Your explanations?

[hortysir]

1) It is guided by natural laws, 2) It has to be explanatory by natural laws, 3) It is testable against the empirical world, 4) Its conclusions are tentative--subject to continual review and revision, and 5) It is falsifiable. On every point, "intelligent design" and every other form of creationism fail as science.

And evolution fits this template?
How?

 

[Hollie]

1) It is guided by natural laws, 2) It has to be explanatory by natural laws, 3) It is testable against the empirical world, 4) Its conclusions are tentative--subject to continual review and revision, and 5) It is falsifiable. On every point, "intelligent design" and every other form of creationism fail as science.

And evolution fits this template?
How?

Expand your horizons beyond Harun Yahya.

I'll take it you agree that the fundamentalist Christian Right has suffered humiliating losses at every attempt to throw a burqa on ID'iot creationism?

You might read some of the transcripts from the Dover trial, among others. The ID'iot creationist cabal were effectively asking the same ignorant, uneducated questions you did.

 

[HaShev]

Still fun to watch God at work, putting just the right people (and tools) in the right place at the right time

Yeah like when they hung Jesus. D'oh!

"A tree service lawn man, a rope and twine maker, and a false prophet walk into a bar."

 

[turzovka]

I'll take it you agree that the fundamentalist Christian Right has suffered humiliating losses at every attempt to throw a burqa on ID'iot creationism? You might read some of the transcripts from the Dover trial, among others. The ID'iot creationist cabal were effectively asking the same ignorant, uneducated questions you did.

From Wikipedia (no friend of Christianity) --- [Intelligent design (ID) is the pseudoscientific view that "certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection."]

“Pseudoscientific,” don’t show your hand too much Wiki. But you and so many others make the mistake that ID has to do with creationism. No. It has to do primarily with evolution. You say it could have happened without any intelligent designer and we say you are being an ignoramus or you have an agenda to pretend there is no evidence for God --- you pick which one.

More Wiki --- [Although they (proponents of ID) state that ID is not creationism and deliberately avoid assigning a personality to the designer, many of these proponents express belief that the designer is the Christian deity.]

Yeah, so what? There is a lot of evidence for the Christian deity as well. So sorry we dare to make a connection between the insistence of an intelligent designer and that that designer may also be God.

 

[turzovka]

Still fun to watch God at work, putting just the right people (and tools) in the right place at the right time

Yeah like when they hung Jesus. D'oh!

"A tree service lawn man, a rope and twine maker, and a false prophet walk into a bar."

Chutzpah.

 

[Hollie]

I'll take it you agree that the fundamentalist Christian Right has suffered humiliating losses at every attempt to throw a burqa on ID'iot creationism? You might read some of the transcripts from the Dover trial, among others. The ID'iot creationist cabal were effectively asking the same ignorant, uneducated questions you did.

From Wikipedia (no friend of Christianity) --- [Intelligent design (ID) is the pseudoscientific view that "certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection."]

“Pseudoscientific,” don’t show your hand too much Wiki. But you and so many others make the mistake that ID has to do with creationism. No. It has to do primarily with evolution. You say it could have happened without any intelligent designer and we say you are being an ignoramus or you have an agenda to pretend there is no evidence for God --- you pick which one.

More Wiki --- [Although they (proponents of ID) state that ID is not creationism and deliberately avoid assigning a personality to the designer, many of these proponents express belief that the designer is the Christian deity.]

Yeah, so what? There is a lot of evidence for the Christian deity as well. So sorry we dare to make a connection between the insistence of an intelligent designer and that that designer may also be God.

What "lots of evidence" can you provide for any of the Christian deities?

 

[amrchaos]

I am a skeptic

Kid moonwalking on the wall--I need videotape!!

So do you think that the Cop and the CPS case worker who saw it, lied about it?
What would be their purpose for doing so?

Anything from promoting their beliefs to not fully understanding what they saw.

You do understand you are trying to make me explain what others think when there is no actual way of doing so, right?

I didn't ask you what they think.
I asked you what you thought and you answered.

When you ask why would someone take up a certain action--you are asking for their line of reasoning--i.e. what they were they thinking to do this.

To turkov
An open minded investigator would be wary of eye witness accounts. Else, Benny Hinn actually heals people on stage to your ideal open minded investigator!!

 

[Avatar4321]

An even bigger miracle would have been if the drunk driver hadn't even hit her at all

Then you've experienced some miracle because a drunk driver didn't hit you.

 

[hortysir]

1) It is guided by natural laws, 2) It has to be explanatory by natural laws, 3) It is testable against the empirical world, 4) Its conclusions are tentative--subject to continual review and revision, and 5) It is falsifiable. On every point, "intelligent design" and every other form of creationism fail as science.

And evolution fits this template?
How?

Expand your horizons beyond Harun Yahya.

I'll take it you agree that the fundamentalist Christian Right has suffered humiliating losses at every attempt to throw a burqa on ID'iot creationism?

You might read some of the transcripts from the Dover trial, among others. The ID'iot creationist cabal were effectively asking the same ignorant, uneducated questions you did.

So that's a no

 

[hortysir]

I'll take it you agree that the fundamentalist Christian Right has suffered humiliating losses at every attempt to throw a burqa on ID'iot creationism? You might read some of the transcripts from the Dover trial, among others. The ID'iot creationist cabal were effectively asking the same ignorant, uneducated questions you did.

From Wikipedia (no friend of Christianity) --- [Intelligent design (ID) is the pseudoscientific view that "certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection."]

“Pseudoscientific,” don’t show your hand too much Wiki. But you and so many others make the mistake that ID has to do with creationism. No. It has to do primarily with evolution. You say it could have happened without any intelligent designer and we say you are being an ignoramus or you have an agenda to pretend there is no evidence for God --- you pick which one.

More Wiki --- [Although they (proponents of ID) state that ID is not creationism and deliberately avoid assigning a personality to the designer, many of these proponents express belief that the designer is the Christian deity.]

Yeah, so what? There is a lot of evidence for the Christian deity as well. So sorry we dare to make a connection between the insistence of an intelligent designer and that that designer may also be God.

What "lots of evidence" can you provide for any of the Christian deities?

It doesn't work like that.
You don't get to claim that evolution is superior to creationism and list the criteria we must meet unless/until you can show how evolution meets the same requirements

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

She wanted to pray out loud.

Was her prayer answered?

Teen Trapped Inside Wrecked Car Asks To Pray Out Loud. Suddenly This Happens...

No prayer was 'answered,' as there are no deities as perceived by theists who 'hear' prayers and 'intercede' on the behalf of humans.

This is known as an appeal to consequences fallacy, devoid of 'evidence' that 'prayer' was 'responsible' for the teen being freed from the wreck.

 

[Auld Phart]

She wanted to pray out loud.

Was her prayer answered?

Teen Trapped Inside Wrecked Car Asks To Pray Out Loud. Suddenly This Happens...

No prayer was 'answered,' as there are no deities as perceived by theists who 'hear' prayers and 'intercede' on the behalf of humans.

This is known as an appeal to consequences fallacy, devoid of 'evidence' that 'prayer' was 'responsible' for the teen being freed from the wreck.

yup, no deities...

Just a lot of very fortunate, for her, coincidences.

 

[Hollie]

I'll take it you agree that the fundamentalist Christian Right has suffered humiliating losses at every attempt to throw a burqa on ID'iot creationism? You might read some of the transcripts from the Dover trial, among others. The ID'iot creationist cabal were effectively asking the same ignorant, uneducated questions you did.

From Wikipedia (no friend of Christianity) --- [Intelligent design (ID) is the pseudoscientific view that "certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection."]

“Pseudoscientific,” don’t show your hand too much Wiki. But you and so many others make the mistake that ID has to do with creationism. No. It has to do primarily with evolution. You say it could have happened without any intelligent designer and we say you are being an ignoramus or you have an agenda to pretend there is no evidence for God --- you pick which one.

More Wiki --- [Although they (proponents of ID) state that ID is not creationism and deliberately avoid assigning a personality to the designer, many of these proponents express belief that the designer is the Christian deity.]

Yeah, so what? There is a lot of evidence for the Christian deity as well. So sorry we dare to make a connection between the insistence of an intelligent designer and that that designer may also be God.

What "lots of evidence" can you provide for any of the Christian deities?

It doesn't work like that.
You don't get to claim that evolution is superior to creationism and list the criteria we must meet unless/until you can show how evolution meets the same requirements

ID'iot creationism meets no criteria as a valid scientific hypothesis. It's a religious claim.

You are free to believe that the entirety of the relevant science community is engaged in a global conspiracy to discredit your gawds. Some of the more excitable of the rabid conspiracy theory / fundie loons believe exactly that. However, it's apparent that your claims to ID'iot creationism / Christian fundamentalism are the same as those who have been repeatedly humiliated in the courts as their attempts to force Christian religious dogma into the public schools under the burqa of ID'iot creationism has been repeatedly rejected as fraudulent.

 

[Hollie]

1) It is guided by natural laws, 2) It has to be explanatory by natural laws, 3) It is testable against the empirical world, 4) Its conclusions are tentative--subject to continual review and revision, and 5) It is falsifiable. On every point, "intelligent design" and every other form of creationism fail as science.

And evolution fits this template?
How?

Expand your horizons beyond Harun Yahya.

I'll take it you agree that the fundamentalist Christian Right has suffered humiliating losses at every attempt to throw a burqa on ID'iot creationism?

You might read some of the transcripts from the Dover trial, among others. The ID'iot creationist cabal were effectively asking the same ignorant, uneducated questions you did.

So that's a no

So that's a sidestep and shuffle. If you had actually read any of the material from the Dover trial, you would have had the opportunity to see the utter failure of the ID'iot creationist / fundie Christian cabal to offer a meaningful case for stealth Christianity.

It's better you don't read the facts of the case. Ignorance is bliss.

 

[amrchaos]

An even bigger miracle would have been if the drunk driver hadn't even hit her at all

Then you've experienced some miracle because a drunk driver didn't hit you.

If you really want to compare the difference---Escaping a dangerous and highly fatal situation without harm seems more like a miracle than barely surviving one.

 

[HaShev]

agree, the person who sky dives and their parachute doesn't open & yet they survive the impact is more impressive and it has happened which boggles the mind.
I notice these same people don't rally around the incredible events when a Rabbi or Cleric or Budhist monk is around the scene..hmmmm? Doesn't give them the affiliation promo boost or ego lift they seek I suppose.

 

[amrchaos]

She wanted to pray out loud.

Was her prayer answered?

Teen Trapped Inside Wrecked Car Asks To Pray Out Loud. Suddenly This Happens...

No prayer was 'answered,' as there are no deities as perceived by theists who 'hear' prayers and 'intercede' on the behalf of humans.

This is known as an appeal to consequences fallacy, devoid of 'evidence' that 'prayer' was 'responsible' for the teen being freed from the wreck.

yup, no deities...

Just a lot of very fortunate, for her, coincidences.

Actually--unfortunate

A Firetruck with faulty equipment arrive at the scene of an accident......You see nothing wrong with that scenario?

 

[Auld Phart]

She wanted to pray out loud.

Was her prayer answered?

Teen Trapped Inside Wrecked Car Asks To Pray Out Loud. Suddenly This Happens...

No prayer was 'answered,' as there are no deities as perceived by theists who 'hear' prayers and 'intercede' on the behalf of humans.

This is known as an appeal to consequences fallacy, devoid of 'evidence' that 'prayer' was 'responsible' for the teen being freed from the wreck.

yup, no deities...

Just a lot of very fortunate, for her, coincidences.

Actually--unfortunate

A Firetruck with faulty equipment arrive at the scene of an accident......You see nothing wrong with that scenario?

Must have been a conspiracy, to make it look like divine intervention.

(Is my sarcasm coming across?)

 

[Avatar4321]

An even bigger miracle would have been if the drunk driver hadn't even hit her at all

Then you've experienced some miracle because a drunk driver didn't hit you.

If you really want to compare the difference---Escaping a dangerous and highly fatal situation without harm seems more like a miracle than barely surviving one.

Doesn't really change the fact that it's still a miracle.

Miracles happen all the time

 

[amrchaos]

She wanted to pray out loud.

Was her prayer answered?

Teen Trapped Inside Wrecked Car Asks To Pray Out Loud. Suddenly This Happens...

No prayer was 'answered,' as there are no deities as perceived by theists who 'hear' prayers and 'intercede' on the behalf of humans.

This is known as an appeal to consequences fallacy, devoid of 'evidence' that 'prayer' was 'responsible' for the teen being freed from the wreck.

yup, no deities...

Just a lot of very fortunate, for her, coincidences.

Actually--unfortunate

A Firetruck with faulty equipment arrive at the scene of an accident......You see nothing wrong with that scenario?

Must have been a conspiracy, to make it look like divine intervention.

(Is my sarcasm coming across?)

Whether or not you think it was divine intervention is up to you.

However, the problem remains--why don't these Firemen have working equipment? Why are they forced to rely on a "miracle" to save people? Will this "miracle" occur again the next time when these firemen reach the next accident--or are we to say "too bad, God doesn't save everyone" when they fail to save the next person?