I go away for a few hours, and this happens?
1) Calling the cosmological constant evidence that the universe was "designed for us" is as ridiculous as saying that a puddle which takes the shape of Elvis did so because the pothole it's in was designed to fit an Elvis-shaped puddle at a depth of exactly 3 cm. You're putting the cart before the horse, in other words: we are the way we are because the random variables fell out the way they did, not the other way around. That argument will never hold water unless you can demonstrate that no other variable-sets could sustain life different from us, or that it's impossible for the variables to have fallen into the order they did without outside intervention (I don't even know how you'd begin to demonstrate that one).
2) They have already explained to you why ID/IC does not constitute science. The definition of science (with which you have actively taken issue because it does not suit your expectations) is that a hypothesis must be formulated based upon the data (which ID/IC meets), then the hypothesis must be falsifiable (fail!), it must be tested and the results published for peer review in such a way that others can reproduce the results and criticize the methodology (fail!), and it must make accurate predictions which can build a model of how that thing functions (fail!). As I told you, please read the Kitzmiller v. Dover case decision carefully... a hyper-conservative Christian federal judge listened to the evidence and took careful note of how they forced the ID supporters (including Behe) to admit that their broadened definition--the one you keep urging us to accept--would also include astrology and tarot in its broad sweep.
That makes it NOT SCIENCE. This is in fact medieval theology-based "magical thinking" trying to creep back into how we investigate the world. I would point out that it was EXACTLY that type of anti-materialist theology which destroyed the Muslim scientific community after 300 years of scientific advancement, around the year 1100 C.E.
3) What's the problem with humans and chimps' relative degree of similarity? It's obvious to anyone (including Behe) who looks at our genomes that we're evolved from the same ancestors. So why are you objecting to our similarity to chimps? Could it be your Creationist "man was made in God's image to rule over the animals, not be one" roots are showing?
Take a look, for instance, at the research team whose work you mentioned earlier (when you said the male-specific Y-chromosome regions were surprisingly different between us and chimpanzees), and how they described it:
"The human Y chromosome began to evolve from an autosome hundreds of millions of years ago, acquiring a sex-determining function and undergoing a series of inversions that suppressed crossing over with the X chromosome. Little is known about the recent evolution of the Y chromosome because only the human Y chromosome has been fully sequenced. Prevailing theories hold that Y chromosomes evolve by gene loss, the pace of which slows over time, eventually leading to a paucity of genes, and stasis. These theories have been buttressed by partial sequence data from newly emergent plant and animal Y chromosomes, but they have not been tested in older, highly evolved Y chromosomes such as that of humans. Here we finished sequencing of the male-specific region of the Y chromosome (MSY) in our closest living relative, the chimpanzee, achieving levels of accuracy and completion previously reached for the human MSY. By comparing the MSYs of the two species we show that they differ radically in sequence structure and gene content, indicating rapid evolution during the past 6 million years. The chimpanzee MSY contains twice as many massive palindromes as the human MSY, yet it has lost large fractions of the MSY protein-coding genes and gene families present in the last common ancestor. We suggest that the extraordinary divergence of the chimpanzee and human MSYs was driven by four synergistic factors: the prominent role of the MSY in sperm production, 'genetic hitchhiking' effects in the absence of meiotic crossing over, frequent ectopic recombination within the MSY, and species differences in mating behaviour. Although genetic decay may be the principal dynamic in the evolution of newly emergent Y chromosomes, wholesale renovation is the paramount theme in the continuing evolution of chimpanzee, human and perhaps other older MSYs."
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20072128
See the part where they mention the God-magic that caused the divergence to happen? Yeah, neither did I.
1) Calling the cosmological constant evidence that the universe was "designed for us" is as ridiculous as saying that a puddle which takes the shape of Elvis did so because the pothole it's in was designed to fit an Elvis-shaped puddle at a depth of exactly 3 cm. You're putting the cart before the horse, in other words: we are the way we are because the random variables fell out the way they did, not the other way around. That argument will never hold water unless you can demonstrate that no other variable-sets could sustain life different from us, or that it's impossible for the variables to have fallen into the order they did without outside intervention (I don't even know how you'd begin to demonstrate that one).
2) They have already explained to you why ID/IC does not constitute science. The definition of science (with which you have actively taken issue because it does not suit your expectations) is that a hypothesis must be formulated based upon the data (which ID/IC meets), then the hypothesis must be falsifiable (fail!), it must be tested and the results published for peer review in such a way that others can reproduce the results and criticize the methodology (fail!), and it must make accurate predictions which can build a model of how that thing functions (fail!). As I told you, please read the Kitzmiller v. Dover case decision carefully... a hyper-conservative Christian federal judge listened to the evidence and took careful note of how they forced the ID supporters (including Behe) to admit that their broadened definition--the one you keep urging us to accept--would also include astrology and tarot in its broad sweep.
That makes it NOT SCIENCE. This is in fact medieval theology-based "magical thinking" trying to creep back into how we investigate the world. I would point out that it was EXACTLY that type of anti-materialist theology which destroyed the Muslim scientific community after 300 years of scientific advancement, around the year 1100 C.E.
3) What's the problem with humans and chimps' relative degree of similarity? It's obvious to anyone (including Behe) who looks at our genomes that we're evolved from the same ancestors. So why are you objecting to our similarity to chimps? Could it be your Creationist "man was made in God's image to rule over the animals, not be one" roots are showing?
Take a look, for instance, at the research team whose work you mentioned earlier (when you said the male-specific Y-chromosome regions were surprisingly different between us and chimpanzees), and how they described it:
"The human Y chromosome began to evolve from an autosome hundreds of millions of years ago, acquiring a sex-determining function and undergoing a series of inversions that suppressed crossing over with the X chromosome. Little is known about the recent evolution of the Y chromosome because only the human Y chromosome has been fully sequenced. Prevailing theories hold that Y chromosomes evolve by gene loss, the pace of which slows over time, eventually leading to a paucity of genes, and stasis. These theories have been buttressed by partial sequence data from newly emergent plant and animal Y chromosomes, but they have not been tested in older, highly evolved Y chromosomes such as that of humans. Here we finished sequencing of the male-specific region of the Y chromosome (MSY) in our closest living relative, the chimpanzee, achieving levels of accuracy and completion previously reached for the human MSY. By comparing the MSYs of the two species we show that they differ radically in sequence structure and gene content, indicating rapid evolution during the past 6 million years. The chimpanzee MSY contains twice as many massive palindromes as the human MSY, yet it has lost large fractions of the MSY protein-coding genes and gene families present in the last common ancestor. We suggest that the extraordinary divergence of the chimpanzee and human MSYs was driven by four synergistic factors: the prominent role of the MSY in sperm production, 'genetic hitchhiking' effects in the absence of meiotic crossing over, frequent ectopic recombination within the MSY, and species differences in mating behaviour. Although genetic decay may be the principal dynamic in the evolution of newly emergent Y chromosomes, wholesale renovation is the paramount theme in the continuing evolution of chimpanzee, human and perhaps other older MSYs."
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20072128
See the part where they mention the God-magic that caused the divergence to happen? Yeah, neither did I.
A Christian told me: if you were saved you cant lose your salvation. you're sealed with the Holy Ghost
I replied: Can I refuse? Because I find the entire concept of vicarious blood sacrifice atonement to be morally abhorrent, the concept of holding flawed creatures permanently accountable for social misbehaviors and thought crimes to be morally abhorrent, and the concept of calling something "free" when it comes with the strings of subjugation and obedience perhaps the most morally abhorrent of all... and that's without even going into the history of justifying genocide, slavery, rape, misogyny, religious intolerance, and suppression of free speech which has been attributed by your own scriptures to your deity. I want a refund. I would burn happily rather than serve the monster you profess to love.
I replied: Can I refuse? Because I find the entire concept of vicarious blood sacrifice atonement to be morally abhorrent, the concept of holding flawed creatures permanently accountable for social misbehaviors and thought crimes to be morally abhorrent, and the concept of calling something "free" when it comes with the strings of subjugation and obedience perhaps the most morally abhorrent of all... and that's without even going into the history of justifying genocide, slavery, rape, misogyny, religious intolerance, and suppression of free speech which has been attributed by your own scriptures to your deity. I want a refund. I would burn happily rather than serve the monster you profess to love.
