Intelligent Design Theory: Science or Religion?

Faith, any?

If you mean, does the example apply to any faith?, I think it would apply to any unfalsifiable faith.

The reason natural selection is not tautological is because it is true. The reason it is true it's because it really happened. The reason it really happened is because an intelligent designer designed the process and possibly intervened while it was happening in the past.

sounds like the ''enhanced radiation" neutron bombs of the Raygun years. It all depends how you PACKAGE IT

We can even see an intelligent designer getting involved today and altering the biosphere of the entire planet, In the form of man made climate change.

Just wondering. How is faith unfalsifiable?

Consider science's Holy Grail of Methodological Naturalism.

Or possibly your own faith that there is no God.

Believing there is no God it's hardly based on faith. It's based on denying the facts or truth. The God who organized the information in the universe into matter and life so he could share that information with us, stepped into the universe as a human being told us who we was , did things only a God could do like cause it to go dark in the afternoon for hours when he died, rise from the dead, raise other people from the dead, among other miracles. Denying the historical record just because it happened along time ago it's not very smart. In my opinion anyway.

In some cases yes.

But I think many place their faith in science authorities who also make the totally unrelated statement that there is no God. If they take their word for it on science they figure they must know about God as well (even though this seems absurd to you and I). It's easier to accept the appeal to authority than to do the work. Might be simple laziness rather than denial that blinds some.

It's yet another hard task to verify for one's self that the Bible is a historical document. It is much easier to believe it is a fabrication cooked up by a few men (as I've been told many times).

The model best supported by facts is for evolution responding to environmental and population changes without ID "support". I can see no occasion where ID jumps in and takes over.

You my believe what you wish, I just dont share it.

. What I believe is replicatable.

First An intelligent being thinks of an idea and stores the idea in matter by manipulating that matter. Cicerone posted a wiki article on Abiogenesis. All that article talks about is how complicated life is, with 13 different hypotheses on how they came into being, and how hard we are trying to replicate Abiogenis. Once we accomplish that all we are going to prove is that we can mimic God. It doesn't surprise me that we can mimic him when he said we were created in his image. Unfortunately we are not God so it is really hard for us to do what was simple for him.

Since I can believe what I want will you allow me to teach it to children in public schools. I can come up with more evidence supporting the fact that Jesus is God and Creator of the universe than that wiki article provided that AbioGenesis is spontaneous and natural. Or at least let me keep my tax money and put it to the school I want to so my kids can learn the truth. I don't know why the government has to steal from me to teach lies to people.

sorry, dont think Id capitulate from "freedom of religion" to "advocacy for a specific religion". You do understand that your belief is a small minority even of the rest of the religious.

If you taught it in a private cultish school, thats OK. Even the Catholics hve defined their beliefs and have many years ago dispensed with "special creation".

Im not sure what
"replicatable" means when you begin your whole thought with "first start with an intelligence"

Thats like all the moon theories that"First start with the moon's composition of green cheese"

They call that "Dream time" elsewhere

Can you teach ID without teaching religion? I think so. You do it by showing the pattern that all information stored in matter must of been an idea in someones mind at one time. That is scientific. "Who the designer is" would be historical or social sciences not religious. Studying Christianity is learning about a historically significant person. Determining who fits the requirements necessary to be the designer of the universe (and everything living in it) is not religion. (If so then trying to determine who built any ancient thing is religion) Choosing to live your life a certain way because you believe in following somebodies teachings is a religion.

How you (as an atheist) choose to live your life according to your beliefs is a religion with a lot of structure and rules. I bet you ritualistic patterns in your day to day life do not differ much from a Christian that has a similar career in your part of the world. Would you say that is true?You do realize that atheism is a smaller minority belief than Catholicism.

It is spiritual. There is such a thing as the spirit of the law, spirit of an idea, etc. . . Each man has a spirit and uses it when we communicate.

There is such a thing as The Holy Spirit, and Evil Spirits. The battle for souls is being waged daily. You have to believe there is a battle before you can join a side and ask the Holy Spirit to open your eyes by submission to His will.

Thats all very pleasing to your worldview I suppose but theres really nothing with a worldview that needs to begin with "Well theres this intelligence that drives it all" THAT IS A RELIGION. You dont prove or evidence, you seem to default only to belief.

Those are all assumptions going in and anything you may discover (which I may say that very little actual research seems to be necessary from IDers other than a book of gainsay) by definition seems to fit your wordlview no matter what the conditions.


I truly like it where I can see that a pretty good model of reality has been developed from the various sciences working on their own.

As I said before, I can easily understand where you derive your beliefs from, I just dont share em. We are still working on the models of life, you seem to be all set with your belief. AND , may I say, its certainly not scientific. Not only is your wv unfalsifiable, youve never even come up with anywhere to start. Everything you say is based on a "who" A mind behind the curtain needs to be revealed if you wih to call it scientific. Science fiction, yes, science, no.

Why would you look for the mine behind the curtain if all you teach kids is that there is no mind? You are in a small minority that believes there is no mind. Science has proven that it not only takes a minute to create life it takes him mine smarter than ours even with the system already in place to support life. How many more years are they going to beat their head agianst the wall before they accept the fact that the universe is information, the information was thought up by somebody bigger than us, and it's there for us to learn from. That is not a religious statement. It is obvious. Most people agree. Why won't you comment on the fact that you are in a minority.

You keep equating understanding the system with explaining how the system came into existence. I don't know why atheist control The system that does all the research on understanding and teaching science. something tells me there's a built-in bias in the university system.

I wouldn't rule that out at all. It is possible that the overarching theme of our existence is a wager between those two spirits. And I do not mean he is just playing with us for amusement. I think he must value the stakes in the game quite highly. That would be us.

You seem a bit testy today. If you believe theres a "mind" in the creative and evolution process, I think you should at least be able to vocalize where these connections and your evidence lies. Any evidence you may glom from science (and try to reinterpret) always begins with your understanding that someone is behind it all
ID is so married to religious belief that you are unable to craft a cogent argument of where you begin.

The sciences behind evolution always discover some little variations in the theory that we are able to better understand how all these life systems come about.