97
   

Intelligent Design Theory: Science or Religion?

 
 
farmerman
 
  1  
Thu 12 May, 2016 04:13 am
@Leadfoot,
Quote:
Everything in existence is explained by the laws of physics EXCEPT everything that required intelligence to design, bring into existence whatever you wish to call it.

That is the core of Intelligent Design Theory.


Ive insisted in past discussions with your ilk, to please take a known species transition through time and discuss what evidence you see that helps you conclude that ID was the means by which that group of species arose?

Pleae consider theit times in residence on the planet and their environments and geography
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Thu 12 May, 2016 04:15 am
It also helps to consider how very little apparent intelligence there is in the design of so many species.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Thu 12 May, 2016 04:24 am
Oh yeah, the predators aren't going to spot this guy:

http://www.scienceofcorrespondences.com/assets/images/birdofparadise-jw.jpg

If this joker has to run from a hunting cat, how far do you think he'll get?

http://www.crystalinks.com/peacock.jpg

Rutting deer have been known to lock antlers, and die of starvation because they couldn't disengage.

http://cdn.images.express.co.uk/img/dynamic/128/590x/Territorial-Stag-Battle-London-Male-Deer-522242.jpg

Still got your appendix, Boys?
Leadfoot
 
  1  
Thu 12 May, 2016 07:31 am
@farmerman,
Quote:
can you recite maybe 20 important differences (regarding their states) between a living organism and a "laptop"?
Not sure what you are driving at but the most obvious difference is that computers are silicon based and living organisms are carbon based. Another is that humans designed the software for computers and some other intelligent entity wrote the software for living organisms. However, we are learning to tinker with it.
Quote:
If you cant, then perhaps the concept of evolution of organisms may be somewhat beyond your grasp.
I wasn't discussing evolution so I'm not even sure why you bring it up at this point.
Leadfoot
 
  1  
Thu 12 May, 2016 07:40 am
@Setanta,
Maybe pure survival wasn't the object of those designs?

The design of those examples is not a bad argument for design and also makes unguided evolution look unlikely. Those flashy species should have been evolved out of existence by now.

Logically, unguided Evolution should have led to a dominate species of either a slime mold capable of eating almost anything or an animal like the creature in Alien.
Leadfoot
 
  1  
Thu 12 May, 2016 09:27 pm
@Leadfoot,
Anticipating the evolutionist argument that attractive plumage attracted more/better mates, I would think that evolution would produce the ultimate sexual predators. What would be the evolutionary advantage to all that dancing, preening, elaborate mating rituals, etc? If spreading the best genes is the ultimate goal, rape of the best breeding stock by the strongest seems like a more obvious strategy for evolution. Again - like 'Alien'.
parados
 
  1  
Fri 13 May, 2016 07:23 am
@Leadfoot,
I guess that must be why evolution made sure that females don't have legs or wings so they can't escape from the biggest rapist. Drunk
Leadfoot
 
  1  
Fri 13 May, 2016 08:19 am
@parados,
Quote:
I guess that must be why evolution made sure that females don't have legs or wings so they can't escape from the biggest rapist.
No, you idiot, they must have legs to show their fitness in running and only the fastest rapist males can catch them. Thus only the fittest pairs are insured to mate and evolve.

You don't get your own favorite theory..
farmerman
 
  1  
Fri 13 May, 2016 10:21 am
@Leadfoot,
remember that, in the animal kingdom, most all "plumage and dress up" is proffered by the males and the females merely select or reject. In many other species the females (like many spiders , mantids, and copepods) are the aggressors and the males are often sacrificed after "doing it".
"Red Queen" problems of HW distribution involves predator/ prey relationships in otherwise non- evolving communities
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  1  
Fri 13 May, 2016 10:24 am
@Leadfoot,
are you sure that life is ONLY carbon based? Your knowledge of chemistry, as minimal as it is, is also absent any doubts

Quote:
I wasn't discussing evolution so I'm not even sure why you bring it up at this point.
with the exception of abiogensis or panspermia or "creation", its ALL evolution. I know you wish to deny many connections but simple facts prevent it from being so.


You are being coy again.(Trying to deny the basic laws that govern the living state). These include things like
1The living state works AGAINST entropy.

farmerman
 
  1  
Fri 13 May, 2016 10:28 am
@Leadfoot,
Quote:
The design of those examples is not a bad argument for design and also makes unguided evolution look unlikely. Those flashy species should have been evolved out of existence by now
Part of your myopic view problem is your myopic view of life an forms so wonderful. You seem to see every living thing as an END POINT, when time and environment seem to keep marching on.
We have nice examples of many many species evolving on the macro level through historical times when humans can actually see their morphological and genera "shift" changes(but they would rather deny these facts)
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  1  
Fri 13 May, 2016 12:16 pm
@Leadfoot,
If your "ultimate sexual predator" is spending all his time chasing down the fastest females he isn't going to do as much spreading around of his genes. Drunk

You don't seem to understand how idiotic your scenarios are.
brianjakub
 
  0  
Fri 13 May, 2016 04:39 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Quote:
That's only seven thousand year history. This planet and human existence is much longer.
The bible is tracking years according to the descendants of Seth. Cain's descendants are not tracked by years. But, they are shown to be very different in this quote from the bible.
Quote:
Genesis 6New American Standard Bible (NASB)

The Corruption of Mankind
6 Now it came about, when men began to multiply on the face of the land, and daughters were born to them, 2 that the sons of God saw that the daughters of men were [a]beautiful; and they took wives for themselves, whomever they chose. 3 Then the Lord said, “My Spirit shall not strive with man forever, [c]because he also is flesh; [d]nevertheless his days shall be one hundred and twenty years.” 4 The Nephilim were on the earth in those days, and also afterward, when the sons of God came in to the daughters of men, and they bore children to them.
In verse 2 above the sons of God are referring to the descendants of Seth. The daughters of men are the descendants of Cain. Cain descendants are different than Seth's descendants because, Cain was made a wanderer of the earth when he killed Abel as stated in the following.
Quote:
GEN4:10 He said, “What have you done? The voice of your brother’s blood is crying to Me from the ground. 11 Now you are cursed from the ground, which has opened its mouth to receive your brother’s blood from your hand. 12 When you cultivate the ground, it will no longer yield its strength to you; you will be a vagrant and a wanderer on the earth.” 13 Cain said to the Lord, “My punishment is too great to bear! 14 Behold, You have driven me this day from the face of the ground; and from Your face I will be hidden, and I will be a vagrant and a wanderer on the earth, and whoever finds me will kill me.”
Cain's descendants are given credit for starting cities on earth, and Seth's aren't. I would suggest that a year to a descendant of Seth is different to a year according to a descendant of Cain. Seth's descendants were not made wanders of the earth, Cain's were. We don't even know if Seth's descendants were confined to the Earth. The bible does say (GEN 6 above) the Nephilum or Seth's descendants came to the earth right before the flood, and some lived on it afterward(Noah and his descendants).

A year to Seth could have been an astrological age or 25,920 years(or some other clock Seth was using). Cain's years are not tracked in the bible, but we know he lived on earth, so I think we can assume, he measured time the way we do now. It appears that the flood changed it so the only surviving descendants of Seth(Noah's family) would now be held to the same time measurements and lifespans as Cains descendants, as stated in Gen6 in the first bible quote
Quote:
GEN6:3 Then the Lord said, “My Spirit shall not strive with man forever, [c]because he also is flesh; [d]nevertheless his days shall be one hundred and twenty years.”
So, if you want to take the bible very literally, that would mean Adam and Eve existed (7,000 years)x(25,920 years in a astrological age)=181,440,000 years, and the first person to for sure live on Earth was Cain (and we don't have a record in the bible of how long ago that was.) But, we do have a fossil record, and it says about 200,000 years ago. There are people(some pretty whacky, and some that at least should be considered) claiming they have evidence of human civilizations as old as 120 million years. I suggest the flood is an event that dramatically changed things, and is probably marked in the fossil record as the end of the last ice age 10,000 years ago.
farmerman
 
  1  
Fri 13 May, 2016 05:42 pm
@brianjakub,
Quote:
I suggest the flood is an event that dramatically changed things, and is probably marked in the fossil record as the end of the last ice age 10,000 years ago
The Pleistocene "Ice Ages" were actually quite local events limited to the high latitudes. In the rest of the planet, because the ICE sewed up all the fresh water, the extent of the land surface was even greater In fact, England was tied to mainland Europe until almost 6000 years ago . SO when the ice retreated and the seas rose, much of the planet under the ice began to rise like yeast dough because of the unweighting from the ice sheets ( averaging anyhere from 1 to 3 MILES thick) This ice unweighting caused rebounding of the land. SO, the upshot is that there is NOWHERE on the planet wherein a "Pleistocene Flood" of such Biblical dimensions ever occurred. There is no stratigraphic record of any "flood deposits " except along marshlands or riverine wetlands or where the ice had plowed up lake beds along existing small lake areas (like the US great lakes) .

If you recall from any view of landmasses through any period of geological time, there are no times in which such a universal flood ever occurred
brianjakub
 
  0  
Fri 13 May, 2016 06:11 pm
@farmerman,
Quote:
If you recall from any view of landmasses through any period of geological time, there are no times in which such a universal flood ever occurred
I don't think the flood was a flood of water, but a change that ended the ice ages and initiated the dawn of the civilization we are experiencing. It is called a flood in the legends of many cultures, and more than likely something happened that changed things enough that a lot of cultures noted it. I don't think the cultures were sophisticated enough at the time to pass the story on in a way that can be understood in a scientific way without looking for other corroborating evidence in the fossil record, cosmology, physics etc. . .
Leadfoot
 
  0  
Fri 13 May, 2016 06:46 pm
@farmerman,
Quote:
are you sure that life is ONLY carbon based? Your knowledge of chemistry, as minimal as it is, is also absent any doubts
Oh good grief. Is it not possible to treat each other as intelligent adults here.

I know that you know that I'm fully aware that there is more than carbon in life forms. Just as I'm sure that you know there is more than silicon in a computer chip. If I'm wrong about EITHER of these things, I have seriously overestimated the level of our discussions.
Leadfoot
 
  0  
Fri 13 May, 2016 06:51 pm
@parados,
Quote:
You don't seem to understand how idiotic your scenarios are.
And you don't understand when your leg is being pulled.
farmerman
 
  1  
Fri 13 May, 2016 09:31 pm
@brianjakub,
Quote:
I don't think the flood was a flood of water, but a change that ended the ice ages and initiated the dawn of the civilization we are experiencing
the mind boggles
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  1  
Fri 13 May, 2016 09:34 pm
@Leadfoot,
Quote:

I know that you know that I'm fully aware that there is more than carbon in life forms.
so were you making **** up on top of the page or with this "Leadfact"
parados
 
  1  
Sat 14 May, 2016 05:37 am
@Leadfoot,
Leadfoot wrote:

Quote:
You don't seem to understand how idiotic your scenarios are.
And you don't understand when your leg is being pulled.

When all your statements are silly, it's hard to tell when you are attempting a joke and when you are just expounding crap. Is it only a joke when even you see how outlandish your statement is after it is pointed out?
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 8.58 seconds on 11/18/2024 at 02:23:55