Intelligent Design POLL

[KickAssClown]

Sounds more like i'm into Panthemism, than Panentheism. You did better the seond time, I think I almost get the arguement against ID. I have to say that in my personal Perview anything outside my experience is inconsiquential. If there exists a heaven and hell, I don't give a rat's a$$. All I care about is that I'm a good person in the here and the now. I can't verify what will happen to me after I'm done here, so anything that happens afterwards is unimportant. I can go to hell if there is a vengeful and cruel god. I will go knowing that I did my best and that is all I could do. I am human, and to be human is to err, this I understand and forgive of myself.

I am not a creationist. I disagree with BB theory. I believe that the universe is a closed system, that is eternal, has had no begining will have no end. It will just be.

[Boerseun]

Hey, TFS - that was a pretty good post you had going there. I would've given you some rep for it, but it seems like I gotta spread the love around some.

Next time somebody's looking for the proof against ID, I'll just refer them to this post of yours.

Kudos!

[questor]

Boersun quote:
''Intelligent Design makes claims that has to be taken on faith - that an Intelligent Designer is responsible for Life. The reason they make this claim is because of certain weaknesses in Evolutionary Theory. What they are basically saying is "There are some holes in your theory, and because of that, I am right". They do not have any proof at all, except for this. Their conclusion is a leap of faith, and therefore fails to satisfy the requirements for a scientifically sound theory. We should not be teaching ID in schools, because it is not science.''
is this what people think is the position of all those who believe in the possibility of ID? is it just about life and evolution? i find this to be a very
narrow and mistaken opinion as to what ID is all about. what about the billions of years before life appeared on earth? i agree that ID should not be taught as science because we do not know the truth. i also think people
dismiss obvious evidence of ID without serious thought about what is before their very eyes. while claims of auras and witch doctors miracle cures don't
pass the tests of full examination, some very obvious everyday phenomenae
point to ID. i have proposed these phenomenae as evidence of intelligent planning and i assume other posters merely want to argue about whether or not God exists. their minds cannot grasp the fact that the discussion is about intelligent creation of the universe billions of years before mankind even existed and invented his idea of God. this is a mental disconnect i do not understand. perhaps it would be better if Raccoon would define intelligent design.

[ughaibu]

Questor: You are human, intelligent design is as much a human creation as gods are.

[TheFaithfulStone]

Originally Posted by questor

is this what people think is the position of all those who believe in the possibility of ID

That's it exactly. You BELIEVE in the possibility of an intelligently designed universe.

I don't have any problem with people believing this, and I don't find it to be mutually exclusive with a belief in evolution.

The only "problem" with ID is the masquerade it's playing as legitimate science. It's perfectly valid philosophy.

TFS

[KickAssClown]

Does it not intend to emperically prove it's self? Does that not make it a scientific theory? It states a hypothesis, it then observes measurements and emperical evidence. I may be mistaken here.

Is there documentation that I may regard ID? I can't play Devil's Advocate here, if I don't know what the Heck I'm talking about.

[Edella]

Originally Posted by Boersun

Intelligent Design makes claims that has to be taken on faith - that an Intelligent Designer is responsible for Life. The reason they make this claim is because of certain weaknesses in Evolutionary Theory. What they are basically saying is "There are some holes in your theory, and because of that, I am right". They do not have any proof at all, except for this. Their conclusion is a leap of faith, and therefore fails to satisfy the requirements for a scientifically sound theory.

Originally Posted by questor

...is this what people think is the position of all those who believe in the possibility of ID?

Certainly not all who support ID,but this seemed to be the position of the ID proponents in the Dover Case.We do hear a lot about the "impossibility" of a natural evolution from the ID camp: irreducible complexity,gaps in fossil records...as reasons for belief in ID.The reason the Discovery Institute exists is to promote ID as science,not just to promote ID.Of course whether ID should be taught in public schools as science and the possibility an intelligent designer are two different things.As TFS said,it's perfectly valid philosophy,but not science.If ID proponents simply wanted to promote the idea as philosophy,this would hardly be such a hot topic.

Originally Posted by questor

ID should not be taught as science because we do not know the truth.

ID should not be taught as science because it is not science.

Ed

[questor]

Ugh, here you go again. since you have great certainty there was no intelligence in the design of the universe, please explain to me the origin of:
1. gravity
2. the weak force
3. the strong force
4. the smallest particle
5. the life force
6. DNA
7. spin (atoms and electrons)
8. orbiting, the method of propulsion
9. order of the universe
10. relationship of the atoms that comprise life with the same elements present in inanimate objects. how do they differ?
11. the age of the universe
12. the deities worshipped by man and when they were invented .

get back to me as soon as you can.

[ughaibu]

Questor: When have I ever said "there was no intelligence in the design of the universe"?
Your post is irrelevant to the fact that intelligent design is a human idea. I'm not going to reply to a set of posts that avoid the issue and rehash stuff you've posted a dozen times, if you have something new to add, I'll be interested.

[HydrogenBond]

Intelligent design in the literal religious sense goes beyond the state of the art in science. Based on what we know now, it can not be proven with existing science.

If we look at intelligent design in a more scientific sense as evolution having a logical predefined order, it makes more sense than random or stupid (opposite of intelligent) design. For example, of all the exotic variety of sub-particles humans have found, manufactured or postulated, if we look around, they all end up as protons, electrons and neutrons. All that random variety is intelligently reduced into three simple things. This was already designed to happen right from the BB since these particles represent a final steady state. They are common all over the universe.

From these three particles the chemical state is defined. Chemicals also have intelligent order or design to them. One reacts H2 and O2 you get water, not a bunch of randon things that change everyday. Even in the center of the sun where oxygen and hydrogen are at 100M degrees, their future is already pre-defined when we cool them to ambient conditions.

If we had stupid design at work in the universe, there would be hundreds or millions of stable sub-atomic particles capable of infinite chemical pertubations which never seem to reach any sense of order. With stupid design it would be nearly impossible for life to form. With intelligent design the next step into life is a logical consequence of specific conditions and chemicals which are already predefined. If the conditions are correct it will happen.

The basic unit of life or the cell is an intelligent design template. It is not coincidental that all life is based on the same template. We do not have a hundred different versions of cell wanabee's. It is like water, the template is predefined, waiting for the correct conditions to appear. Once the cell does appear, variety is possible but all will be cells.

The brain is another example of stupid design reduced to one. As far as I know, no animal thinks with its feet or hair. With stupid design that may be a possiblity since even the subparticles can't make up their minds.