entire universe, the laws of physics seem to almost always apply?

Should we believe that this is all by random chance? Or isn’t there some logical reason we can believe that everything was “caused” to conform to those rules?

Creation is too complex and too perfect to be mere dumb luck

 

[Dagosa]

Creation is too complex and too perfect to be mere dumb luck

That doesn’t prove anything.

 

[Mac-7]

That doesn’t prove anything.

It does to me

 

[Dagosa]

It does to me

That’s fine. There’s a segment of the population that believe anything. That’s why we have lotteries. Just because it’s too hard for you to understand, doesn’t mean it’s anything in particular. I bet you don’t understand how cell phone networks work. Does that mean it was created by a deity ?

 

[Mac-7]

That’s fine. There’s a segment of the population that believe anything. That’s why we have lotteries. Just because it’s too hard for you to understand, doesn’t mean it’s anything in particular. I bet you don’t understand how cell phone networks work. Does that mean it was created by a deity ?

I’m not God, or in your example an electronic engineer specializing in communication

But I have a layman’s knowledge that shields me from lib liars

 

[Leo123]

That’s fine. There’s a segment of the population that believe anything. That’s why we have lotteries. Just because it’s too hard for you to understand, doesn’t mean it’s anything in particular. I bet you don’t understand how cell phone networks work. Does that mean it was created by a deity ?

We actually have no understanding how life came to be. Oh we have done experiments that have had partial success using prefabricated elements from living cells but, there has been no experiment where we just throw together molecules in a 'soup' and create living working cells. Some of the other more serious posters here have actually read and researched these experiments. Your take is to insult because you are ignorant and full of shit.

 

[Dagosa]

We actually have no understanding how life came to be. Oh we have done experiments that have had partial success using prefabricated elements from living cells but, there has been no experiment where we just throw together molecules in a 'soup' and create living working cells. Some of the other more serious posters here have actually read and researched these experiments. Your take is to insult because you are ignorant and full of shit.

Ha ha
The idea that you can say something is created by anything, anyone at any particular time, with no evidence isn’t proof of anything.
You are as far removed from the beginnings of life as an ant is from modern physics….and much farther. That doesn’t mean you can just make up shit and pretend you know anything. The smartest people just say, I don’t know. It’s hilarious how you got to this point from giving god names to the moon, the sun and the tides…..until we had an explanation. You aren’t that smart. If you were, someone would be paying you to hear you speak.

 

[badger2]

You weren’t listening, were you. It’s one man’s conjecture, nothing more. So, it isn’t science.

You weren't reading, were you? There's two involved in the OP. One of them was caught teaching, in a college physics class, that there is evidence for god. That's two men's conjectures, Einstein, and the story drew litigation from the Freedom From Religion Foundation. We are currently waiting for the physicist's (Hedin's) book to get details of this double conjecture.

 

[Dagosa]

You weren't reading, were you? There's two involved in the OP. One of them was caught teaching, in a college physics class, that there is evidence for god. That's two men's conjectures, Einstein, and the story drew litigation from the Freedom From Religion Foundation. We are currently waiting for the physicist's (Hedin's) book to get details of this double conjecture.

You’re not listening. It’s Not science. Two is not 42,000 ACTIVELY working in EVERY institute of higher learning and research from related fields. You don’t know shit about science do ? ALL science fields are interrelated.

I‘ll test your knowledge bubba. The science of CLIMATE CHANGE and AGW, has passed the muster in 30, 000 universities, EVERY RELATED active scientist working in climate science and related govt agencies and climate science institute. Is there an institute NOW DEDICATED to using creationism to further research ? No foolish.

But there are in EVOLUTION. EVERY RELATED Institution is dedicated to using EVOLUTION in science research in every country, and every related field in medical science IN THE WORLD.

 

[Dagosa]

You weren't reading, were you? There's two involved in the OP. One of them was caught teaching, in a college physics class, that there is evidence for god. That's two men's conjectures, Einstein, and the story drew litigation from the Freedom From Religion Foundation. We are currently waiting for the physicist's (Hedin's) book to get details of this double conjecture.

Science illiterate, you just called it a conjecture. It’s not science till it’s an accepted THEORY by ALL related institutions.
Now, look up what a “conjecture” is in science and what a THEORY IS in science.

 

[ReinyDays]

The bigger question is, if evolution, as proposed by science, is true, why do so many people still not believe it?

Because evolution isn't a thing of belief ... it is a thing of understanding ... starting with the structure of DNA ... and not many people understand that ...

 

[ReinyDays]

The fact is ... when we say "life", we mean the protein backbone ... whether you understand or not ... and that backbone is a carbon atom, another carbon atom and then a nitrogen atom ... repeated ad nauseam ...

Take all the natural elements, combine them every way possible ... and this amino acid subunit is the easiest, cheapest, most economical and best for the job ... bar none ... intellectual input is unnecessary ... this arises through simple random combinations, and the best combinations persisting ... the statistical arts at their finest ...

 

[Woodznutz]

Because evolution isn't a thing of belief ... it is a thing of understanding ... starting with the structure of DNA ... and not many people understand that ...

How is it even possible to 'understand' evolution? I don't understand creation, but I believe it because it makes sense to me.

 

[badger2]

You’re not listening. It’s Not science. Two is not 42,000 ACTIVELY working in EVERY institute of higher learning and research from related fields. You don’t know shit about science do ? ALL science fields are interrelated.

I‘ll test your knowledge bubba. The science of CLIMATE CHANGE and AGW, has passed the muster in 30, 000 universities, EVERY RELATED active scientist working in climate science and related govt agencies and climate science institute. Is there an institute NOW DEDICATED to using creationism to further research ? No foolish.

But there are in EVOLUTION. EVERY RELATED Institution is dedicated to using EVOLUTION in science research in every country, and every related field in medical science IN THE WORLD.

The OP states, ' Kitzmiller v. Dover case....violation of the First Amendment.'

 

[badger2]

Science illiterate, you just called it a conjecture. It’s not science till it’s an accepted THEORY by ALL related institutions.
Now, look up what a “conjecture” is in science and what a THEORY IS in science.

Yes. See the OP: 'Kitzmiller v. Dover case.'

 

[badger2]

Dover Trial

It's true in a sense. Once faith is in the believer's head, it becomes almost impossible to dislodge.

But if voodoo and Islam can be kept out of the children's heads until thier teen years, then is becomes nearly impossible to install.

It's a powerful drug. Its pimps should be boycotted.

 

[badger2]

It's faster to use the book (forthcoming) than the video for critique, but here it is:

Cancelled Science

 

[ReinyDays]

How is it even possible to 'understand' evolution? I don't understand creation, but I believe in it.

"In the beginning, God created Heaven and Earth" ... that's all we need to know ... we should stay focused on "loving our brothers as we love ourselves" ... that's the beauty of religion, even simpletons can live the lifestyle ...

Evolution is the understanding ... so of course we understand it ... or should I say someone understands it ... or better a lot of different people understand parts of it such that together "we" as a People understand evolution ... exactly the same way Paul the Apostle explains the body of Christ ... each of us our own part and together making a Godly Kingdom ...

I have a textbook here Molecular Biology of the Gene by Robert Watson/1970 ... upper division, say junior level in college ... a full year's course just how DNA functions in day-to-day cellular functions ... it would be a senior level course to learn DNA's role in providing inherited characteristics ... it's complicated, to be sure, but it is possible to understand ... just lots of years of college ..

It's the three dimensional structure of DNA ... atom by atom, electron by electron ... that reveals the Truth of evolution ... it's chemistry, we can show you in a lab ...

 

[badger2]