87
   

Intelligent Design Theory: Science or Religion?

 
 
farmerman
 
  2  
Reply Sun 27 Sep, 2015 07:48 am
@Briancrc,
as Set said earlier, Frank has had his undies hung out by many and he still retains his POV as something on which science even wastes time . Hes a golfer, not a scientist.

Im not sure about his taste in undies, although I dont want to have that image anywhere near me on a do-nothing day like today.
I wanna watch the Eagles lose and not think about Apisa doing his own shopping at Victoria's Secret.

Brrrr,

Fil Albuquerque
 
  1  
Reply Sun 27 Sep, 2015 08:08 am
@farmerman,
How did your boat summer vacations went Fama ? Curious n jealous... Smile
Briancrc
 
  2  
Reply Sun 27 Sep, 2015 08:48 am
@farmerman,
Ha! I don't want to appear to be attacking anyone. It seems that he and I have a difference of opinion; which is fine. I think people can have differences without descending into ad hominem. My slight "philosophical" point is to propose a logical challenge to the assertion he made. As a determinist I see no point in personal attacks. Go Jets!
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Sun 27 Sep, 2015 09:41 am
@Fil Albuquerque,
piloted 3 boats(owned by others) to destinations to places we had not been, like the Inland waterway and the docks up around SW harbor and Sydney Nova SCotia. It was great. Lotsa whales off Gulf of Maine and in Fundy.
Discovered that my wife and I have a skill that is slightly in demand,(live-on-board boat delivery). This way we have a nice (modestly paid) vacation expenses all paid and all return expenses were picked up too. If Ida known about this 20 years ago I wouldnt have bought my original "lobstah yot"
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  2  
Reply Sun 27 Sep, 2015 09:46 am
@Briancrc,
If you let Frankoie know you are a scientist, he will quit debating and begin his mantras. His favorite debate skill is interminable phrase chanting.
PS he doesnt listen either. Thats one of the most annoying things about him.

I like to talk ABOUT him than TO him. (Its a cheap shot I know, but he isnt beneath doing it also).
SO, welcome to the boards and have fun. Youre a chemist yes?
Frank Apisa
 
  -2  
Reply Sun 27 Sep, 2015 02:24 pm
@Briancrc,
Briancrc wrote:

Quote:
No decent scientist would assert that there is an intelligent designer...or that there is no intelligent designer.


I hate to go to the flying spaghetti monster well again, but why would a scientist assert there is none as if there was one to disprove? Why stop there? Why deny that there are 9 foot tall invisible rabbits? What is the logic? When someone makes an assertion accept it as true if it can't be disproved? Okay. When no one is looking you put on a dress and rub your nipples. If anyone is watching or secretly recording you, then you don't do it. Now tell us, when will you stop putting on dresses and rubbing your nipples? I'm a scientist, so I won't assert that you don't do this.

PS. Hope I didn't out you ;-)


Nope...you did not out me.

Also...you did not make any sense.

Frank Apisa
 
  -1  
Reply Sun 27 Sep, 2015 02:26 pm
@farmerman,
farmerman wrote:

as Set said earlier, Frank has had his undies hung out by many and he still retains his POV as something on which science even wastes time . Hes a golfer, not a scientist.

Im not sure about his taste in undies, although I dont want to have that image anywhere near me on a do-nothing day like today.
I wanna watch the Eagles lose and not think about Apisa doing his own shopping at Victoria's Secret.

Brrrr,




Still in the sewer, Farmerman.

Good place for you.


0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  -2  
Reply Sun 27 Sep, 2015 02:28 pm
@farmerman,
farmerman wrote:

If you let Frankoie know you are a scientist, he will quit debating and begin his mantras. His favorite debate skill is interminable phrase chanting.
PS he doesnt listen either. Thats one of the most annoying things about him.

I like to talk ABOUT him than TO him. (Its a cheap shot I know, but he isnt beneath doing it also).
SO, welcome to the boards and have fun. Youre a chemist yes?


Yup...the sewer.

And I am talking to you directly, Farmerman...as I always do when I have something to say to you or about you.
0 Replies
 
Briancrc
 
  1  
Reply Sun 27 Sep, 2015 07:40 pm
@Frank Apisa,
So then you're saying that people do already know about these proclivities of yours? Interesting.
Leadfoot
 
  1  
Reply Sun 27 Sep, 2015 08:58 pm
@farmerman,
Quote:

I wanna watch the Eagles lose


Quote:
Go Jets!

I knew it! farmerman and Brian DO have a religion!
That one makes as much sense to me as God does to you guys.
Quehoniaomath
 
  0  
Reply Sun 27 Sep, 2015 11:28 pm
@Leadfoot,
Quote:
I knew it! farmerman and Brian DO have a religion!
That one makes as much sense to me as God does to you guys.


Of course they have.


'scientism" IS a religion.


Did you know that 'science' was invented after the fact that religions didn't work any good anymore for controlling masses of people?
When that happened, a new religion was invented: science

Just look at scientists, most are very very dumb and very closed minded.

This is by design. And people look up to these idiots, like priests! Exactly.

They blindly follow eintstein, hawkins, dawkins, and all those other clowns.

It is hilarious if it wasn't so sad.
Frank Apisa
 
  -1  
Reply Mon 28 Sep, 2015 02:38 am
@Briancrc,
Briancrc wrote:

So then you're saying that people do already know about these proclivities of yours? Interesting.


Are you an adult?

Why are you arguing like a kid in a schoolyard?


Briancrc
 
  2  
Reply Mon 28 Sep, 2015 04:54 am
@Frank Apisa,
It does seem silly; doesn't it. But how is it different than your argument to declare that I should not state there is no intelligent designer? Is there any more or less evidence for an intelligent designer than there is that you wear dresses and rub your nipples?
Leadfoot
 
  1  
Reply Mon 28 Sep, 2015 07:10 am
@Quehoniaomath,

Leadfoot Quote:
"I knew it! farmerman and Brian DO have a religion!
That one makes as much sense to me as God does to you guys."


Quehoniaomath replied:
"Of course they have.
'scientism" IS a religion.
It is hilarious if it wasn't so sad."

True, some people do make it a religion. But at least science has a basis in reality even if it's worshippers don't acknowledge its origin. I can't say the same about football. As far as I can tell, it serves as a remedy for or distraction from - poverty of spirit.


farmerman
 
  4  
Reply Mon 28 Sep, 2015 08:30 am
@Leadfoot,

If we only derive conclusions from all available evidence--we call it science

When we only seek out evidence to support our conclusions-thats religion.

Lemme know which of the natural sciences are actually religion.


----------------------------------------------
In football, the conclusions are dependent upon scoring tally and a clock... all measurable evidence.


Briancrc
 
  2  
Reply Mon 28 Sep, 2015 10:17 am
@farmerman,
Good points. Many theists say that their convictions are based on belief (i.e., acceptance of things without evidence). Science involves practices that require evidence.

One question I would pose would be if belief is a reliable way to make decisions about the world?
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Mon 28 Sep, 2015 11:04 am
@Briancrc,
Briancrc wrote:

It does seem silly; doesn't it. But how is it different than your argument to declare that I should not state there is no intelligent designer? Is there any more or less evidence for an intelligent designer than there is that you wear dresses and rub your nipples?


There is absolutely NO evidence for an intelligent designer, Brian...and I have NEVER suggested there is.

But I am saying that no decent scientist would assert that there is an intelligent designer...or that there is no intelligent designer.

And NO DECENT, COMPETENT scientist would assert either.
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Mon 28 Sep, 2015 11:06 am
@Briancrc,
Briancrc wrote:

Good points. Many theists say that their convictions are based on belief (i.e., acceptance of things without evidence). Science involves practices that require evidence.

One question I would pose would be if belief is a reliable way to make decisions about the world?


Well...apparently you consider "belief" to be a reliable way to make decisions about the world, Brian.

You are prepared to assert that no intelligent design has occurred...that there is no intelligent designer...

...based purely on a belief.

Unless you are saying there is evidence that a god cannot possibly exist.

Are you?
Briancrc
 
  2  
Reply Mon 28 Sep, 2015 04:41 pm
@Frank Apisa,
No, I would say that the evidence gathered relative to the evolution of species suggests natural selection is the best and most appropriate conclusion. I think that the geological sciences have used their data appropriately to explain the theory of tectonics and stratification. I think radiometric dating has provided an adequate theory for the age of natural materials. From these examples and the data from other sciences I think that we have evidence in support of evolution and no evidence in support of an intelligent designer.

The logic of your argument, Frank, that belief is not believing in something, and because that something is not falsifiable, is what leads to arguments that you wear pretty little dresses and rub your nipples; which people are talking about and are saying is not the most flattering look for you. It could be true. Right? If you want to fall upon that prosaic argument that anything is possible. However, I will stick with the likelihood of you wearing a dress is greater than the likelihood that there is an intelligent designer. If I was a betting man, I would bet that you do not actually wear dresses. But perhaps a picture will surface on the internet and I will have to re-evaluate my theory. Fair?
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Mon 28 Sep, 2015 05:28 pm
@Briancrc,
Briancrc wrote:

No, I would say that the evidence gathered relative to the evolution of species suggests natural selection is the best and most appropriate conclusion.


So do I. But that does not mean that natural selection was not part of an intelligent design. In fact, if there is an intelligent designer...that probably is the way the intelligent designer would have designed things.



Quote:
I think that the geological sciences have used their data appropriately to explain the theory of tectonics and stratification. I think radiometric dating has provided an adequate theory for the age of natural materials. From these examples and the data from other sciences I think that we have evidence in support of evolution and no evidence in support of an intelligent designer.


The fact that there is no evidence of an intelligent designer...is not sufficient reason to suggest there is no intelligent designer...

...something any decent scientist would take into consideration before being fool enough to suggest there is no intelligent design.


Quote:
The logic of your argument, Frank, that belief is not believing in something, and because that something is not falsifiable, is what leads to arguments that you wear pretty little dresses and rub your nipples...


Yeah...I think I guessed correctly. You are an immature individual...probably a kid pretending to be an adult.

Does Mommy know you are using her computer to post stuff like this?





Quote:
...which people are talking about and are saying is not the most flattering look for you. It could be true. Right? If you want to fall upon that prosaic argument that anything is possible. However, I will stick with the likelihood of you wearing a dress is greater than the likelihood that there is an intelligent designer. If I was a betting man, I would bet that you do not actually wear dresses. But perhaps a picture will surface on the internet and I will have to re-evaluate my theory. Fair?


Not even close to "fair."

Now you had asked if it were immature...

...I'd have said: YUP!
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2019 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.07 seconds on 10/23/2019 at 06:29:01