RE: Intelligent Design: Did you design yourself?
May 29, 2014 at 10:08 am
(This post was last modified: May 29, 2014 at 10:40 am by Mister Agenda.)
(May 28, 2014 at 6:36 pm)Artur Axmann Wrote: Is intelligent design a scientific theory?Yes.
The scientific method is commonly described as a four-step process involving observations, hypothesis, experiments, and conclusion. Intelligent design begins with the observation that intelligent agents produce complex and specified information (CSI). Design theorists hypothesize that if a natural object was designed, it will contain high levels of CSI. Scientists then perform experimental tests upon natural objects to determine if they contain complex and specified information. One easily testable form of CSI is irreducible complexity, which can be discovered by experimentally reverse-engineering biological structures to see if they require all of their parts to function. When ID researchers find irreducible complexity in biology, they conclude that such structures were designed.
http://www.intelligentdesign.org/
It's a discredited scientific hypothesis. For every proposed instance of irreducible complexity, an evolutionary path has been found that explains how the structure was formed. ID researchers have thus far found no irreducible complexity in biology. They are akin to ghost hunters.
(May 28, 2014 at 9:15 pm)Heywood Wrote:(May 28, 2014 at 9:08 pm)Stimbo Wrote: Based on a sample size of exactly one laboratory-created bacterium that we not only know was deliberately designed, but we also know the identities of the designers?
The claim made was that intelligent design was merely a hypothesis. Just one example of something intelligently designed demolishes that claim.
Intelligently designed biological systems exist.....shouldn't students then be taught about intelligent design?
If the intelligent design hypothesis wasn't already exclusive of human-designed organisms, your thought might actually make sense, but it's something we've been doing for thousands of years.
Students ARE taught about things that are KNOWN to be intelligently designed. In a proper science class, they are not taught about things IMAGINED to be intelligently designed.
(May 28, 2014 at 9:25 pm)Artur Axmann Wrote: it is a mathematical impossibility for the universe to be the way it is without external interference.
That's an assertion that would be provable by definition, if true. Show your work, please.
(May 28, 2014 at 9:25 pm)Artur Axmann Wrote: The universe ,in its construction ,reveals the
the laws of mathematics and these laws can be calculated and diagrammed by physicists.
Mathematics is a language we use to describe things precisely. If the universe were different, the math would be different. The mathematical models of physical laws are determined by observation and experimentation, and some of them seem to be brute facts impossible to derive mathematically from other facts.
(May 28, 2014 at 9:25 pm)Artur Axmann Wrote: This implies an intelligence in creation and underpins I.D. theory.
The basis of ID is in trouble, then. And ID is not a theory. Scientific theories are based on hypotheses that have withstood attempts to falsify them. ID fails at this level as well.
(May 28, 2014 at 9:27 pm)Heywood Wrote: Would you have a problem teaching students that there are two known mechanisms which explain the existence of biological systems, evolution and intelligent design?
Sadly, the co-option by creationists of the term 'intelligent design' have rendered it useless, scientifically. I would go with natural and artifcial organism.
(May 28, 2014 at 9:38 pm)Heywood Wrote: But atheists don't want it taught at all...when it is a fact of reality.
I have difficulty believing that you're actually this stupid. Consider it a compliment that I think you're being willfully deceptive.
(May 28, 2014 at 11:46 pm)Heywood Wrote: I think ID'st would be quite happy with teaching that intelligent design is one of the known mechanisms by which biological systems come into existence....even if it included a disclaimer that they only known examples are the result of human intellect.
Sure, the thinnest edge of the wedge still gets the wedge in.
(May 28, 2014 at 11:46 pm)Heywood Wrote: I suspect there would be atheists who fight it and still claim it isn't science.
I suspect you suspect this because you suspect we are as dishonest as you are, not realizing how high you're setting that particular bar.
(May 28, 2014 at 11:46 pm)Heywood Wrote: In the future, the very near future, most lineages of life on this planet will be the result of intelligent design.
That's ridiculous. Do you have any comprehension of the numbers involved? What motivation could we have to be in a hurry to create hundreds of millions of new species? It will take centuries.
(May 28, 2014 at 11:46 pm)Heywood Wrote: The lineage you and I belong to....its origin is unknown. Its origin could be designed or could be the result of happenstance.
It could not be happenstance. It could be evololution, which is to what all the available evidence points.
(May 28, 2014 at 11:46 pm)Heywood Wrote: After generations are taught about intelligent design, some will ponder if our origin is the result of intelligent design. Intelligent design isn't going away anytime soon.
The same way some idiots wonder if we can see a laptop on the beach and tell it's designed, why do we think the sand on the beach isn't. Your future generations will be the intellectual heirs of these same idiots who try to force the qualities that tell us the artificial is different from the natural into service as telling us that the natural is actually artificial. I don't think they'll be very representative.
But your dishonest agenda in getting this taught in schools is noted. I'm perfectly okay with letting the cards fall as they may regarding accurate science being taught. I have a feeling it won't work out as well for your agenda as you think.
I'm not anti-Christian. I'm anti-stupid.
