Intelligent Design Theory: Science or Religion?

Searching for "appeals to authority" is second best to actually trying to sort through the "Big Data". iw ork with a geneticist and a paleo-geneticist in several "interdisciplinary projects", in which weve done several analyses of cave deposits of megafauna, SO , I dont have to go to Wikipedia to try to fin some piece of "quote mining" (most of which are slightly out of context.
I was never a big supporter of the RNA world hypothesis but was fully understanding of the organic biochem of the compkexes, reactions, and linkages , as well as the formation of the "key ingrediemnts" of the "SOUP"

In fact, there are about 10 different and conjoined hypotheses that weve discussed on other fora and the chenmistry involved.

I must say that you , when pushed, will quickly change your positions from "The improbability of reactions occuring" to the need for a minimal structure (which are , byyour assertions , even more improbable in your mind)-

Some of my own discussions with colleagues involve competing hypotheses.
1Proteins first hypothesis

2two chains of interacting basic racxtions that involved
a structure of a cell and
b replication by the first simple proteins

3the "cold soup" theory I previously mentioned (Its been demonstrated in labs

4 crystals of clays served as "scaffolding" upon which nucleotides have been structured, and according to Cech "randomness can produce functionality" and the number of distinct complex functional RNA structures is very large in nature (and is reproduceable in a lab)

5Undersea volcanic vents have catalyzed nucleotides and polysaccharides by extreme nickel and iron sulfide reduction reactions.(Eh/pH bats last)

6When a collection of molecules reaches a specific complexity, they will crystallize-out a metabolic route by mere contact between the phosphorus and the sugar ends (a lab finding)

7Peptide Nucleic Acids (PNAs) may be a pre biotic formulary


As Lynn Margulis always said
"Going from a bacterium to people is an easier step than going from a collection of amino acids to a bacterium"


If you wish to attribute all of life to some meddlesome deity, thats for you and Dog bless you. As for me, I worry that, with all the assertin going on about the certainty and even the "Frankie routes of iirrational pronouncements", you all would shut down meaningful research because all this stuff is found while people are researching methods of medicine and science and Id hate to see that grind to a halt by some GOP edict that "we are confident that God did and that settles it"

CREATION/ID has tried to sneak its nose under the tent of public education and to have it even be given the time of day is dangerous to knowledge and applications.

No. And thank you for making the point for me.

Much of the real dvances in the theories of the origins of life are being done by Polymer engineers and applied biochemists like Dave Deamer. (maybe you want to look up and get into "First Life" By Deamer).

You seem to suffer from a "thats it, dont ply me with any facts cause Ill try to refute em rather than understand em"

You nailed it with that last bit.

In the context of all I've said, that charge is completely un-justified as addressed to me and I think you know it.

Same as above.

This is a common flaw online, and it's not just the holy rollers. Some people seem to think that it's never about anything but an argument. Of course, the holy rollers have an additional motive for never agreeing. Sometimes, if you don't have a cogent objection to what someone says, maybe saying nothing at all is the best course.

I see you decided to ignore the data that show your math is specious.

Why must we look to the "scientific community" for answers? Do we not live in a time when we have all knowledge accessible to us? Why can't we do our own fact checking, reading, and what not.. and come to our own conclusions?

There seems to be this implied division between science and religion, or science and God, or science and spirituality. I disagree with this whole concept.

Both science and religion can work together, hand in hand, to make sense of all this.

Why don't we focus on the commonalities of both "teachings". There are points of convergence where scientific and religious views meet and align quite nicely. Let's build on that.

no problems with me an Im in the "scientific community". It appears that weve made a chasm that we cant ford on the internet.

I have many colleagues who are religious and or spiritual and many who are not. I think that the less one understands, the more important is the chasm to them.

Wouldn't mind seeing that myself. But first it would be necessary for theism (I can't bring myself to use the 'R' word) to have a serious discussion within itself about what it believes. That is the one great advantage of science. It may not know that it is reverse engineering creation, but at least it is sure and consistent about what it finds. (until quantum physics anyway)

When theism is able to have a reasoned discussion with itself, it may be able to have one with science.

Good insight.

Atheism might benefit from that also.

Just a thought!

December 5, 20015 is the 10th anniversary of the Kitzmiller v Dover case, in which the PA Fed District Court has determined that ID (being taught as science in Public High biology), is NOT science, but is religion being masked as science
Two weeks of testimony in this case is summarized in B Lebo;s book, "MONKEY GIRL" in which the case's history and the court's analysis were presented in a quick read.

lol, isn't it funny we need court cases in heavens sake to see what is thought in schools or not!

It is pathetic.

Sure is. ID/Creationists think that they get to skip to the front of the line. They've had to lick their wounds, but, unfortunately, it won't be the last attack on science education perpetrated by the religious right.

Did you attend any portion of the trials?

It is very clear that evolution can't stand on it's own two feet because they need the legal system. How telling it all is.

And there is more the evolution-shite is made by high degree freemasons as are most judges. Yep, Most judges are members with a high degree in freemasonry.

What is wrong with this picture?

It is all very hilarious to watch though!.

An it doesn't matter, the whole thing is tumbling down

Evolutino-shite is going down, like all the rest of the rubbish in science.

I love to see that day coming,

Then we can really start with the truth,

Until then....

Whats pathetic is that you are clueless. An you wish to have me believe that you are educated?

Hows that workin for you?

Better than that.

Good for you! Congratulations! Keep fight he good fight.