Intelligent Design Theory: Science or Religion?

Quote:

Book Review:
The Goldilocks Enigma: Why is the Universe Just Right for Life? By Paul Davies

You were invited to give us your views on the fact that Christian society switched the pretty feathers to the female of the species which is contrary to what we see in nature, and with a good result, and that anti-ID was attacking Christianity to put them back on the male presumably so that anti-IDers could start wearing the lingerie. I think the incidence of cross-dressing is much higher in urban areas than in the food growing regions and the ID/anti-ID polarity does follow a Rural/City division. And males in cities are much more primped up and concerned with their appearance than the oiks in the sticks. Perhaps anti-IDers have seen the video of the courtship ritual of the bird of paradise. Spengler would have jumped on that as another sign that autumn is here.

Your answer is hardly satisfactory fm.

This post of mine on another thread really belongs on here-

Quote:

You were invited to give us your views on the fact that Christian society switched the pretty feathers to the female of the species which is contrary to what we see in nature, and with a good result, and that anti-ID was attacking Christianity to put them back on the male presumably so that anti-IDers could start wearing the lingerie. I think the incidence of cross-dressing is much higher in urban areas than in the food growing regions and the ID/anti-ID polarity does follow a Rural/City division. And males in cities are much more primped up and concerned with their appearance than the oiks in the sticks. Perhaps anti-IDers have seen the video of the courtship ritual of the bird of paradise. Spengler would have jumped on that as another sign that autumn is here.

Your answer is hardly satisfactory fm.

fm had done his usual snow-job to try to cover up his confusion. Had the facts related above concerned another species he would have soon put two and two together.

You know...maybe I'm a moron, I'll admit that it is a possibility...but I can hardly ever understand what you're trying to say.

Look at this way mapie-

This nature the anti-IDers are wanting to let us be ruled by has the male of the species all fancied up and doing various feats. The bird of paradise is the best example I've seen. The frumpy plain drab female justs sits there and watches and says yes or no if she approves the performance.

Christianity reversed that. As you can see if you look although there are signs of a reversion to nature.

Anti-ID is a city policy. And a media policy. Particularly in media the men get primped up. Like girls do. They have their hair dyed and stuff. In the boonies there's a lot less of that sort of effeminate behaviour.

And in the boonies is where Christianity is strong.

Any plonker can see from that that anti-ID is emasculating. Some men wear scent and bling.

It isn't that difficult.

Your scenario seems to suggest that Christianity and Anti-ID are in opposition. As a christian, I beg to differ.

aka-

One of the problems is phrases like- Sorry Spendi, I'll rephrase things.

Quote:

If you stand back far enough

"We cannot see the forest for the trees". Exact position mentioned a couple of lines down.

and-

Quote:

with some assurance

There is no sure thing, only probabilities. I am often willing to give odds though

and the way you use "society". Society-The body politic-The Great Unwashed. Any differentiated association of humans, voluntary or not. (usually delineated) ie. human society- Christian society- Ku-Klux-Klan, American society, Society of Friends{Quakers} etc.

How far back?
From an imaginary vantage point, Right next to an imaginary Intelligent Designer. At the foot of Gods throne. At the small end of a microscope.

How much assurance? Give me odds

Is there a "society" of those endangered species we keep in pens?

Yes, we generally call them criminals. This designation is also frequently imaginary or arbitrary especially from the vantage point of the members).

Quote:

Intelligence is simply an asset in the battle for survival. Of little more importance than the neck of a giraffe or the four stomachs of a cow.

I know the argument. It cannot be refuted. It can be rejected. We can intelligently choose to reject it in the service of survival as we still do with atheism. And the doctrine of the survival of the fittest. We are not going to allow a silly fact to do us in. It would be unintelligent. It would make our design look wonky.

Reject all you want. It will still cost me $0.50 for a cup of senior coffee at McDonalds, and it's still a fact.

And what about the societies that didn't work?

Did they not think that they were acting in a manner necessary to insure their survival?

Consider the Shakers. They knew their society could not survive but were powerless to change their beliefs to align with observations. The Rev. Jim Jones also ran an unsuccessful society. (The mass poisoning group) And some fail for the same reasons that business's fail or organisms become extinct. Something in their environs changes that they for myriad reasons cannot adapt to.

You are right to say that " there are many more aspects of societal competition as a factor in the development of societal groups that still could be mentioned".

Thanks, I had kind thought that that may have been irrefutable

And you are philosophizing and moralizing yourself. Don't you think that your general drift is self-defeating?

No, I am simply trying to describe a thing that may be causing my species (and sometimes me personally) a spot of difficulty. No different that putting a slide of tissue under a microscope.

Shouldn't you be spaced out somewhere not giving a shite about anything.
Probably, In the U.S. we call that "taking a vacation" :wink: Mine is usually on a sailboat.


Isn't coming on A2K philosophizing and moralizing meaningless by your own argument.

Not if it stimulates a little awareness. OR- Quite possibly true--- You pick.

I prefer to reach for the stars, At my age probably vicariously

Or are you just browsing in the top branches or chewing the cud?

You should be aware that at the present age of the Earth there is no species known that is capable of typewriting while eating tree leaves and chewing the cud. It's not impossible, just hasn't happened.

It's a pleasant change though. I was getting fed up of shooting sitting ducks.

akaMech, I've given your post some thought, and the following is the best i can come up for now.

Thanks CI. Remember that I am defining societies as organisms as would be seen from some imaginary vantage point and with the effects that one society may have on another. And whether they show intelligence or not.

Here's my .02c worth; I think the Jewish experience is only one of many that tells us about the human-animal story. We can't possibly arrive at any human imperatives by just studying the Jews. History is replete with the migration of homo sapiens beginning with the first human migration from Africa.

Agreed,with this exception. History or geology is also replete with the origionations, migrations, changes, supplantations and distributions of quite a few other species as well. The horse family and Finchs come quickly to mind. Farmerman could probably give us hundreds of other examples that we laymen would not be aware of. The result is no different than that of the rat for instance. (Also a very adaptable creature) I only used the Jewish experience as that is the most widely known that is still viable.The Anamites with respect to the Chinese and Malay is another There are quite a few others but they mostly have been supplanted.

Genghis Kahn, Columbus, Captain Cook, Charles Darwin, Mao Zedong, Hitler, Alexander the Great, Edison, Copernicus, Galileo, Gandhi, all had an impact on humanity beyond their borders and their lifetimes.

Agreed, As did the first horses to swim to Siberia. The explorers merely enlarged the range of their respective societies. Usually at the expense of other aborigional societies.

The only common thread we have with other animals is the need for water and food.
No, Survival and reproduction are required for all species. All the rest is dependent upon physical characteristics.

The governing power of any culture influences how humans live. Animals do not have governments.

Yes it does but it does not affect the fact that most of our efforts after the basic two (mentioned above) are concerned with supplanting other societies. In effect; expanding our range.

Most of us live and die in the same country of birth. That's true for some land animals, but not all.

So Not all elephants live in africa either. There are costs associated with change for all species.

The size of our planet seems to shrink for humans; animals do not have that perspective unless they are living in the poles (shrinking ice) or lands where their water and food source seems to dry up..

Right, that is why I am trying to change our perspective. To look at world as a zoologist would look at a handful of shells or a geologist a bucket of sand. Perhaps to determine from the evidence whether we act (as a species) intelligently or not.

A lot of how we live is an accident of birth. Most animals don't have a choice.

The less people know about how sausages and laws are made, the better they'll sleep at night.
Otto von Bismarck

The ACSI/Calvary Chapel Complaint against the University of California system (UC) was filed in U.S. District Court for the Central District of California in Los Angeles. The Complaint alleges that UC practices viewpoint discrimination in its high school course approval process in core subjects necessary for high school students to complete in order to be eligible for admission to UC under the standard admissions framework.

August 8, 2007 - Motions for Summary Judgment are due from plaintiffs and defendants.

August 29, 2007 - Briefs opposing Summary Judgment are due by both parties.

September 12, 2007 - Reply Briefs are due by both parties.

September 24, 2007 - Argument in Court

The people who have prepared this book have tried consistently to put the Word of God first and science second."

I'm beginning to believe what the scriptures tell

Science looks more and more iffy by the minute.