Intelligent Design Theory: Science or Religion?

Hi Lola-

Listen kid- if you pierce the paper with a pin a few times it doesn't have quite such a dramatic effect.

Are you in favour of muzzling science or not? Yes or no. No ifs or buts. Just to get the principle established. We can argue about which areas to muzzle once you say yes but there is no argument if you say no.

It is a question you asked me and I answered yes.

It's hardly an indecent proposal.

Here's a great clip from Ken Miller, called the collapse of Intelligent Design.

Can't be bothered reading it ros. More wishful thinking I imagine. Like with the National Lotteries we should all be so proud of. The Global Raffle.

I truly, truly hope it makes them feel really, really better about themselves.

It reminds me of a midden near a bull concentration camp.

Of course I believe in muzzling science. How else will we ever be able to halt progress and return to the dark ages? If scientific investigation is allowed to continue, it will cause financial collapse and psychic discomfort for too many poeple. How will the unwashed masses be controlled if we don't put a lid on science?

Silly man.

Can't be bothered reading it ros. More wishful thinking I imagine. Like with the National Lotteries we should all be so proud of. The Global Raffle.

Chimps More Evolved Than Humans
Jeanna Bryner
LiveScience Staff Writer
LiveScience.com
Tue Apr 17, 11:10 AM ET

Since the human-chimp split about 6 million years ago, chimpanzee genes can be said to have evolved more than human genes, a new study suggests.

The results, detailed online this week in the Proceedings of the large brains, cognitive abilities and bi-pedalism.

Jianzhi Zhang of the University of Michigan and his colleagues analyzed strings of DNA from nearly 14,000 protein-coding genes shared by chimps and humans. They looked for differences gene by gene and whether they caused changes in the generated proteins.

Genes act as instructions that organisms use to make proteins and thus are integral to carrying out biological functions, such as transporting oxygen to the body's cells. Different versions of the same gene are called alleles.

Changes in DNA that affect the making of proteins are considered functional changes, while "silent" changes do not affect the proteins. "If we see an excess of functional changes (compared to silent changes) the inference is these functional changes occurred because they were positively selected, because they were useful in some way to the organism," said study team member Margaret Bakewell, also of UM.

Bakewell, Zhang and a colleague found that substantially more genes in chimps evolved in ways that were beneficial than was the case with human genes.

The results could be due to the fact that over the long term humans have had a smaller effective population size compared with chimps.

"Although there are now many more humans than chimps, in the past, human populations were much smaller, and may have been fragmented into even smaller groups," Bakewell told LiveScience. So random events would play a more dominant role than natural selection in humans.

Here is why: Under the process of natural selection, gene variants that are beneficial get selected for and become more common in a population over time. But genetic drift, a random process in which chance "decides" which alleles survive, also occurs. In smaller populations, a fortuitous break for one or two alleles can have a disproportionately greater impact on the overall genes of that population compared with a larger one.

Chance events could also explain why the scientists found more gene variants that were either neutral and had no functional impact or negative changes that are involved in diseases.

There is still much to learn, the scientists say, about human and chimp evolution. "There are possibly a lot of differences between human and chimps that we don't know about, [perhaps] because there are differences in chimps that nobody has studied; a lot of studies tend to focus on humans," Bakewell said.

Ken Miller's presentation was interesting not just because it dismantles ID as well as IR, but also because it so clearly demonstrates the attempted fraud perpetrated by the people behind the ID push (Discover Institute to name one).

Here's a great clip from Ken Miller, called the collapse of Intelligent Design.

Great clip, Ros. Thanks for it

. The beginning yes. The end , however, is Millers apologetics and his own dance with religion. He sometimes gets in his own way and can be somewhat inconsistent in his arguments. He WANTS to show that religion and Science are compatible, Then, sort of like the IDers he demolishes, he uses some of the same kind of arguments sans evidence to support his own religious beliefs. After reading some of his latest stuff, I get a little disappointed at how he attempts to stretch his dogma..

spendius wrote:
Can't be bothered reading it ros. More wishful thinking I imagine. Like with the National Lotteries we should all be so proud of. The Global Raffle.
Wow, you're irrelevant.

. The beginning yes. The end , however, is Millers apologetics and his own dance with religion. He sometimes gets in his own way and can be somewhat inconsistent in his arguments. He WANTS to show that religion and Science are compatible, Then, sort of like the IDers he demolishes, he uses some of the same kind of arguments sans evidence to support his own religious beliefs. After reading some of his latest stuff, I get a little disappointed at how he attempts to stretch his dogma..

Wow, you're irrelevant.

The blurb wandeljw posted is based on a legitimate objection to the irreducible complexity argument. Namely, structures whose supposedly irreducible complexity can be explained by naturalistic means no longer serve as any kind of basis for ID.

Its getting so , that Behe has only an intro and a conclusion left. He might as well stick a Bible in the middle and make an
ID hoagie

Dr Behe speaks for himself. Good luck to him. He's one man in a long history of Christian society. As we all are.

spendius wrote:
Can't be bothered reading it ros. More wishful thinking I imagine. Like with the National Lotteries we should all be so proud of. The Global Raffle.


Typical of people like Spendius; they're so proud of their ignorance. They wear as if it wre a badge of honor.

ros

Quote:

Ken Miller's presentation was interesting not just because it dismantles ID as well as IR, but also because it so clearly demonstrates the attempted fraud perpetrated by the people behind the ID push (Discover Institute to name one).

. The beginning yes. The end , however, is Millers apologetics and his own dance with religion. He sometimes gets in his own way and can be somewhat inconsistent in his arguments. He WANTS to show that religion and Science are compatible, Then, sort of like the IDers he demolishes, he uses some of the same kind of arguments sans evidence to support his own religious beliefs. After reading some of his latest stuff, I get a little disappointed at how he attempts to stretch his dogma..

Collins has described his parents as "only nominally Christian" and by graduate school he considered himself an atheist. However, dealing with dying patients led him to question his religious views, and he investigated various faiths. He became a believer after observing the faith of his critically ill patients and reading Mere Christianity by C. S. Lewis [1].

In Collins' book The Language of God: A Scientist Presents Evidence for Belief (published in July 2006), he considers scientific discoveries an "opportunity to worship." In his book Collins examines and subsequently rejects creationism and Intelligent Design. His own belief system is Theistic Evolution (TE) which he defines as: (1) The universe came into being out of nothingness, approximately 14 billion years ago, (2) Despite massive improbabilities, the properties of the universe appear to have been precisely tuned for life, (3) While the precise mechanism of the origin of life on earth remains unknown, once life arose, the process of evolution and natural selection permitted the development of biological diversity and complexity over very long periods of time, (4) Once evolution got under way no special supernatural intervention was required, (5) Humans are part of this process, sharing a common ancestor with the great apes, (6) But humans are also unique in ways that defy evolutionary explanation and point to our spiritual nature. This includes the existence of the Moral Law (the knowledge of right and wrong) and the search for God that characterizes all human cultures throughout history.

A documentary titled "Darwin's Deadly Legacy" by the Coral Ridge Ministries released in August 2006 originally advertised that it featured Collins and claims to "show why evolution is a bad idea that should be discarded into the dustbin of history." However, in email exchanged with science blogger PZ Myers, Collins was "unambiguous in stating that he was interviewed about his book, and that was then inserted into the video without his knowledge."[2] When asked by the Anti-Defamation League why he agreed to appear in such a production, Collins stated that he was "absolutely appalled by what Coral Ridge Ministries is doing. I had NO knowledge that Coral Ridge Ministries was planning a TV special on Darwin and Hitler, and I find the thesis of Dr. Kennedy's program utterly misguided and inflammatory. [3]" Collins' name has since been removed from the Coral Ridge Ministries' promotional site [4]; however, the interview segment was left in place with Collins saying that "Man is a special creature. We are not just part of some random evolutionary process with no purpose." He also commented on the large amount of data in the genetic code of humans and on the percentage of scientists who believe in God.

I doubt that Id agree with spendi on most anything.

My discomfort on Ken Millers piece is based upon familiarity with it. I fully agree with ros and Lola and Tkress.

Miller doesnt disagree with the facts of evolution

He, however, posts his own brand of evidence-free religion.

Spendi no one will ever accuse you of seeking out further information on a subject that doesnt involve some tangential topic.

You attempt to foment discord where none exists.

lightly accuse Miller

You, however, give yourself way too much credit for original thought

You just keep tossing noodles to the wall hoping that one or more will stick.

HEs also the "polished monkey" the "grand poobah" "the one who is held up as understanding Irreducible complexity" and the "shining scientist of ID".

They cant try to use science as a method to prove a bogus point that science has just discredited.

Its good to be an "Anti IDer" , Its relatively fraud-free.

Ros, that guy is Francis Collins, who , with Craig Venter, is the shared recipient of the credit of the human genome.

Hi FM,

Thanks for the name. I heard this guy on the radio a few weeks ago. He's a good speaker also. But I disagree with his view on a couple of points...

Collins' book wrote:

(2) Despite massive improbabilities, the properties of the universe appear to have been precisely tuned for life
(6) But humans are also unique in ways that defy evolutionary explanation and point to our spiritual nature. This includes the existence of the Moral Law (the knowledge of right and wrong) and the search for God that characterizes all human cultures throughout history.

I too get a bit annoyed with some scientists attempts to squeeze a tiny bit of spirituality out of the data. The guy who headed up the Genome project (can't remember his name) does the same thing.

The other interesting thing contained within the clip was the fusion of the human chromosomes. I didn't know about that.

I wonder if universities will begin producing a group of science trained people who enjoy presenting science to the public.

Item #6 I don't even know where to begin with. It just seems like a last ditch desperate attempt to squeeze some form of objective morality into nature.