Intelligent Design vs Evolution

[whatthe_fuzz]

Here you are, start reading:

 

http://scholar.google.com.au/scholar?q=scientific+articles+biological+evolution&btnG=&hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5&as_vis=1

 

These will help you understand the theory of evolution.

 

thank you for undermining my intelligence. heres a read for you http://www.answersingenesis.org/ 

 

No, and I refer you to post 123 for the answer.

 

no? i didnt ask a question 

[FireFox]

I sometimes encounter people mainly from a religious background bitching about evolution and that it is only a theory, well at least it is marketed as a theory but it is the best thing we have.

 

The bible says god and it's interpretation of creation is fact, which is more credible at the end of the day? I think I'll stick with evolution.

[whatthe_fuzz]

You did? Weird, because when I click on the link I see a bunch of bones from each separate species between out common ancestor with some of the other great apes and our current species.

 

 

Or maybe, just maybe, the heart changed along with the rest of the animal? It's physically impossible for an adult's heart to exist in a baby and for an adult to exist with a baby's heart, yet somehow babies grow up along with their hearts!

 

thats not a different species nor an adaptation so your argument is invalid. 

 

 

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/d/db/Ardipithecis_Ramidus_skeleton_1994-1996.jpeg

 

this is what i see. fragments with multiple pieces missing being turned into this http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/e/e2/Ardipithecus_ramidus.jpg

 

seems like a few pieces are missing from the puzzle

[whatthe_fuzz]

I sometimes encounter people mainly from a religious background bitching about evolution and that it is only a theory, well at least it is marketed as a theory but it is the best thing we have.

 

The bible says god and it's interpretation of creation is fact, which is more credible at the end of the day? I think I'll stick with evolution.

 

ok well that is religion and this thread is not arguing religion but rather intelligent design

[mr moose]

thank you for undermining my intelligence. heres a read for you http://www.answersingenesis.org/ 

 

 

no? i didnt ask a question 

 

I give you a link to 1.78 Million search results pertaining to scientific articles on biology and evolution, and you link me to answers in genesis? That site is nothing short of a joke, it does absolutely nothing for scientific understanding and does even more damage to those of us who want to have a faith in God. 

[mr moose]

ok well that is religion and this thread is not arguing religion but rather intelligent design

If your not arguing religion then why link to a religious website?

[FireFox]

ok well that is religion and this thread is not arguing religion but rather intelligent design

 

Thought I saw some religious based replies, my bad lol

[wpirobotbuilder]

I sometimes encounter people mainly from a religious background bitching about evolution and that it is only a theory, well at least it is marketed as a theory but it is the best thing we have.

This.

 

Science is not in the business of disproving beliefs, it is devoted to presenting the truth as is seen by the scientific community. That does not mean it is infallible, many theories have been overturned in the past. The overall goal of science is to increase our knowledge and understanding of the universe.

[whatthe_fuzz]

I give you a link to 1.78 Million search results pertaining to scientific articles on biology and evolution, and you link me to answers in genesis? That site is nothing short of a joke, it does absolutely nothing for scientific understanding and does even more damage to those of us who want to have a faith in God. 

 

so you want a broad general google search? sorry for linking you to a credible source instead of basically a "lmgtfy" 

 

how is it a joke? it offers solid scientific answers? not some malarchy 

[whatthe_fuzz]

If your not arguing religion then why link to a religious website?

 

 

its also valid from a scientific viewpoint. 

[whatthe_fuzz]

Thought I saw some religious based replies, my bad lol

 

well that is not the intent of this thread. as the title states. 

[whatthe_fuzz]

This.

 

Science is not in the business of disproving beliefs, it is devoted to presenting the truth as is seen by the scientific community. That does not mean it is infallible, many theories have been overturned in the past. The overall goal of science is to increase our knowledge and understanding of the universe.

 

then why is "science" so quick to shut down the school of thinking behind ID?

[wpirobotbuilder]

then why is "science" so quick to shut down the school of thinking behind ID?

I didn't know that it was. As far as I know they dispute its scientific reputability because it has no empirical support, generates no new hypotheses and is scientifically untestable by experiment. 

[whatthe_fuzz]

I didn't know that it was. As far as I know they dispute its scientific reputability because it has no empirical support, generates no new hypotheses and is scientifically untestable by experiment.

technically it is testable. its the simple idea that nothing as complex as the universe happened by chance. this is also the hypothesis. we can test this by observing nature. nothing is created out of disorder. secondly empirical value is needed to support a theory correct? my argument is that the same empirical value used yo prove evolution/big bang also supports ID. its the same time line just different ideologies on how it all happened.

[mr moose]

so you want a broad general google search? sorry for linking you to a credible source instead of basically a "lmgtfy" 

 

how is it a joke? it offers solid scientific answers? not some malarchy 

 

Answersingenesis is a website developed by die hard Christians to prove their god exists, hence the name answersinGENESIS .

 

It is not credible, it is not scientific.

 

 

then why is "science" so quick to shut down the school of thinking behind ID?

 

Because it is a pseudo science not a real science, it's purpose is to  prove the existence of god not determine the origins of life.  And this:

 

 

I didn't know that it was. As far as I know they dispute its scientific reputability because it has no empirical support, generates no new hypotheses and is scientifically untestable by experiment. 

[whatthe_fuzz]

Answersingenesis is a website developed by die hard Christians to prove their god exists, hence the name answersinGENESIS .

 

It is not credible, it is not scientific.

 

 

 

Because it is a pseudo science not a real science, it's purpose is to  prove the existence of god not determine the origins of life.  And this:

 

so because it comes from a christians standpoint its suddenly not credible nor science? hm that seems like a double standard. if its a school of thought that offers new ideas but from a source that has faith in something then its not credible. 

 

its not real science?! really? its not the sole purpose to prove God but prove that this complexity which makes "us" is too intricate to happen randomly. 

[Nort]

I believe evolution and intelligent design co-exist. I don't understand why people think that intelligent design isn't possible. I mean look at humans, in our lifetimes the intelligence of a computer is supposed to surpass that of a human. CPUs are being tested that are made from organic material (algae). Who's to say that humans won't one day incorporate these ideas together and create their own race of intelligent beings?

[whatthe_fuzz]

I believe evolution and intelligent design co-exist. I don't understand why people think that intelligent design isn't possible. I mean look at humans, in our lifetimes the intelligence of a computer is supposed to surpass that of a human. CPUs are being tested that are made from organic material (algae). Who's to say that humans won't one day incorporate these ideas together and create their own race of intelligent beings?

 

wow i had no idea of the algae thing! thats freakin sweet! imagine have a "pet" cpu :p

[mr moose]

so because it comes from a christians standpoint its suddenly not credible nor science? hm that seems like a double standard. if its a school of thought that offers new ideas but from a source that has faith in something then its not credible. 

 

its not real science?! really? its not the sole purpose to prove God but prove that this complexity which makes "us" is too intricate to happen randomly. 

It is not a double standard, it is a very singular one.  ID was developed to prove the existence of god, it was developed to imitate science in  a hope that it would be universally accepted but the problem was that it is a pseudo science much like the autism is caused by vaccines debate.  It has not grounding in scientific method and thus has been treated as such by the scientific community.

[whatthe_fuzz]

It is not a double standard, it is a very singular one.  ID was developed to prove the existence of god, it was developed to imitate science in  a hope that it would be universally accepted but the problem was that it is a pseudo science much like the autism is caused by vaccines debate.  It has not grounding in scientific method and thus has been treated as such by the scientific community.

 

how is it imitating? it takes an observable fact, has a hypothesis, answers questions, whats the issue?

 

your only issue so far is that it was originally used to understand God. i still dont see a problem there.

[mr moose]

how is it imitating? it takes an observable fact, has a hypothesis, answers questions, whats the issue?

 

your only issue so far is that it was originally used to understand God. i still dont see a problem there.

 

the issue is you are referring to it as a science, it is not a science, it is not falsifiable, it does not maintain any of the standards required to full fill a scientific theory.

 

It's inception is anything but scientific and it's conclusions are severely lacking supporting evidence.

 

What more do you need to understand that ID is not a relevant science and should not be refereed to as such?

[beebskadoo]

 I don't have time to respond but this basically sums it up. Yeah it's loing but a great video to watch. Love me some AronRa

[beebskadoo]

so because it comes from a christians standpoint its suddenly not credible nor science? hm that seems like a double standard. if its a school of thought that offers new ideas but from a source that has faith in something then its not credible. 

 

its not real science?! really? its not the sole purpose to prove God but prove that this complexity which makes "us" is too intricate to happen randomly. 

AronRa and other youtubers have picked apart every argument on that site and found that they are all moot. See the video i posted.

[Dave :)]

As expected, thread has blown up to an ego fight between Science and Religion - granted, i didn't help the cause as such, but it's turning into something nasty. Locked.