Intelligent Design Theory: Science or Religion?

@cicerone imposter,

[quote[spendi, I'm afraid I don't understand your "circular" argument. If something doesn't exist because there is no evidence for it, it's not circular; it's pigheadedness. [/quote]

There is a beautiful piece of non-reasoning...illogic if ever one was needed to prove a point!

0 Replies

What amazes me is that it has taken this long for Frank to realise effemm's true worth.

There have been a few remakable examples recently of the effects of "superior" persons placing those who question their machinations on Ignore.

The guy who has been telling the SEC, and others, for years, that Madoff was a crook .

The staff of the cricket ground in Antigua who told the authorities last November that the pitch would be unfit for a Test Match in mid-February.

The authorites who have been told endlessly that sperm banks and fertility treatments in conjunction with the free expression of a lady's whims would lead to a disastrous conclusion.

And the thousands of warnings about the looming financial "catastrophe".

Ignoring countervailing opinions, in lieu of countering them, is the true hallmark of a complete and utter moronic ******* idiot and to parade it as a badge of honour and a clinching argument beggars belief to put it as politely as I can.

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

Frank,

If you care to ask that question again in a civilized manner I might respond,

1 Reply

@fresco,

Quote:

If you care to ask that question again in a civilized manner I might respond,

I don't care to do that at all, Asshole!

So do whatever you want.

0 Replies

Agnosticism is the position that there may be a God or there may not be a God and I'm not concerned about it.

It's a simple philosophy. Why go into any further detaiI?

It's off track for the question (and it is a question -- there a ? behind it).

ID is not science -- it can't qualify as a scientific hypothesis or theory.

ID is religion -- it depends on a supernatural being who has the design
sensibility of a mad man.

The science of evolution is getting extremely close to predictions of evolution.

3 Replies

@Lightwizard,

Not quite

Quote:

1. Religion: Intelligent Design is an oxymoron

2. Science: Intelligent Design is an oxymoron

Religion has trifurcated itself into "believers in ID as a science" , believers of ID but not as science" and "ID is bogus"

More conservatives believe in the first two, (including the Lithuanian Rites and estonian Rites of the Catholic Chruch of the Eastern Us). To sveral rites and religions its not an oxymoron at all, It is a basis of some belief and , to some rel;igions like Evangelicals, its a scientific fact that supports Creationist views> (Often ID doesnt reside by itself as dr Behe asserted in court.

0 Replies

@spendius,

There's a huge difference between evidence and invisible. Some people will never see the bug in their soup.

0 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

Quote:

I do not have "beliefs", you ******* moron...and nothing I've said about this issue has to do with "beliefs."

I have not ducked anything, you ******* lying moron

That "there may be gods or IDers or whatever", thats a belief Frank. Now if you dismiss that and say its false, then we are on the same page, although Ive gotten there with greater clarity and intellectual consistency than you. Your problem is an inability to communicate . Youre too busy trying to be a smart ass that you forgot how to write clearly.

1 Reply

@Lightwizard,

Quote:

Agnosticism is the position that there may be a God or there may not be a God and I'm not concerned about it.

Not sure what you mean about "not concerned about it."

I am an agnostic...and I am "as concerned" as any theist or atheist about the question...and the investigation of the question.

Quote:

It's a simple philosophy. Why go into any further detaiI?

What are you talking about here? I am not asking you to discuss agnosticism.

Quote:

It's off track for the question (and it is a question -- there a ? behind it).

I am not asking you to discuss agnosticism. Why are you raising this?

Quote:

ID is not science -- it can't qualify as a scientific hypothesis or theory.

So what??? That has absolutely nothing to do with anything I've asserted in this thread.

Quote:

ID is religion -- it depends on a supernatural being who has the design
sensibility of a mad man.

Why are you saying that?

Why can you not envision a GOD (read that Intelligent Designer) coming up with the very design that occurred on planet Earth.

Is that really too difficult for you to grasp? Or is there something else at work here?

Quote:

The science of evolution is getting extremely close to predictions of evolution.

Well I don't know about that...and I think it is little more than blind guessing on your part...but the fact remains...it does not impact on my contention in the slightest.

0 Replies

@farmerman,

Quote:

That "there may be gods or IDers or whatever", thats a belief Frank.

No it is not, you ******* moron.

The fact that there may be gods or there may not be gods...is a fact! There MAY be gods. There MAY NOT BE gods.

None of that belief bullshit in there.

Quote:

Now if you dismiss that and say its false, then we are on the same page, although Ive gotten there with greater clarity and intellectual consistency than you.

You do not have or see anything in greater clarity or intellectual consistency than I, but if you want to flatter yourself with that nonsense...hey, go for it.

If I were a moron like you, I'd probably try the same thing.

Quote:

Your problem is an inability to communicate .

I can communicate...and I communicate quite well. What you consider to be my "communications problems" are actually your comprehension problems.

Quote:

Youre too busy trying to be a smart ass that you forgot how to write clearly.

Considering the clarity of my posts and the jumbled, at times incoherent garbage that you often post...that statement is ******* hilarious.

Thanks for the laugh!

Spendius is right...it is incredible that I have taken this long to realize that you are a buffoon.

1 Reply

@Lightwizard,

Quote:

ID is not science -- it can't qualify as a scientific hypothesis or theory.

Frank discussion had nothing to do with that. Ive entered this actual point from page 1 of this thread. Weve dispensed with what I feel and many others say. ID IS RELIGION.period, most of us know that without any necessary (or unecessary) qualifiers. Frank ignores the fact that ID is being peddled as science and ,by linking the ID/god tale, hes ignored all evidence without backing up his initial statement that says, and I paraphrase (cause hes made subtle changes from statement to statement) "he didnt care what the evidence says, he states that If a god, then there is Id,(duhh, no **** Franky) but where he pulls up short is that no compelling reason has been forwarded by him and thats intellectual cowardice, complete copout and spendi style smoke blowing. Ive been seeking some reasons and all I got was boorish trash talking substituting as intellectual convictions.. If FRANKY buys (as he asserts)the evidence that evolution is predictable and is presently in effect but still wishes to default to a "possible" god, then he should certainly be able to give some reasons why he states that (His shouting sounded like he sure believed this , Unless his poor manners were masking his "honesty". SO FAR,wrt these reasons for his assertions(beliefs") hes a no-show. He hasnt pulled together anything that is halfway logical, much in contrast to his own solemn protestations. In that Hes thecoward trying to sound profound. Hes a joke that would be laughed off the dias were he in an actual debate.

0 Replies

Frank, If you would have noticed, I posted that as a general reply -- not anything you specifically asked for. So I look back on your post and see no reference to your agnosticism. Right.

Here's some quotations, since it's obvious ID, Science or Religion has become so malleable.

Q: What do you get when you cross an insomniac, an agnostic, and a dyslexic?

A: Someone who stays up all night wondering if there is a Dog.”

Groucho Marx (American Comedian, Actor and Singer, 1890-1977)

There's nothing an agnostic can't do if he doesn't know whether he believes in anything or not”

Monty Python (Creators and stars of the television comedy series Monty Python's Flying Circus.)

W. C. Fields, a lifetime agnostic, was discovered reading a Bible on his deathbed. ''I'm looking for a loop-hole',' he explained.”

W. C. Fields (American Comic and Actor, 1880-1946)

There may be fairies at the bottom of the garden. There is no evidence for it, but you can't prove that there aren't any, so shouldn't we be agnostic with respect to fairies?”

Richard Dawkins

I do not consider it an insult, but rather a compliment to be called an agnostic. I do not pretend to know where many ignorant men are sure - that is all that agnosticism means.”

Clarence Darrow quotes (American Lawyer, Speaker and Writer, 1857-1938)

I am an atheist, out and out. It took me a long time to say it. I've been an atheist for years and years, but somehow I felt it was intellectually unrespectable to say one was an atheist, because it assumed knowledge that one didn't have. Somehow, it was better to say one was a humanist or an agnostic. I finally decided that I'm a creature of emotion as well as of reason. Emotionally, I am an atheist. I don't have the evidence to prove that God doesn't exist, but I so strongly suspect he doesn't that I don't want to waste my time.”
dmg

Isaac Asimov (Russian born American science-fiction Writer and Biochemist. 1920-1992)

0 Replies

@Lightwizard,

Quote:

Agnosticism is the position that there may be a God or there may not be a God and I'm not concerned about it.

I said that about 8 pages back when I first asked lil Franky to back up his "thesis". He then merely tried to turn it around that I could only believe what I did were there no "gods".
That being a ridiculous point, I asked him to explain what he meant and then he started going Postal. The rest is on the record. Frank looks like a raving loony herein and I think if we had a custody battle for Darwin, Id win hands down because the court would have sufficient reason to believe that Franky is unstable.(bsides being a rather poor debator whos unable to explain his points to the public)

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

Quote:

The fact that there may be gods or there may not be gods...is a fact! There MAY be gods. There MAY NOT BE gods.

. Steppeing into your own sepatge here Franky. You now have changed your position to try to sound more globally encompassing. Your original points were that I couldnt hold the non acceptance of ID unless I was sure there were "No gods" . Ididnt hear you taking my point of either way, until just this AM when I reminded you that there were 2 options and that Ive given my reasons for accepting that ID is bogus (my evidence argument), youve still been ducking the other side. I assume you will continue to duck this because it causes you to drop "the god myth" and thats unacceptable to an old altar boy.

SOmetimes being an altar boy lets you understand and appreciate the business complexes that religions can represent.

2 Replies

@farmerman,

I've backed up everything I've ever said in this thread, moron.

Here is my contention section by section...I DARE YOU TO REFUTE it reasonably.

First part:

There MAY be a GOD!

What can you say about that? Are you saying “NO...there cannot be a God.” Or do you agree that there MAY be a GOD!

C'mon, moron...let's here what you have to say here.

Second part:

IF THERE IS A GOD...(one of the possibilities)...there is the possibility of Intelligent Design.

So...if there is the possibility of a GOD....there is the possibility of Intelligent Design.

C'mon, moron...tell me why that does not follow.

NOTE, MORON...I AM NOT SAYING ANYTHING ABOUT THE NATURE OF THE DESIGN...NOT SAYING THAT IT HAS TO BE THE NONSENSE PEDDLED BY THE IDers...NOT SAYING ANYTHING ABOUT THAT AT ALL.

That is the entire of my argument.

IF THERE IS THE POSSIBILITY OF A GOD...and there is the possibility that a GOD exists...THEN THERE IS THE POSSIBILITY OF INTELLIGENT DESIGN.

You cannot fault the reasoning there, you ******* moron. Why not just stop the bullshit and finally acknowledge it?

0 Replies

@farmerman,

Quote:

Steppeing into your own sepatge here Franky. You now have changed your position to try to sound more globally encompassing. Your original points were that I couldnt hold the non acceptance of ID unless I was sure there were "No gods" .

I said unless you could prove there were no gods...you could not assert there was no Intelligent Design.

AND YOU CANNOT. If there is a GOD...THERE IS THE POSSIBILITY OF INTELLIGENT DESIGN.

You are a ******* moron.

Quote:

Ididnt hear you taking my point of either way, until just this AM when I reminded you that there were 2 options and that Ive given my reasons for accepting that ID is bogus (my evidence argument), youve still been ducking the other side. I assume you will continue to duck this because it causes you to drop "the god myth" and thats unacceptable to an old altar boy.

I have never ducked anything. I think you are finally seeing that you are completely all ******* wet in this...and are not man enough to acknowledge it.

And nothing I have said today is inconsistent in any way with anything I've said before. And I have said everything I've said today before.

By the way, did I mention that you are a ******* moron?

1 Reply

@farmerman,

The elephant in the room is that ID with its bogus, rigged scientific evidence is theological, not academic. If the agnostics want to be happy with their position, they can't include being very concerned with the ID movement and they can't include being concerned with those who have given up on any concept of god or gods. In trying to shoe horn ID into an academic setting instead of a theological setting and dressing it up to disguise it, if the agnostics want to think about it, they should be moving towards the no god(s) and stop claiming they are throwing a coin in the air and it is coming down as heads and tails.

2 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

Frank, If you expect farmerman to prove "there is no god," can you also prove "there is no spaghetti monster?" That's also a "maybe?"

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

Quote:

Frank, If you expect farmerman to prove "there is no god," can you also prove "there is no spaghetti monster?" That's also a "maybe?"

I am not expecting him to prove there is no god.

But so long as there is the POSSIBILITY of a GOD...THERE IS THE POSSIBILITY OF INTELLIGENT DESIGN.

And despite you silly insistence that there cannot be a GOD...there IS the possibility that there IS A GOD.

0 Replies

@Lightwizard,

You are the one thinking agnostics should not be concerned with these problems. Not sure why you think that...but it is about as wrong headed as anything that moron is asserting.

1 Reply

Intelligent Design Theory: Science or Religion?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know