@hingehead,
Quote:@Leadfoot,
Leadfoot Quote:
"If you want to defend the position that there was no intelligence required for the creation of life and the universe, then it is up to you to prove that no intelligence was required."
Actually that's arse about. IDers need to prove intelligence was involved - it's their theory. List for me the independently verifiable experiments/predictions they've come up with as proof. Even the particle physicists were theorising about Higgs boson long before there was any evidence for its existence.
No mate, you're a little late to the fight. FBM conceded a post or two back. But I'll summarize the ID debate so far.
"ID" does not hypothesize a God. It is based on what is obvious to any normal human being but is not negated by science. In a nut shell:
If you find a watch (digital or analog, take your pick) laying in the sand, no sane adult of average intellect would conclude anything other than that they were looking at something designed by an intelligent being. They might not know who it was, but they know there was a watch maker.
The watch in this case is a universe exquisitely fine tuned for life (but not having a mechanism to make it) followed by life springing from a non biological environment. I have already conceded to FBM and others that I cannot show him the "watchmaker" but the watch is here for all to see. It's a 'watch' so much more intricate and complex than any you have ever seen.
Now you, FBM and a multitude of others come along and say, no, this watch is a result of natural causes. It is an absurd assumption and I'm willing to listen but you can offer no plausible explaination for how the watch came to be. Many then fall back on the pathetic tactic of saying, "Well, I can't explain it right now, but sooner or later, we'll figure it out". No deal guys, it is YOUR burden to explain how this impossibly complex 'watch' came to be by natural causes.
Still others fall back on an even more pathetic tactic of 'appealing to authority' to 'prove' it was a naturally occurring watch. They say "There are some really smart scientists who say it could happen, therefore I believe it." That's a doomed tactic anyway because to date, EVEN THEY conceded that we have no explaination for the origin of life or the universe.
But since the the folly of scientists who insist that there is no watch maker needed has been exposed ( see Hawking quote), FBM abandoned that approach and took on the task himself. But all he can do is endlessly repeat the demand to "show me the watchmaker".
Hey, I've shown you the watch that you insist can build itself. It's up to you guys (minus FBM, he already conceded by default) to prove it has that ability. At the very least, you should be able to point to some naturally occurring thing as complex as a watch that made itself without intelligence being involved.
Hingehead wants a prediction from ID, so here are two.
1. No one will ever demonstrate abiogenesis without the introduction of intelligence.
2. No one will ever prove Hawking's claim that "The universe is perfectly capable of creating itself from nothing".
