Intelligent Design Theory: Science or Religion?

Considering the code of the DNA as a complex software which controls all the activities of the cells, if you cannot show within reasonable probability how it could be produced by chance interaction of amnio acids then it can be taken as evidence of intelligence behind the design.

and given that life arose here, the only objective, logical, evidence-based conclusion to be drawn is that the natural state of the universe is such that the development life is no more improbable than is the formation of galaxies, stars, and planetary systems out of gas clouds.

assaying to assign causality to some independent, supernatural, external-to-the-universe thing, condition, or state of being,

Now, if you wish to wrap yourself in the comfort of anthropic arrogance through assaying to assign causality to some independent, supernatural, external-to-the-universe thing, condition, or state of being, fine, go right ahead; there is a "chance" that is so, however slight the probability. Please, though, don't attempt to dignify any such notion through implying it has any logical, scientific basis.

Yes there is a consensus in the scientific community.

By scientific community I mean all conventional scientific organizations which accept the scientific process (for example publishing in peer reviewed journals) which encompasses the great majority of scientists.

The consensus is that Intelligent Design is not scientifically valid.

War Vets Call on Americans to Urge Congress to Preclude Attacks on Veterans Memorials
(American Legion Press Release, 9/12/2006)

Following markup of a bill by the House Judiciary Committee last week that would stop courts from awarding taxpayer dollars in attorney's fees in litigation against religious symbols on veterans memorials, the leader of the nation's largest wartime veterans organization today called on all Americans to urge their congressman and senators to pass it and a companion measure in the Senate.

"With only 18 legislative days left in this Congress before the election recess, I ask every American that cherishes the religious heritage given to us by our Founding Fathers to take a minute today to call their Congressman and both Senators," said American Legion National Commander Paul A. Morin. "Legal attacks against veterans memorials that display religious symbols must not be rewarded by judges reaching into taxpayer pockets to enlarge the coffers of organizations such as the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) to encourage more lawsuits against our traditions and memorials."

HR 2679, the Public Expression of Religion Act introduced by Rep. John Hostettler and its companion piece in the Senate introduced by Sen. Sam Brownback as S. 3696, the "Veterans' Memorials, Boy Scouts, Public Seals, and Other Public Expressions of Religion Protection Act of 2006," (PERA) would amend U.S. statutes to eliminate the chilling effect on the constitutionally protected expression of religion by state and local officials that results from the threat that potential litigants may seek damages and attorney's fees.

The American Legion has fought for passage of this reform legislation since the ACLU sued the Mojave Desert WWI Veterans Memorial and obtained a federal judge's order to destroy the solitary cross at that veterans' memorial. The ACLU then sought, and received, $63,000 from that same judge as an attorney fee award -- although neither the ACLU nor its mascot plaintiff -- had any actual attorney fees. The $63,000 went directly into ACLU coffers as profit.

Most Americans remain unaware the ACLU and other organizations have been reaping millions of dollars in taxpayer-paid attorney's fees from lawsuits against veterans memorials, the Boy Scouts, the public display of the Ten Commandments and other symbols of America's religious heritage. In recent testimony to the Senate, Rees Lloyd, former ACLU attorney and Department of California District 21 Commander, provided these examples of ACLU awards of taxpayer money: Approximately $950,000 in attorney fees was awarded to the ACLU in a settlement with the City of San Diego in its lawsuit to drive the Boy Scouts out of Balboa Park. In the Judge Roy Moore Ten Commandments case, the ACLU received $500,000. In a recent "Intelligent Design" case against a school board, the ACLU received $2 million in attorney fees by order of a judge -- although the law firm that represented the ACLU informed the court and public that it had acted pro bono and waived any attorney fees; these fees were pure profit to the ACLU.

"If the ACLU feels it has to bring lawsuits that most Americans abhor, it should at least have the decency not to assess these to the taxpayers to make a profit," Morin said. "We are calling on our representatives in the House and Senate to sponsor and support PERA, bring it to the floor for a vote, or explain why they will not. I ask my fellow Americans to join us in this effort."

U.S. CONGRESS UPDATE

Quote:

War Vets Call on Americans to Urge Congress to Preclude Attacks on Veterans Memorials
(American Legion Press Release, 9/12/2006)

In the Judge Roy Moore Ten Commandments case, the ACLU received $500,000.

Panel puts off debate on teacher guidelines
(Cathy Candisky, THE COLUMBUS DISPATCH, September 12, 2006)

The Ohio Board of Education has drawn national attention and thousands of e-mails in recent weeks regarding proposals to give teachers guidelines for handling controversial subjects such as evolution.

Despite the intense interest, a board committee scheduled to debate the issue yesterday declined to do so after spending hours on other topics.

"We've run out of time," said James L. Craig, co-chairman of the board's Achievement Committee after a private consultation with board President Sue Westendorf.

The announcement came minutes after members were handed copies of a "Framework for Teaching Controversial Issues."

Critics say the plan is another attempt by creationists to undermine Darwin's theory of evolution and inject religion into science classrooms. Evolution, stem-cell research, global warming and other subjects that have been mentioned are not controversial in a scientific sense, the critics say.

Privately, several board members say they support an immediate vote so debate can end. The proposals, they say, are unnecessary and divisive and draw attention from more important topics.

KurMa, the error which is a gaping hole in your proposition is your attribution of causality to "chance" ... chance and probability are very different things. There is a chance a coin will come up heads 100 times in a row, however, the probability of such an outcome is exceedingly low. The probability that a confluence of conditions and circumstances propitious to the formation of life is not uncommon is extremely high. Given environmental considerations for which we have no reason to expect might be exclusive to Earth, given the chemistry and physics we observe to be consistent and constant throughout the observable universe, and given that life arose here, the only objective, logical, evidence-based conclusion to be drawn is that the natural state of the universe is such that the development life is no more improbable than is the formation of galaxies, stars, and planetary systems out of gas clouds. There is nothing "chance" about it; that's the way things work. Central to your error is your focus on DNA; DNA itself most probably is the natural product of chemistry stretching back through a long chain beginning with the formation of organic molecules, peptides, proteins, and sugars, which are the precursors of RNA. A broader overview of what I'm trying to get across to you is available HERE

Now, if you wish to wrap yourself in the comfort of anthropic arrogance through assaying to assign causality to some independent, supernatural, external-to-the-universe thing, condition, or state of being, fine, go right ahead; there is a "chance" that is so, however slight the probability. Please, though, don't attempt to dignify any such notion through implying it has any logical, scientific basis.

As certain as many people are that the RNA world was a crucial phase in life's evolution, it cannot have been the first. Some form of abiotic chemistry must have existed before RNA came on the scene. For the purpose of this discussion, I shall call that earlier phase "protometabolism" to designate the set of unknown chemical reactions that generated the RNA world and sustained it throughout its existence......What can we conclude from this scenario, which, though purely hypothetical, depicts in logical succession the events that must have taken place if we accept the RNA-world hypothesis? And what, if anything, can we infer about the protometabolism that must have preceded it?.........

I have tried here to review some of the facts and ideas that are being considered to account for the early stages in the spontaneous emergence of life on earth. How much of the hypothetical mechanisms considered will stand the test of time is not known. But one affirmation can safely be made, regardless of the actual nature of the processes that generated life. These processes must have been highly deterministic. In other words, these processes were inevitable under the conditions that existed on the prebiotic earth. Furthermore, these processes are bound to occur similarly wherever and whenever similar conditions obtain.......It also seems likely that life would arise anywhere similar conditions are found because many successive steps are involved..........All of which leads me to conclude that life is an obligatory manifestation of matter, bound to arise where conditions are appropriate.

timber wrote:

... Now, if you wish to wrap yourself in the comfort of anthropic arrogance through assaying to assign causality to some independent, supernatural, external-to-the-universe thing, condition, or state of being, fine, go right ahead; there is a "chance" that is so, however slight the probability. Please, though, don't attempt to dignify any such notion through implying it has any logical, scientific basis.

timber,

Even the author of your article seems to admit that there is scant to no evidence that the pre-RNA world that you wish to invoke actually existed.........

Quote:

As certain as many people are that the RNA world was a crucial phase in life's evolution, it cannot have been the first. Some form of abiotic chemistry must have existed before RNA came on the scene. For the purpose of this discussion, I shall call that earlier phase "protometabolism" to designate the set of unknown chemical reactions that generated the RNA world and sustained it throughout its existence......What can we conclude from this scenario, which, though purely hypothetical, depicts in logical succession the events that must have taken place if we accept the RNA-world hypothesis? And what, if anything, can we infer about the protometabolism that must have preceded it?.........

..............he apparently is very convinced that it did. (Saying these fantasies are in 'logical succession' Ow, oh my sides hurt. Yer killin me, timber)

I thought wishful thinking, according to you, was only the province of the religious?

('We don't know HOW it happened , we just KNOW that it did' ----from the tomb of the Unknown Evolutionist In fact the author candidly admits that he has no clue how, because any chemical pathways to his Nirvana are completely unknown.)

Since life from non-life generation won't work ( he admits ) with RNA or with DNA, he speculates that there just HAD TO BE (oh please there just had to be he he) a precursor which COULD and DID spontaneously generate living organisms from dead chemicals.

I thought you were for science based on evidence?

As the author gives the altar call, his theology is fully unveiled

Quote:

I have tried here to review some of the facts and ideas that are being considered to account for the early stages in the spontaneous emergence of life on earth. How much of the hypothetical mechanisms considered will stand the test of time is not known. But one affirmation can safely be made, regardless of the actual nature of the processes that generated life. These processes must have been highly deterministic. In other words, these processes were inevitable under the conditions that existed on the prebiotic earth. Furthermore, these processes are bound to occur similarly wherever and whenever similar conditions obtain.......It also seems likely that life would arise anywhere similar conditions are found because many successive steps are involved..........All of which leads me to conclude that life is an obligatory manifestation of matter, bound to arise where conditions are appropriate.