Evolution is Fact

[questor]

Is the argument here that there could not be intelligent design of the universe because life has evolved over time? What is proved by evolution, and how does it negate the possibility of intelligent design?

[Buffy]

No, Intelligent Design offers no testable hypotheses, and thus is not a valid scientific theory. This has been rehashed endlessly in earlier threads on the topic. I encourage you to go back and look at those rather than trying to turn this already tortured thread into yet another defense of ID.

Almost all absurdity of conduct arises from the imitation of those whom we cannot resemble,
Buffy

[JulianKeller]

This should put an end to the discussion of if Evolution is even real or not.

Founder effect - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[questor]

If you don't want further discussion, the thread should be closed. I'm not trying to re-open a can of worms, I'm merely asking how the presence of evolution of life on earth negates the possibility of intelligent design of the universe. This seems a fair question.

[Buffy]

That's fine. However if you do wish to discuss support for ID, please take it to one of the ID-specific threads.

Now to address your question, there are several levels of distinction that can be made about an "intelligent designer":

• A meddling designer: one who made arbitrary decisions about how evolution proceeded. There is no evidence of this, as Evolution has sufficient explanatory power to account for what we perceive, and despite claims of "irreducible complexity" there is no known counter example to evolution that requires such intervention.
• An initial-conditions setting designer: one who defined the initial laws and parameters which drive our universe. Both the Copenhagen and Many-Worlds Interpretations adequately account for our "initial conditions" and are not contradicted by any observable phenomena.
• Uninvolved designer: This is an interesting one because it assigns no actual "designing" role to the Creator, and as it is not emotionally satisfying, not many people ascribe to it. It also by definition ensures that there can be no evidence that such a creator exists.

Now to answer your specific question, does this *prove* that there is no "Creator" or "Designer?" No, it does not, but it is by definition not possible to use the scientific method to prove a negative.

In combination with the above points however, all this says that the personal belief that there is/was an Intelligent Designer is a personal opinion that you are free to hold, but it is not a scientific theory and thus has no bearing on whether or not Evolution is a "Fact."

I have opinions of my own -- strong opinions -- but I don't always agree with them,
Buffy

[questor]

I am not arguing against the existence of evolution. I am merely saying that the presence of it does not negate the possibility of Intelligent Design. I also will not argue for ID except to say that as I perceive observable evidence there is much more for the possibility than against it. This is my opinion, others differ.

[REASON]

People often see what they want to see.

[questor]

and some see but do not comprehend.

[Buffy]

Originally Posted by questor

I am not arguing against the existence of evolution. I am merely saying that the presence of it does not negate the possibility of Intelligent Design. I also will not argue for ID except to say that as I perceive observable evidence there is much more for the possibility than against it. This is my opinion, others differ.

Nothing wrong with that. In the post above, I'm agreeing with your premise, and you're certainly free to perceive the evidence as you do!

That belief is not supported by science, however, because there is no supportive evidence in its favor or counter-examples negating the Evolutionary explanation, so there's no foundation for ID being considered as an "alternative" explanation in a scientific context.

Military intelligence is a contradiction in terms,
Buffy

[questor]

If all life began by some action in the ''primordial soup'', it would seem that this occurrence had a cause or happened by accident. The same applies to the universe itself, there was a cause, or there wasn't ( if you believe in BB).
When I view spin, orbiting, gratity, time and countless other phenomenae that exist, I say this evidence of intelligence outweighs any evidence that it was all happenstance. As I said others may have evidence to the other side. I personally don't care which answer is correct, I just go with the flow.