Intelligent Design

[The Inquisition]

If he 's going to get a PhD in molecular biology while denying the fact of natural evolution, I'd be really interested in where he places the line between natural evolution that requires no deity and theistic evolution that requires a creator. Where is this dividing line? Be specific!

Your hero Michael Behe draws this line at chloroquine resistance of malaria, is this where you draw the line?

You want me to decide right now which parts of evolution occur and which do not? I don't have a completely coherent hypothesis or anything, but I would say that the genetic code is incapable of increasing in complex arrangements of nucleotides that lead to new functions. Therefore I would say that all the observable functions that are the result of proteins would have had to been programmed by an intelligent agent. This is just my thought so far. I can't be much more specific. But it is important to know that I don't have to propose a complete alternate to scientifically scrutinize an existing theory.

Chloroquine resistance in malaria would qualify under that definition. It developed resistance to a drug that we developed to combat malaria.

Do you understand that such a god is a bio-terrorist?

Of course the scientists understand why chloroquine resistance developed, it did it through multiple convergent paths, not paths that were contingent as Behe asserted. This is why Behe; and ID proponents, are regarded as a laughingstock among the scientific community. It's why he lost in the Kitzmiller vs. Dover trial.

Behe’s (malevolent) intelligent designer is still at work

If you are serious about pursuing an actual career in science, then you need to consider the crank status that Behe has in the scientific community. Behe writes books that are there to dupe people, but they have zero credibility among scientists.

ID proponents are some of the most dishonest, quote-mining cranks I have ever had the displeasure of interacting with online.

[Old Baby]

I haven't read all 31 pages of this thread so someone else might have said this.

The "If God designed X, why is it screwed up?" argument posed to a Christian is going to be explained with the story of Adam's fall.  

In the beginning, everything was perfect.  Then, Adam ate the apple and suddenly we had thorns and weeds and back aches and eye problems and guys only living to be 500 instead of 1000.

Yeah, I think it's still a good argument as it shows the hypocrisy of certain approaches.

"Humans are so amazing and brilliant and wonderful, they must have been designed!"

"But they are shit. [Insert facts about human biology]"

"Yes! That's because of [insert scapegoat]."

"So if they're shit, they're not wonderful, so you defeated your own argument."

"Free will."

"What?"

"Look over there!" *runs off*

Absolutely, I agree with you.  Just saying that if you're wanting to pin Christians down it's not the best way to go because they'll just scoff at you for not understanding the bible.  The bible is the only real tangible aspect of Christian faith.  Being convinced that it was not divine was the final blow that shattered my faith.  Sure, there are apologetics, but honest people know when they are being coerced.

[robvalue]

For sure. I don't bring arguments to people anyway, I just respond to what they bring me. Trying to lay into someone's faith when they haven't asked you to has about 150% failure rate. It's more important to be there if they do have questions, to help the odd soul like yourself to escape the prison.

Ironically, as an uninvested atheist, I can understand what the bible really tells us in ways most Christians will probably never see.

[ohreally]

What's the best way to refute the argument that we were intelligently designed? I've seen the bit that Neil Degrasse Tyson did on it, but what else can I put into my arsenal? (More specifically, about how complex flowers are and other things in nature)

Without referencing evolution, what exactly is ID?  What is the process?  What are the mechanisms?  How do you measure the process to know something is designed?  

I would say what is the theory of ID but i'm sure that would throw many off their axis.

[Old Baby]

What's the best way to refute the argument that we were intelligently designed? I've seen the bit that Neil Degrasse Tyson did on it, but what else can I put into my arsenal? (More specifically, about how complex flowers are and other things in nature)

Without referencing evolution, what exactly is ID?  What is the process?  What are the mechanisms?  How do you measure the process to know something is designed?  

I would say what is the theory of ID but i'm sure that would throw many off their axis.

It wouldn't because it's an entirely circular concept.  I once told a Christian this and the response I got was "Yes, as it should be."  This person then told me that I needed to submit to Jesus to have my faith in God restored.

[The Grand Nudger]

I think it's disappointing that after 34 pages of a thread entitled "Intelligent Design" we have yet to see a single example thereof.

[ErGingerbreadMandude]

I think it's disappointing that after 34 pages of a thread entitled "Intelligent Design" we have yet to see a single example thereof.

*cough*

[The Grand Nudger]

Are you sick, something stuck in your throat?

[Edwardo Piet]

Pool natural selection isn't hard to grasp, seriously.

[ErGingerbreadMandude]

Are you sick, something stuck in your throat?

Do you think 1 + 2 = 3 is a result of intelligent design?