Intelligent Design vs. Casino Universe

@Herald,

Quote:

If the evolution is valid (the best explanation as some people here claim) it should be able to explain everything, incl. the origin of life on the Earth ... not only a cherry-picked part of the evidences.

What utter nonsense. No theory can be expected to explain something that has nothing to do with it.
Are you going to argue the theory of gravity is wrong because it can't explain how evolution occurs? Are you going to argue that the theory of relativity is wrong because it doesn't explain why Spring occurs in the Northern Hemisphere in May?

1 Reply

@MontereyJack,

MontereyJack wrote:

And ID doesn't explain the evidence. That's the problem with it. As a competing "theory" (wrong use of the term, incidentally), it doesn't.

Why do you think so?

0 Replies

@parados,

parados wrote:

Are you going to argue the theory of gravity is wrong because it can't explain how evolution occurs?

Gravity is not an assumption of evolution ... at least the evolution does not bother itself with the issue whether life is possible without gravity or not.

1 Reply

@Herald,

Evolution is not the theory of how life began. To attempt to make it be is as silly as tying gravity to evolution.

0 Replies

@Herald,

Quote:

FM, you are totally missing something

Well, if you wrote more clearly, perhaps I could catch up. Your points don't seem too difficult to demolish. Your biggest trick is to "cherry pick" something that I said, and then ascribing it to something that I never said or even agree to.

1 Reply

@Herald,

Quote:

You made the claim that 'evolution is the best explanation',

when compared against
panspemia
special Creation
YEC (creation
Intelligent design
"Scientific Creation"

Lesse , that's 5. they are easy to discount based in several clear areas of evidence

0 Replies

@Herald,

Quote:

You have a skeleton of a mammoth ... with all the beautiful genetics within its teeth ... and you cannot revive the species to life for you don't have the vaguest idea of how the genetic code of a living creatures work

I think youre full of **** an don't even understand what you don't know. Its not my business to be your tutor if youre too damned lazy to learn what science does or soent "know " about genomics.

The genes have pretty much been typed an we know what most of them do an how.
How do you know that no ones out there trying to clone a mammoth?

As far as "bringing one back to life" That sounds like a story for FRANKENPHANT

2 Replies

@farmerman,

Quote:

That sounds like a story for FRANKENPHANT

That's your game old boy. Mary wrote the story to point it out.

0 Replies

@farmerman,

farmerman wrote:

Your points don't seem too difficult to demolish. Your biggest trick is to "cherry pick" something that I said, and then ascribing it to something that I never said or even agree to.

Do you still mainatin the statement that 'evolution is the best explanation' or not?

0 Replies

@farmerman,

farmerman wrote:

How do you know that no ones out there trying to clone a mammoth?

There are a lot of people out there having tried to do this - from Vancouver to Vladivostok ... along the longer path through the Atlantic.
Nobody here is interested in the revival of a mammoth. This is just an example that you don't know what is the difference between the genetic code of a living creature and the genetic code of a dead one. Why does the genetic code of a dead creature not continue to replicate ... in a test tube, when supplied with everything that it might need, for example?

0 Replies

Frankly, I consider both Creationism and Evolution theories that both have good evidence, but neither one can be proven. And as with any theory, they both have 'holes'. As a thinker, I refuse to let biased emotions and thoughts get in the way of considering either of these theories. I would be glad to further explain my views to any who question them.

1 Reply

What evidence do you allege there is for "creationism?" Why do you call it a theory? Do you know what theory means in scientific practice?

1 Reply

@Setanta,

What's the theory in scientific practice of doing without creationism which Setanta has the luxury of not having to do?

As Setanta claims implicitly that he knows what theory means in scientific practice he should have no difficulty with such a begged request.

After all, knocking something without an alternative to offer is a little lad's game.

0 Replies

@InkRune,

InkRune wrote:

I refuse to let biased emotions and thoughts ...

Consider then them impartially and without any excessive emotions.
Set is absolute evolutionist and claims the he knows everything about evolution to the '18th digit after the decimal point', but cannot explain for example why the hybrid wheat cannot germinate.
The problem is that germination is another level of understanding of the nano-processes in a given theory (... in case one has the definition for a theory in the first place).

0 Replies

What I find interesting in the discussion of Creation vs. Evolution is why people are so scared at the possibility that the universe and it's it's begining was a totally random occurence and that man's existence is also the result of a random event.
I believe it is this fear that generates all the ridiculous notions of some sort of mystical/magical entity that controls every second of this existence.

3 Replies

@giujohn,

Not all of the motivation is fear. Some of it is pride, and some of it is just stubbornness (there's probably a whole grab bag of emotions involved however).

2 Replies

@giujohn,

I don't think they fear a mystical/magical entity. It is that falling in love, going to the shops and cheering for an NFL team are all random events with no meaning. And our posts.

1 Reply

@rosborne979,

I wonder if ros thinks his emotions are meaningless, random events.

0 Replies

@spendius,

I didnt mean to imply that they fear a mystical/magical being, but rather it is the fear that things may be random with out a classical explanation that promts the invention of the omnipotant being to allieviate the fear.

1 Reply

@rosborne979,

I speak to the invention of these kooky beliefs at their inception rather than after their establishment.
I believe at this point people come to religion in only 3 ways: indoctrination (usually at a young age), they are unsure but are hedging their bet, or they believe they had an "experience" they percieve to be real. (more likely a small electrical disturbance/stimulous in the left pre-frontal lobe)

1 Reply

Intelligent Design vs. Casino Universe

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know