Intelligent Design - Are we ready for a new thread?

[SeattleGriz]

You guys up for another new thread?

Got some really interesting stuff.

First off, believing in Intelligent Design does not mean you don't believe in Evolution, it means you believe there is more than just random mutation and natural selection that has driven us from a single source of life to all the diversity we have today.

Secondly, the "Intelligent force" could easily be something we haven't discovered yet. While I personally believe in a God, it doesn't have to be One.

Lastly, my reason for bringing this up is because I believe the "consensus" in the evolution field is bastardizing the scientific method by crushing anything that doesn't fit into their mold.

Bitches.

[89Hen]

No

[Pwns]

It's simple, Seagriz.

In the beginning the universe spontaneously exploded from a singularity. There was no external energy source providing energy (the universe is a closed system, of course), it just happened. Then in our world the first biomolecules miraculously and non-supernaturally formed from a soup of inorganic substances. Then the first self-replicating cells miraculously formed from these biomolecules. Then the first nucleated cells formed from these cells. Then the cells miraculously and naturally aggregated together to form the first multicellular life.

Don't ever ask for any experiments demonstrating how these things happened. That's not important. You want proof? Bacterial resistance to antibiotics! Neuriminidase polymorphisms! The Galapagos Finches! Similarities between dinosaurs and birds! Basically the same thing.

By the way, ignore the infidel cosmologists who say the universe shouldn't exist as quoted in articles like this one.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/bridainepar ... snt-exist/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[CID1990]

When evidence of this guiding hand appears then it will be investigated.

Sort of like dinosaurs were never investigated until evidence of their existence was evident.

Sort of like how the atom was not investigated until there was evidecne that it existed.

Heck, we can even take it down to the theoretical level

the Higg's Boson was never investigated until it was proven it could exist by theoretical physics

SO SG... your task is

should you choose to accept it

is to provide us with either evidence of the existence of this guiding hand, or a compelling theoretical equation that tells us where to start looking

until then your guiding hand is a unicorn

[Chizzang]

You guys are just mean.... that makes Jesus sad

[Cap'n Cat]

[DSUrocks07]

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N1nrzKlLaWI[/youtube]

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FN2D1nV9qec[/youtube]

[D1B]

SG IS DRUNK, again

[JoltinJoe]

When evidence of this guiding hand appears then it will be investigated.

Sort of like dinosaurs were never investigated until evidence of their existence was evident.

Sort of like how the atom was not investigated until there was evidecne that it existed.

Heck, we can even take it down to the theoretical level

the Higg's Boson was never investigated until it was proven it could exist by theoretical physics

SO SG... your task is

should you choose to accept it

is to provide us with either evidence of the existence of this guiding hand, or a compelling theoretical equation that tells us where to start looking

until then your guiding hand is a unicorn

Then again, man will never be able to disprove intelligent design, because every theory regarding the formation of the universe, and every experiment concerning the formation of the universe, will be the product of human intelligence.

[kalm]

[youtube]http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=nlaoR5m4L80[/youtube]

[CID1990]

When evidence of this guiding hand appears then it will be investigated.

Sort of like dinosaurs were never investigated until evidence of their existence was evident.

Sort of like how the atom was not investigated until there was evidecne that it existed.

Heck, we can even take it down to the theoretical level

the Higg's Boson was never investigated until it was proven it could exist by theoretical physics

SO SG... your task is

should you choose to accept it

is to provide us with either evidence of the existence of this guiding hand, or a compelling theoretical equation that tells us where to start looking

until then your guiding hand is a unicorn

Then again, man will never be able to disprove intelligent design, because every theory regarding the formation of the universe, and every experiment concerning the formation of the universe, will be the product of human intelligence.

THIS RIGHT HERE^^^^^^

Joe you just nailed it

ID can never be proved, NOR disproved because it is not science, and will never have a place in the process of scientific discovery. It will always be a matter of faith. SG gets faith and science hopelessly confused.

Maybe one day we'll have telescopes powerful enough to see that enormous kid with the chemistry set. Until then, its faith, nothing more.

[SeattleGriz]

Then again, man will never be able to disprove intelligent design, because every theory regarding the formation of the universe, and every experiment concerning the formation of the universe, will be the product of human intelligence.

THIS RIGHT HERE^^^^^^

Joe you just nailed it

ID can never be proved, NOR disproved because it is not science, and will never have a place in the process of scientific discovery. It will always be a matter of faith. SG gets faith and science hopelessly confused.

Maybe one day we'll have telescopes powerful enough to see that enormous kid with the chemistry set. Until then, its faith, nothing more.

While I do feel the Intelligent Agent (Designer) is God, I too feel that even if we can prove an Intelligent Agent, we will never be able to prove it is God. Something I also believe, is that Intelligent Agent could also be some natural law that we have yet to discover. That doesn't affect my faith in one bit.

All I really have been saying, is nothing more than many scientists (certainly not a majority) are saying "Mutation and Natural Selection are not enough to have gotten us from a single source to all the diversity we have today".

That is why I likened it to the AGW crowd. No matter the result, we will make it fit the theory! Scientific method be damned.

I just believe there is enough doubt out there to believe in the need for something in addition to what Evolution gives us now.

[Chizzang]

THIS RIGHT HERE^^^^^^

Joe you just nailed it

ID can never be proved, NOR disproved because it is not science, and will never have a place in the process of scientific discovery. It will always be a matter of faith. SG gets faith and science hopelessly confused.

Maybe one day we'll have telescopes powerful enough to see that enormous kid with the chemistry set. Until then, its faith, nothing more.

While I do feel the Intelligent Agent (Designer) is God, I too feel that even if we can prove an Intelligent Agent, we will never be able to prove it is God. Something I also believe, is that Intelligent Agent could also be some natural law that we have yet to discover. That doesn't affect my faith in one bit.

All I really have been saying, is nothing more than many scientists (certainly not a majority) are saying "Mutation and Natural Selection are not enough to have gotten us from a single source to all the diversity we have today".

That is why I likened it to the AGW crowd. No matter the result, we will make it fit the theory! Scientific method be damned.

I just believe there is enough doubt out there to believe in the need for something in addition to what Evolution gives us now.

Trying to make something FIT a theory is not science... Its EGO (The I am)
When we can successfully remove EGO from both science and religion we might actually get somewhere

[SeattleGriz]

While I do feel the Intelligent Agent (Designer) is God, I too feel that even if we can prove an Intelligent Agent, we will never be able to prove it is God. Something I also believe, is that Intelligent Agent could also be some natural law that we have yet to discover. That doesn't affect my faith in one bit.

All I really have been saying, is nothing more than many scientists (certainly not a majority) are saying "Mutation and Natural Selection are not enough to have gotten us from a single source to all the diversity we have today".

That is why I likened it to the AGW crowd. No matter the result, we will make it fit the theory! Scientific method be damned.

I just believe there is enough doubt out there to believe in the need for something in addition to what Evolution gives us now.

Trying to make something FIT a theory is not science... Its EGO (The I am)
When we can successfully remove EGO from both science and religion we might actually get somewhere

I do realize I get a skewed amount of instances where results are "fit" into evolution, because I visit ID sites that point them out.

That's why I always like when JMU DJ comes through because he explains it without bias.

[SeattleGriz]

You guys are just mean.... that makes Jesus sad

In light of D1Bs thread, Jesus with a unicorn would have been a show stopper. This one is good too though.

[D1B]

You guys are just mean.... that makes Jesus sad

In light of D1Bs thread, Jesus with a unicorn would have been a show stopper. This one is good too though.

Be a part of message board history - Get on the unicorn thread.

[SeattleGriz]

After 60,000 generations, why haven't we seen a new species?

http://myxo.css.msu.edu/ecoli/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

This is a great study by Dr Lenski, but it shows how species remain the same and don't turn into something else on a whim.

Could there be some sort of natural law we don't know about that would cause this e coli to turn into a new species? 60,000 generations seems to say yes.

Considering humans take an average of 20 - 30 years for a new generation, we get 60000 x 25 years = 1.5 million years.

We are only 6 million removed from our human/chimpanzee progenitor.

Are we on track? Where are the gradual changes? Surely the paleontological record would show that?

[Vidav]

After 60,000 generations, why haven't we seen a new species?

http://myxo.css.msu.edu/ecoli/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

This is a great study by Dr Lenski, but it shows how species remain the same and don't turn into something else on a whim.

Could there be some sort of natural law we don't know about that would cause this e coli to turn into a new species? 60,000 generations seems to say yes.

Considering humans take an average of 20 - 30 years for a new generation, we get 60000 x 25 years = 1.5 million years.

We are only 6 million removed from our human/chimpanzee progenitor.

Are we on track? Where are the gradual changes? Surely the paleontological record would show that?

No one that has any serious brains thinks one species turns into another on a whim. It's small changes over a very long time.

[D1B]

After 60,000 generations, why haven't we seen a new species?

http://myxo.css.msu.edu/ecoli/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

This is a great study by Dr Lenski, but it shows how species remain the same and don't turn into something else on a whim.

Could there be some sort of natural law we don't know about that would cause this e coli to turn into a new species? 60,000 generations seems to say yes.

Considering humans take an average of 20 - 30 years for a new generation, we get 60000 x 25 years = 1.5 million years.

We are only 6 million removed from our human/chimpanzee progenitor.

Are we on track? Where are the gradual changes? Surely the paleontological record would show that?

No one that has any serious brains thinks one species turns into another on a whim. It's small changes over a very long time.

Shiattelgriz is a drunk troll.

[SeattleGriz]

After 60,000 generations, why haven't we seen a new species?

http://myxo.css.msu.edu/ecoli/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

This is a great study by Dr Lenski, but it shows how species remain the same and don't turn into something else on a whim.

Could there be some sort of natural law we don't know about that would cause this e coli to turn into a new species? 60,000 generations seems to say yes.

Considering humans take an average of 20 - 30 years for a new generation, we get 60000 x 25 years = 1.5 million years.

We are only 6 million removed from our human/chimpanzee progenitor.

Are we on track? Where are the gradual changes? Surely the paleontological record would show that?

No one that has any serious brains thinks one species turns into another on a whim. It's small changes over a very long time.

Thanks for posting Vidav!

I could have used a better term than "whim". So, to address your point, where are the the intermediates in our paleontology record if we advance incrementally? We should have millions of examples on the books. How about you give me the link on our chimpanzee/human progenitor? How about Ida?

So let's just say you totally fold on this one and say, evolution does happen in punctuations. How exactly are we gaining genetic information to create a new species? That information better be useful or it is a waste of genetic time and should die out according to evolution.

[SeattleGriz]

No one that has any serious brains thinks one species turns into another on a whim. It's small changes over a very long time.

Shiattelgriz is a drunk troll.

[Vidav]

No one that has any serious brains thinks one species turns into another on a whim. It's small changes over a very long time.

Thanks for posting Vidav!

I could have used a better term than "whim". So, to address your point, where are the the intermediates in our paleontology record if we advance incrementally? We should have millions of examples on the books. How about you give me the link on our chimpanzee/human progenitor? How about Ida?

So let's just say you totally fold on this one and say, evolution does happen in punctuations. How exactly are we gaining genetic information to create a new species? That information better be useful or it is a waste of genetic time and should die out according to evolution.

It takes way longer than you or I can live to see.

[SeattleGriz]

Thanks for posting Vidav!

I could have used a better term than "whim". So, to address your point, where are the the intermediates in our paleontology record if we advance incrementally? We should have millions of examples on the books. How about you give me the link on our chimpanzee/human progenitor? How about Ida?

So let's just say you totally fold on this one and say, evolution does happen in punctuations. How exactly are we gaining genetic information to create a new species? That information better be useful or it is a waste of genetic time and should die out according to evolution.

It takes way longer than you or can live to see.

True, but my point is that they have no explanation for why the paleontological record only show distinct species introduced, living and dying. No intermediate forms.

Where is our missing link? Where is our gradual movement from that missing link?

That is why I said whim. If we don't have a record, then maybe it happened really fast - hence my punctuated comment.

You seem to think I am against evolution, when I am not. I am just against the shitty science that has happend in regards to our origins.

[Chizzang]

It takes way longer than you or can live to see.

True, but my point is that they have no explanation for why the paleontological record only show distinct species introduced, living and dying. No intermediate forms.

Where is our missing link? Where is our gradual movement from that missing link?

That is why I said whim. If we don't have a record, then maybe it happened really fast - hence my punctuated comment.

You seem to think I am against evolution, when I am not. I am just against the shitty science that has happend in regards to our origins.

So the fact that a chimpanzee and a human are (approximately) 96% identical means nothing..?
Even the biblical apologists who have spent millions and millions of dollars modelling their own genetic Chimp vs. Humans studies are forced to concede no less than 96%



Have you read the book "Who moved my cheese?" if not - you should...

[SeattleGriz]

True, but my point is that they have no explanation for why the paleontological record only show distinct species introduced, living and dying. No intermediate forms.

Where is our missing link? Where is our gradual movement from that missing link?

That is why I said whim. If we don't have a record, then maybe it happened really fast - hence my punctuated comment.

You seem to think I am against evolution, when I am not. I am just against the shitty science that has happend in regards to our origins.

So the fact that a chimpanzee and a human are (approximately) 96% identical means nothing..?
Even the biblical apologists who have spent millions and millions of dollars modelling their own genetic Chimp vs. Humans studies are forced to concede no less than 96%



Have you read the book "Who moved my cheese?" if not - you should...

It's actually 98.7% of non junk DNA. What does that tell you?

By the way, Bessie the Cow and you are 80% similar. I'm going to squeeze your udders later.