Intelligent Design Theory: Science or Religion?

@farmerman,

Please dont act like an uninformed Dipshit, farmerman.

Quote:

"Your argument[sic] are merely impugning honest scientists without any counter evidence or facts."

0 Replies

These "ID aint science" proponents exemplify the proposition that "It's OK when I do it, but you can't," eh?

They try to act like they're making a distinction between "methodological naturalism" and "ontological naturalism," but they aint. A valid distinction can be made in that respect, but it's not one they adhere to in practice.

As Nagel points out, if you assume that "divine" (or "intelligent") intervention in the the natural world is possible, then "God" is part of nature, too. Any "methodological naturalism" would consider this possibility, as well as others.

But, as he also points out, if you deny that possibility, you are simply making a religious claim. Call it an ontological or metaphysical premise if you prefer, but either way it is not an empirical, "scientific" claim.

0 Replies

Quote:

These "ID aint science" proponents exemplify the proposition that "It's OK when I do it, but you can't," eh?

As far as the "establishment clause" issue goes, it's the same damn thing. The philosopher Michael Ruse, who is himself a committed atheist and an extremely strong supporter of orthodox evolutionary theory (neo-darwinism), has made this point.

He uses his friend, Richard Dawkins, to illustrate the point. Dawkins is a militant atheist who sees it as his mission in life to utterly demolish all semblance of religious belief and convert every last human being on earth to his brand of atheism.

Dawkins claims that evolutionary theory provides an utterly irrefutable proof that God does not exist. He wrote an entire book, designed to proselytize on behalf of atheism, devoted to that premise and that theme.

He also insists that neo-darwinism, and ONLY neo-darwinism should be taught in public schools. So, essentially, he is attempting to "establish" atheism as the only legitimate theological doctrine. That would be unconstitutional, eh?

1 Reply

@layman,

Quote:

As far as the "establishment clause" issue goes, it's the same damn thing. The philosopher Michael Ruse, who is himself a committed atheist and an extremely strong supporter of orthodox evolutionary theory (neo-darwinism), has made this point.

He uses his friend, Richard Dawkins, to illustrate the point. Dawkins is a militant atheist who sees it as his mission in life to utterly demolish all semblance of religious belief and convert every last human being on earth to his brand of atheism.

Dawkins claims that evolutionary theory provides an utterly irrefutable proof that God does not exist. He wrote an entire book, designed to proselytize on behalf of atheism, devoted to that premise and that theme.

He also insists that neo-darwinism, and ONLY neo-darwinism should be taught in public schools. So, essentially, he is attempting to "establish" atheism as the only legitimate theological doctrine. That would be unconstitutional, eh?

You have absolutely NO sense of the history of this issue do you??
You need to bifurcate where Dawkin arguments are. Hes arguing with those who dont deny that theyre employing a Creationist/ID worldview.(You had better learn a bit more about where many of his public statements lie. Lately , His other arguments are with the anti nat selection(rel science) guys who are not having a great year .

The "EStablishment Clause" is being used (by you and Leadfoot)as some kind of punishment stick to those pro science groups who dont want total evidence-free crap take over science classes . Those folks who are IDers may say that they are not speaking the name of the designer but, back at their clubhouse, they keep printing up their Bible centered "scientific" literature in order to satisfy their base.
Why not just come out in favor of theistic evolution and be done with it??
I feel that in a few years, organizations like The Discovery Institute will adopt that rule. However "Scientific Creationists" are wedded to the old Testament .
The neat thing about Method naturalism is that it can change our stories based upon new data and evidence, ID , instead, begins with a firm premise and just tries to deny a lot of the evidence that cant be argued away. (SO far thoiugh, theyre batting 0.000)

1 Reply

@farmerman,

Besides, the big distinction between "godless evolution" scientists and Intelligent design "researchers" is that, no matter what a scientists religious belief, it can leave its worldview at the lab door. ID, on the other hand, plays all its show cards at the get-go. There i no doubt.

I can respect theistic evolution dudes more than the IDers with thir damn judgementalist views of biology. Jesus H Christ, they spend mot of their available "science research" funding looking for WHERE the designer slipped in the blueprints, or else they wanna show,"How far back in biochemistry can we prove that the reaction or linkage is "Irreducible"

Getting a PhD i ID is awfully limiting, Id take up bqsket weving.

0 Replies

@farmerman,

Quote:

Leadfoot Quote:
"Me too, I think that needs a lot more investigation. "

FM replied:
Please dont act like an uninformed Dipshit, that's already being done in most schools (even the parochial High Schools have a deeper science curriculum tht imparts information more detailed than youve been able to sustain).

Your passion just gives away your agenda farmer. Knock yer self out

But you get so flustered and confused I can't tell if you knew I was referring to religious fraud in that quote. Or maybe you weren't really concerned with meaning

FL getting too hot. These daily dialogs with you are about all I'll miss in CO Cool

1 Reply

@layman,

Quote:

They really don't seem to actually understand much about the issues they are so adamant and fervent about, and they don't want to know.

Yeah, but they get more thumbs -up!

0 Replies

@Leadfoot,

Im aware that you really try to sound like you straddle the stream lyman does the same, but when you push all your pots together they led but one direction. Im only here to remind you that you must be smarter than you put on and you do understand the importance of precedent.

Ill keep it up till you understand that ID doesnt draw ANY scientific conclusions based on evidence, it uses its worldview to establish what it really wants to see as evidence.
Drive safely. Got a load of gear to take West??
I still do some work up on Cripple Creek mining dumps. Im uually at Can'on City in July

1 Reply

@farmerman,

Quote:

Im aware that you really try to sound like you straddle the stream lyman does the same, but when you push all your pots together they led but one direction. Im only here to remind you that you must be smarter than you put on and you do understand the importance of precedent.

Aside from ID for a minute, I'm almost convinced you really believe it is impossible to believe both 'there is a God' and that 'the scientific method is valid'. I said almost! You hurl the charge of 'belief in God' like it's some kind of damning evidence. I never denied the charge, you don't have to have a mock trial, I already pled guilty. But your fear of 'science contamination' is still overblown.

As for precedent, I understand it's importance to you and the legal system.
But to quote JC, "Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and unto God the things that are God's" .

Nothing to take to CO but the slingshot & a laptop. Easier to keep duplicate toys there.

2 Replies

@Leadfoot,

Quote:

As for precedent, I understand it's importance to you and the legal system.

Not surprising that Farmer repeatedly cites the opinion of one (non-scientist) lower level judge in one case, in one state, as the ultimate arbiter of all questions about what science "is," eh?

When the opinion expressed agrees with his own, then whoever said it must be the most accomplished and distinguished philosopher of science that ever existed.

2 Replies

@layman,

Quote:

Not surprising that Farmer repeatedly cites the opinion of one (non-scientist) lower level judge in one case, in one state, as the ultimate arbiter of all questions about what science "is," eh?

That's how your system works, layman. Why are you whining?

0 Replies

@layman,

I forgot to mention the other half of Farmer's pretensions. Any opinion that doesn't agree with his, no matter how qualified, knowledgeable, and respected the source may be, belongs in "The Onion."

This is a very effective stance--if you're dealing only with shallow-minded chumps who also agree with you.

1 Reply

@layman,

Quote:

I forgot to mention the other half of Farmer's pretensions. Any opinion that doesn't agree with his, no matter how qualified, knowledgeable, and respected the source may be, belongs in "The Onion."

I agree. farmerman can be stunningly unscientific, but you and a lot of other folks share that position with him. As regards certain issues, you and farmerman are two peas in a pod.

You often leap up screaming the same types of things, done, by both of you to avoid discussing the truth.

0 Replies

@Leadfoot,

You dont read me very well . Ive really never impugned a "belief in God" I clarly stated tht I hqve many colleagues who are religious but that position is easily left by the lqb door when work starts. ITS damned hard to convince me that ID "scientists" who go into a lab with their minds already set to find any evidence they can to support their cast in cement beliefs, are objective in their work. AT least I dont know any and I know quite a few of the recognized names both sides.

What you believe is of little concern to me, I dont hve to do my work in science, I GET TO DO MY WORK IN SCIENCE. Im havin a ball and you dont seem to be having any fun except with your cars and a kinda creepy desire to be dead.
However, Youll probably outlive me. Hell Ill never be done pursuing my interests though.

Drive safe dude. You have no top on that thing , you gonna haul it in a toy carrier?

2 Replies

@farmerman,

Quote:

ITS damned hard to convince me that ID "scientists" who go into a lab with their minds already set to find any evidence they can to support their cast in cement beliefs, are objective in their work.

That's more or less what I was saying. We just disagree about their (and my) ability to be objective.

I did enjoy my scientific work for a long time. But at this time you are right about my inability to fully enjoy life here. It's not as completely empty as you imply but I do feel like I'm in an alien social environment that I'm not suited for. If it were not for the internet I'd be hard pressed to find any likeminded friends. Whether by design or evolution, we are 'social animals' that need others we can relate to. I didn't think the road would be this 'less traveled' though.

I can't say that I wasn't warned that this alienation would likely be my fate if I followed the path. ("You are in this world, not of it") But I have no regrets. I got 'the pearl' I asked for and it was/is worth the price, even here and now. But I do look forward to what comes next. Just Imagine the Geology you could do with interstellar travel and unlimited time..

The drive to CO in the Slingshot is part of the fun so hauling is not an option. I do put a canvas top on the roll cage to limit the direct sun.
I gotta start packing a 4 day Go Bag with underwear & shave kit.

May you enjoy this third rock from the sun for as long as you live.

0 Replies

@farmerman,

Quote:

However, Youll probably outlive me. Hell Ill never be done pursuing my interests though.

Forgot to ask, hope you're wrong but why do you think I'll outlive you?
Do hope you're right about never being done with your interests.

I'd be so pissed if you got the 6 mo. to live prognosis instead of me.

1 Reply

@Leadfoot,

stop bein so damned competitive about dying!! Jezus ckrise ya Creep me out. I was just beginning to like you.

At 66 Ive got Hi BP and some other problems . SO I lost a lotta weight, tightened up and am watching my diet. SO food as I love to eat it is an occasional vice and that pisses me off. Never can tell about traffic and work related accidents (I use a lot of cyanide in lab hoods and last year we hd a small incident where the system shut down and cyanogen was trapped within the labs exhaust system and filters. It took almost a week of staying away while the techs fixed the system. Now we have a back up system that kicks on as pressure and CN builds to a specific level.

Also we had to reset some failed ANFO charges at a glass mine in Ohio and that was touchy. Imagine walking over an entire 1/2 mile long bank of drill holes pqcked with ANFO and symp caps in each hole and the main charge was set in the center? I hadda help cause it was my charge design and if it breaks on your watch, you help fix it.

10 years ago I had my lil Bell chopper flip over in an ARgentinan plat mine qnd we landed upside down in a shallow lake. We lost one guy on that one.
I hqve many others like that and worse

So I am tightly connected to this life and will not go gently. Its just that I get these close calls.
If a god exists, he apparently is trying to send me to the principals office at every chance

2 Replies

@farmerman,

Dear Both of You,

I listen to both of you but am a Farmerman stalwart.
I am glad you can just talk re regular life.

0 Replies

@wandeljw,

I wouldn't say that everything is so perfect like many people think. Genetics and nature shows a lot of flaws overall, plus many innocent lives are exterminated even before they start to experience their path here on Earth. Everything goes by chance, it's just that accumulating effects of natural selection through billions of years give somehow a wide picture that looks focused, but still many things don't compute how they would supposed to be, if ID was a real thing.

1 Reply

@farmerman,

Quote:

Imagine walking over an entire 1/2 mile long bank of drill holes pqcked with ANFO and symp caps in each hole and the main charge was set in the center?

Excite'n ! Makes my heart start pump'n with fun-fear. I went through a lot of C4 but most was just lighting a match to it to heat my C-rats in Nam.

I can't help smiling at the irony here though. Me, who is ready to go, God keeps pulling out of tight spots and you he puts in them. ex: My tour in Nam passes rather uneventfully then two weeks after I leave, only 4 of the 135 kids in my company are still alive. Rest died in the Tet offensive of 68.

Osso likes regular life stories so here's one for her.

More recently, last Sat. there was a fly-in in MS I wanted to go to. My go fast & far plane is in CO so I had to resurrect my first attempt at a fast plane (RV-4) which has been collecting dust for several years. Not too bad, just needed a new battery and overhauling the leaking brake calipers. Built back in 94, I felt like I knew the function of every switch and knob by heart so nothing is labeled. Great anti-theft feature I thought.

Shortly after take off I was flailing around the snug cockpit trying to arrange a sectional chart where I could see it and not be in the way. During that I managed to bump a switch that killed the engine. I was too far from the runway to glide back and I didn't know which switch I'd bumped. Unlike a standard aircraft where there is only one that does that, there are many that can do that in this thing.

The little memory I had of the switches disappeared in the excitement. I though maybe this was my exit time but kept trying to sort out the switches. I was only a couple of hundred feet above the trees by the time I figured it out and got the engine started and continued on to MS.

It was the first time I'd felt fully alive for awhile now, so I kind of envy you for feeling that way all the time.

3 Replies

Intelligent Design Theory: Science or Religion?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know