Intelligent Design Theory: Science or Religion?

fm wrote-



That's easily explained.

akaMechsmith,

I realize that you may be talking about other threads. You are aware, aren't you, that "Big Bang" has nothing to do with evolutionary theory?

If you really want to know...
"Intelligent design (ID theory) is science without the naturalistic axiom. The theory still relies on the observable axiom. But it differs from science in that intelligent design does not assume that everything has a natural cause. This allows scientists to examine the evidence and if they see something that just cannot happen, they can infer design. Intelligent design is not science - because it does not rely on the naturalistic axiom. Intelligent design is not religion - because it does not require faith. Intelligent design is a framework of logical thinking based on the observable axiom that can be used to analyze scientific data."

Not my words...go here http://www.theory-of-evolution.net/

Really doesn't matter to me...I am too intelligent to enter into a debate that has no way of resolving itself... :wink:

mismi, Your ID theory is full of presumptions. There isn't anything in science that concedes to ID based on any unknowns.

You really must READ cicerone imposter
Well...seeing that it was not my theory - I just looked up a website that gave the definition. For my own enlightenment...seeing that I said I didn't believe either theory - I am not really presuming anything. I am regurgitating for the enlightenment of all...and so you can have something to debate dear person - whoever you are.... It matters not to me.....

Wande,

This is a thread that is attempting to determine whether or not ID theory can fairly be called a Science or a Religion.

Intelligent Designer, Creator, or Big Banger, all are attempts to determine how we got where we are. Wherever we are :wink:

Since all three "TOO"s (Theories Of Origination) require stepping outside the bounds of physics or observation and into imagination this is the basis for my comment.

There is "cosmological intelligent design" and "biological intelligent design". We have mostly been talking about the latter because that is what has been causing problems in science education. ID proponents want ID taught whenever evolution is taught. Evolution is not about the origin of life, but rather the origin of species.

Would you concede wande that modern scientific mankind represents a new species?

Is the difference between this mankind and all previous human existence greater than the difference between a monkey and a dog say which both belong to a genus which has movement and sexual selection?

If you agree, as many do, would you then agree that the mutation involved was the development of organised religion and in particular its patriarchal variation?

If you agree again, as many do, would you agree that the removal of organised patriarchal religion would constitute a reactionary step backwards towards primitivism and matriarchy?

Are anti-IDers really seeking submission to females?

Now the truth of Spendius' fears comes out: the submission of the male to the female. (Horrors, though the British don't seem to doing all that badly being led by a Queen lo these many years.) And no, sweet fearful Spendius, the removal of -what did you call it? - organized patriarchal religion would not be a step backward towards anything like submission to females, (How tough was his nanny?) but more likely a step towards -get ready for your head to swim, S - egalitarianism.

Really, if we stop thinking that 1) God is a boy-person or at least a male-ish thing who put Males(!) in charge of humanity. Hoo-rah. (Does God really have a sex, does he then have a really huge penis??) and 2) those louts with the church-collars and sour looks have anything to do with making society better for more people, we'd all be better off within two generations. (The death rate amongst certain sects would plummet.)

How about if we promise you, Spendius, that you personally will not have to submit to any female authority throughout the remainder of your sad life??

Joe(Unless it's a meter-maid ticketing your vehicle, then you have to pay up.)Nation

Joe (spokeperson of feminism) Nation wrote-



Well Joe- That would be very nice I agree. As for "sad" I sure do see a lot of sad looking henpecked, bowed down, skinted blokes on my travels. It is a pity you besmirched your otherwise reasonable post by using that word. Women use it a lot you know. Anybody they don't agree with is often "sad" and should "get a life". It's a new type of logic don't you know.

We have just had smoking in pubs banned and now pubs themselves are in the firing line. Men would never have done that.

Don't you know that Germaine Greer said that "all men are rapists" and I have seen a front page headline in a newspaper saying "Romance is rape" based on her irrefutable arguments.

Isn't it obvious that media is run by the "female interest" which sees drinking and smoking as diverting family income away from soft furnishings and pretty clothes with which to show off to other men.

The human race has existed for a very long time under martiarchal domination and it never made the slightest progress. Check out the oldest known work of art; the Venus of Willendorf.



How very complacent that assertion is and contrary to the observed facts as patriarchal religion has waned. Your eyes must be closed Joe although I suspect that even if they were open you would not see the significance of the observable trends. You would obviously prefer to be popular and approved of by the ladies. I was hearing the American phrase "pussy whip" 30 years ago so I suppose you are more conditioned that we are. You ought to know that ladies don't respect goodie-goodies for sound Darwinian reasons. He trusted his readers to not need the phrase "sexual selection" to be printed on every page in bold type.

And I am too old to be "fearful". I'm defending the young men of the future. Not myself.

" egalitarianism. " my royal backside. You don't believe in any such thing. You just use the word as a convenience to avoid thinking. Your head would do a lot more than swim if any egalitarianism got in through the door you're holding open so innocently.

And who said that God is a male person, It wasn't me. Even a cursory reading of Darwin and much other stuff is proof that God is a woman. Google the Venus Joe and see for yourself. Look at the thing and try to think what was in the guy's mind when he created it with so much effort and delicacy. And there are distinct signs that modern women are moving in the direction of the model for his artistic creation.

And what's a woman doing dressed up in a drab uniform ticketing vehicles? That's pretty damn humiliating in my book. The bigtime feminists who put her there wouldn't entertain doing that. They go on telly, power dressed, and to all the flash parties. Your meter-maid is one of the millions of their victims.

George Bernard Shaw said that once women get the vote we will spend the rest of our lives talking about ovaries. I was reminded of that when I saw a woman doing the weather forecast who was 8+ months gone in the pudding club.



You are spot on there. That has been my starting point all along which is why I am incoherent.

The female is divine Joe. You only want equality so you can seem divine yourself and you are a tosspot like me and all the other chaps.

You are simply self-justifying your abject surrender. And if you are successful in persuading others you will run women off a cliff and the economy too.

Wow spendius, that last post says a lot. I do not have time right now to comment further, but ........ well, just wow.

OMG I CANT BELIEVE I CAME BACK TO THIS THREAD.

eew. just eeeew.

Did spendius say that organized religion has something to do with not being in check to females or something?

w.... t..... f?

So without religion females rule the world? is that correct?

It says here in the Sunday Times-



Is that role model egalitarianism Joe?

The hash seems to have consisted of-

Throwing single mothers off welfare

Exporting blue-collar jobs to Mexico and China.

Selling the populace a Republican agenda which the GOP couldn't sell itself.

The ratio of average wages to CEO pay went from 113 to 1 up to 449 to 1
during his stay in office.

Mr Panetta having to be sent for to try to "bring order to the Clinton's chaotic White House".

And there is this-



And there is the obvious absence of sexual satisfaction within the ambience of domestic bliss.

BTW Joe. Our Queen is a token man. I can't recall any of her senior advisers being female. And newly released official documents show that the Queen ensured that Prince Philip would become monarch rather than Princess Margaret, who was next in line, in the event of her death.

Thatcherism is a ghastly interlude which we are trying to expel from consciousness. It was anti-intellectualism personified.

OGI wrote-



Of course. Why do you think Lola is an anti-IDer.

anti-IDers are promoting the SDS. (The Sitting Duck Syndrome.)

CAN I CALL YOU SPENDY? your a funny dude spendy

You can call me anything you like OGI.

Nobody takes any notice of me anyway. You have the authority and scientific expertise of a number of anti-IDers on the record here to that effect.

Do you know how many great writers are being airbrushed out of English Literature. Benny Hill was taken off air at the height of his popularity by the bluestockings of television. Orwell style. The gushing, girlie primness of JK Rowlings has replaced Sir Henry Rider Haggard.

Has anybody here ever read the auction catalogue of Madame de Pompadour's "effects" which were sold up when she passed away thus allowing France to get onto the road of modernism which her personal demands had been preventing. Nero's wife, the angelic Poppea Sabina, almost brought Rome to its knees and he had to stab himself to avoid the "punishment of the ancients" which the Senate decreed him to suffer and which I will forbear describing. Mrs Marcos had more shoes than the rest of the population put together.

The list is endless. Madame Mao was something of a nuisance I read.

Spengler predicted "Herrin morale" long ago. (Don't google that boys).

Stick to 600 million year old bat knuckle bones and pleistocene deposits.

The anti-IDers said I was off topic with my posts on Footballer's Wives and that was taken off air too.

Some of the beer adverts still make sense though. In England I mean.

Anthropologists such as Malinowsky have studied matriarchal structures half to death and they never mention the one big fact about all of them which is that we walked in and took over whenever we fancied if they had any assets we could use. Patriarchal male chauvinist piggery was selected in and I can't see why any male person should be ashamed of the label. All the medical advances fm trumpets about derive from it.

Wasn't Tom Ewell adapting Little Women for a TV show in The Seven Year Itch?

How could thatcher have been anti-intellectual? She did help invent soft-serve ice cream after all.

That's the whole kit and kabootle of this thread; entertainment. spendi can be very funny while he sounds like the typical junior nerd in college.

Come on then c.i.

Let's see some grown up stuff from you instead of you using the language as a convenience for your reassurance. By now that sort of thing makes people wonder about you and giggle with embarrassment. You are a mature and well travelled gentleman I gather. You ought to be a mine of useful information for the young men on here as they take their first tentative steps into the jaws. Vandalising our English language is hardly a proper example to hold forth for emulation. They are young and might easily catch from you the idea that someone is a nerd simply by them having said so. That would hardly stand them in good stead now would it.
They could end up having to seek the company of morons in order to have any companions at all or a continuous supply of strangers with whom to exchange superficialities in lieu of conversation.

A person does not magically become a typical junior nerd in college on the strength of your having thought up such an original phrase. As I explained to Joe that method of discourse is a new form of logic based on superstition and feminine mental processes.

And I really do take account of the delicacies I perceive to be in operation in any setting I find myself.

As a minor example, and I know you don't really favour providing examples and would rather rely on the mysterious magic of your fantastic vocabulary, you may well have gained the impression that Madame de Pompadour was simply Louis XV's mistress on the 7 minute principle. I had thought it more decent not to mention that she was the supervisor of the satisfaction of his jaded appetites. A sort of manageress. A logistics expert if you will. A research scientist even.

One supposes that history teachers in your experience probably failed to draw this important distinction as an explanation of the power she wielded and the resources she was able to command and thus left the brighter students somewhat mystified as to why the corrupt libertine couldn't get a cheaper shag if it was only a shag he was after.

Of course I could explain the situation if it wasn't for the etiquette problem which your grown up sensibilities are no doubt accustomed to. And using scientific terminologies and methods as well as colloquial ones on request. But I don't recommend either as you are obviously still a little damp behind your ears.