Intelligent Design
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
23-02-2016, 09:00 PM
RE: Intelligent Design
(23-02-2016 07:00 PM)Unbeliever Wrote:  
(23-02-2016 06:38 PM)Paleophyte Wrote:  So that's the quick-N-dirty of design, or lack thereof. I know, TL;DR.

Allow me.

Be my guest. I've been know to ramble.

And on that note, Unbeliever touched on a good point here.

I think that this was raised at the Kitzmiller vs. Dover trial but I'm not sure. In a really transparent attempt at weaseling around the obvious theistic implications, the ICR never explicitly mentioned God in ID. They left open the possibility that it could have ben advanced aliens even though everybody knew damned well exactly what they were talking about. Looked really funny when they handed the judge a copy of The Wedge Document.

There is:
(23-02-2016 07:00 PM)Unbeliever Wrote:  the obvious question of where the designer came from
And the problem there is that your designer had to be designed by an even more complex designer, who had to be designer by had to be designed by yet a more complex designer than that who...

It's turtles all the way down.

[Image: bbe14bdc-d48f-4ec7-a675-184caea3deb2]

The whole silly mess iterates to absurdity so at some point you have to invoke either God or evolution anyway.

ID is the philisophical equivalent of a dog chasing its own tail. Hilarious to watch but not something you'd want making laws.

---
Flesh and blood of a dead star, slain in the apocalypse of supernova, resurrected by four billion years of continuous autocatalytic reaction and crowned with the emergent property of sentience in the dream that the universe might one day understand itself.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like Paleophyte's post
24-02-2016, 12:23 AM
RE: Intelligent Design
(22-02-2016 09:10 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  
(22-02-2016 09:01 PM)Paleophyte Wrote:  So what the heck is this?

God is a spider.





So where are the spiders?

Right. These spiders. Possibly NSFW.

---
Flesh and blood of a dead star, slain in the apocalypse of supernova, resurrected by four billion years of continuous autocatalytic reaction and crowned with the emergent property of sentience in the dream that the universe might one day understand itself.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Paleophyte's post
24-02-2016, 12:18 PM
RE: Intelligent Design
(23-02-2016 09:00 PM)Paleophyte Wrote:  
(23-02-2016 07:00 PM)Unbeliever Wrote:  Allow me.

Be my guest. I've been know to ramble.

And on that note, Unbeliever touched on a good point here.

I think that this was raised at the Kitzmiller vs. Dover trial but I'm not sure. In a really transparent attempt at weaseling around the obvious theistic implications, the ICR never explicitly mentioned God in ID. They left open the possibility that it could have ben advanced aliens even though everybody knew damned well exactly what they were talking about. Looked really funny when they handed the judge a copy of The Wedge Document.

There is:
(23-02-2016 07:00 PM)Unbeliever Wrote:  the obvious question of where the designer came from
And the problem there is that your designer had to be designed by an even more complex designer, who had to be designer by had to be designed by yet a more complex designer than that who...

It's turtles all the way down.

[Image: bbe14bdc-d48f-4ec7-a675-184caea3deb2]

The whole silly mess iterates to absurdity so at some point you have to invoke either God or evolution anyway.

ID is the philisophical equivalent of a dog chasing its own tail. Hilarious to watch but not something you'd want making laws.

complexity requiring someone to make it means we have to go down the line of infinite regression or in this case infinite turtle stacking
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-02-2016, 10:21 PM (This post was last modified: 24-02-2016 11:21 PM by Momsurroundedbyboys.)
RE: Intelligent Design
(21-02-2016 09:06 PM)BlackEyedGhost Wrote:  For this forum, I'm defining "Intelligent Design" as the idea that life was originally either created or seeded on this planet by some intelligent source.

It is my stance that this is a valid possibility and shouldn't be discredited without proof.

The evidence I claim supports this stance is the complexity of life forms as we know. The human brain is the most complex bit of "machinery" in the known universe, with man-made (intelligently designed) things only recently having any sort of comparable complexity.

I realize this is far from a popular view in this forum, but I none-the-less hold it. I created this forum so people would have a place to tell me how stupid I am without junking up other forums.

So, you're discussing abiogenesis?

Wait...no you're talking human evolution?

You're conflating two different things and mixing them up to bolster your own argument.

I would be more than happy to accept the ID idea, but it's got to apply to something...you can't just toss it in whenever your questioned and fail to have an answer.

If your talking abiogenesis, I could be persuaded, if you're talking human evolution then you'd be wrong. There's too much evidence to support how our brains evolved from human biology and anthropology. There are plenty of transitional fossels that back up evolution. No intelligence is required for that, just millions of years.


But as if to knock me down, reality came around
And without so much as a mere touch, cut me into little pieces

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Momsurroundedbyboys's post
24-02-2016, 11:08 PM
RE: Intelligent Design
(24-02-2016 10:21 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  No iteligence is required for that, just millions of years.

Iteligence is like intelligence except you don't go 2 L Big Grin

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes morondog's post
24-02-2016, 11:24 PM
RE: Intelligent Design
(24-02-2016 11:08 PM)morondog Wrote:  
(24-02-2016 10:21 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  No iteligence is required for that, just millions of years.

Iteligence is like intelligence except you don't go 2 L Big Grin

GaspFacepalm

I'm flummoxed. I have no idea how that happened. I mean it's not like I'm on my iPhone. Anyway, I did repair the damage. Smile Heart


But as if to knock me down, reality came around
And without so much as a mere touch, cut me into little pieces

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Momsurroundedbyboys's post
24-02-2016, 11:28 PM
RE: Intelligent Design
(23-02-2016 09:00 PM)Paleophyte Wrote:  
(23-02-2016 07:00 PM)Unbeliever Wrote:  Allow me.

Be my guest. I've been know to ramble.

And on that note, Unbeliever touched on a good point here.

I think that this was raised at the Kitzmiller vs. Dover trial but I'm not sure. In a really transparent attempt at weaseling around the obvious theistic implications, the ICR never explicitly mentioned God in ID. They left open the possibility that it could have ben advanced aliens even though everybody knew damned well exactly what they were talking about. Looked really funny when they handed the judge a copy of The Wedge Document.

There is:
(23-02-2016 07:00 PM)Unbeliever Wrote:  the obvious question of where the designer came from
And the problem there is that your designer had to be designed by an even more complex designer, who had to be designer by had to be designed by yet a more complex designer than that who...

It's turtles all the way down.

[Image: bbe14bdc-d48f-4ec7-a675-184caea3deb2]

The whole silly mess iterates to absurdity so at some point you have to invoke either God or evolution anyway.

ID is the philisophical equivalent of a dog chasing its own tail. Hilarious to watch but not something you'd want making laws.




#sigh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes GirlyMan's post
24-02-2016, 11:36 PM
RE: Intelligent Design
(24-02-2016 11:24 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  
(24-02-2016 11:08 PM)morondog Wrote:  Iteligence is like intelligence except you don't go 2 L Big Grin

GaspFacepalm

I'm flummoxed. I have no idea how that happened. I mean it's not like I'm on my iPhone. Anyway, I did repair the damage. Smile Heart

Hug You know it's just teazing Smile I've visited Misspellheim myself on several occasions.

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like morondog's post
25-02-2016, 08:06 PM
RE: Intelligent Design
(24-02-2016 10:21 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  If your talking abiogenesis, I could be persuaded, if you're talking human evolution then you'd be wrong. There's too much evidence to support how our brains evolved from human biology and anthropology. There are plenty of transitional fossels that back up evolution. No intelligence is required for that, just millions of years.
You summarized my own views on the topic rather well actually. Yes, the human brain was a poor example to use for arguing abiogenesis. In subsequent posts I used the complexity of the simplest cells and the seeming coding language which makes up DNA for a better argument.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-02-2016, 08:20 PM
RE: Intelligent Design
(25-02-2016 08:06 PM)BlackEyedGhost Wrote:  Yes, the human brain was a poor example to use for arguing abiogenesis. In subsequent posts I used the complexity of the simplest cells and the seeming coding language which makes up DNA for a better argument.

"Better" is highly subjective.

Your argument is no more suited for supporting the idea of an intelligent agency responsible for abiogenesis than it is for evolution. All of the same issues already raised still apply.

"Owl," said Rabbit shortly, "you and I have brains. The others have fluff. If there is any thinking to be done in this Forest - and when I say thinking I mean thinking - you and I must do it."
- A. A. Milne, The House at Pooh Corner
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Unbeliever's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: