Theory of Intelligent Design

"Intelligent design" isn't a theory. It is a severely misguided delusion.

 

No science from you whatsoever. The best you could do was to attribute others' words to me and promise to continue "slithering around." Why don't you try to express some real science instead. Begin by explaining how hemoglobin defies LeChatelier's Principle. Use some specific expressions of pKa values, please. This should be good.

Note: gravely just added to my Ignore List for obvious reasons. He has nothing to contribute.

 

You have to have facts to support any theory. Otherwise it's as you say

 

Attempting debate on this with those who believe ID or Creation is akin to telling a frog how to do calculus and expecting an equation to be solved. The basics must be understood and these people cannot even grasp a pencil, figuratively or physically.

 

Yeah - BUT - you cannot PROVE a frog can't do calculus!

 

Hahaha. Touche. Yes. How could we possibly get inside of a frogs mind and know what it knows.

It's like when some ask to prove that god doesn't exist.

 

Yes I most certainly can....likely I cannot "Prove" it to YOU but that has more to do with purposeful ignorance than reality.

 

And here do we note what this really comes down to. Underlying these debates seems to be a unique and purposeful desire to ignore what science provides in the way of understanding nature and our universal reality in favor of deity worship. While this human tendency worked for humanity for thousands of years it has become counter productive as we become enlightened to advanced knowledge and evolve mentally beyond what we once were.
There cannot be proof of a negative and thus does the rational mind not even try....science generally ignores the God Hypothesis because it known it cannot be advanced to theory.

 

Science generally, outside of quantum mechanics is grounded in philosophical materialism. The philosophy assumes that matter is the fundamental reality, and that nothing exists but matter. So it excludes the idea of something outside of matter existing. This gets rid of any idea of something existing independent of matter, in another dimension. And this is the reason there is no place for what man might call god. And so all explanations for reality has to be matter based. And that is why science ignores the god hypothesis. But they also ignore anything which might be considered, like Sheldrake's idea about morphic fields being involved in creating the shape of different living organisms. Morphology must be explained using matter, for materialism assumes such a field does not exist. So, no research is done, for grants are not available for what materialism considers to be Woo.

Scientific knowledge does not offer what religion offers for humanity. Religion did more for man than explaining the nature of reality, by giving human existence meaning. Sciencee will never give sufficient answers for those questions that are common, regardless of era or culture. Of course not all people seem to need such answers, but there will always be people that do. Religion arose because of a need of the human psyche. While there has been a move away from organized religion, many times this was replaced by spirituality.

All scientists are not atheists, although in academia it is best to act as if you are an atheist, whether you are or not. What some of the founders of QM, became were a kind of mystic, which is of a religious nature. This came from pondering what they were discovering about the quantum level of reality when it came to matter and consciousness. Today this hardly acceptable in academia, to even talk about the implications. Generally the only physicists that will discuss such things have to wait until they retire. Such is the nature of academia if you want to remain in it, to make it to retirement. Most follow Richard Feinman's advice and forget about any such implications and just work the equations. One of the most brilliant men of science was of course Einstein. It is known that the god of Spinoza attracted him. Science is just not concerned with gods, but there have been many scientists who would not reject the idea of some force outside of this universe, but they did not need such a force to understand the universe. Afterall, they saw the universe as a kind of machine, mechanistic, governed by laws and all they had to do was to figure it out. Didn't need a god to do that.

 

Yeh. They present a fairy tale (not a theory since it lacks supporting evidence)while asking for evidence to prove our claim. And we provide empirical evidence

Then they say that they don't believe it ,even documented experiments; all while flouting a fairy tale with zero supporting evidence.

 

After reading the Bible, many people are mystified as to why grown, otherwise intelligent adults would believe that it is the direct communication or the "inspired Word" of an all-powerful, all-knowing, all-good being. To many people, it seems absolutely incredible that any reasonable person could maintain this belief in the face of our current scientific knowledge and the contemporary understanding of history, religion and mythology. To outsiders, the phenomenon of Christian belief is a puzzlement.



However, after a bit of research and reflection, the mystery is resolved. It soon becomes apparent that the whole bizarre Christian belief system is predicated, to a large degree, on two compelling ideas. The first idea is that maintaining faith in Bible claims is the most morally virtuous act one can perform and will be rewarded with an eternal life of bliss. The second belief is that doubting biblical claims represents the greatest evil imaginable and will be punished with an eternity of torture. These linchpin beliefs make it possible for Christians to accept thoroughly ridiculous biblical assertions not merely in the absence of evidence, but against the evidence-against reason.


The sanctification of "faith" and demonization of doubt short-circuits the thinking process. Since it is continually drilled into Christians' brains that faith must be maintained at all costs, anything which contradicts a Bible claim is automatically rationalized away as the arrogance of the "wise," as a ploy of Satan, or as a test of faith from God himself. So when it is explained and demonstrated to a Christian that the Bible is simply a collection of ancient writings masquerading as the "Word of God," this is dismissed as the delusion of unbelievers blinded by their sin. (See the wisdom of the world) When scientific discoveries are shown to clearly, directly and unambiguously contradict biblical pronouncements, these scientific discoveries are interpreted by the Christian as satanic trickery. If it is patiently and painstakingly evinced to the Christian that the Bible is filled from one end to the other with obscene cruelty and violence, pagan mythology and superstition, blatant contradictions, ludicrous claims and outrageous, blithering idiocy, the Christian smiles in the face of this, confident that his faith is being tested by God and that he will be rewarded accordingly in the Age To Come.


It must be understood that in the Alice-in-Wonderland Christian world view, the more difficult it is to believe in a biblical claim, the more one is glorified for believing it. Faith, believing no matter what the facts say, is the highest manifestation of moral righteousness. Developing and maintaining one's faith in the preposterous and the incomprehensible becomes the ultimate purpose of life. Tertullian's declaration, "I believe because it is impossible," is the boast of a man who celebrates his irrationality. While liberal Christians today may pay lip service to the notion of a reasonable faith, the sentiment of Tertullin's inane "I believe because it is impossible" is alive and well and continues to be spouted from church pulpits on Sunday mornings: "Brethren, did not Paul say that God will make foolish the wisdom of the world, and choose that which is foolish to shame the wise of the world? Brothers and Sisters, did not JEEEZ-ZUSS tell us that unless we become as little children we will never enter the kingdom of heaven, that God has chosen to hide his light from the eyes of the wise and reveal himself to babes?" Reason and knowledge are ridiculed while biblical absurdities are held aloft as bless-ed revelation. This is how Christianity sustains itself. It is the only way that it can.


Thus the Christian faith's invisible attributes are now clearly to be seen. Behind all the sacraments and the rituals, the organ music and the angelic choirs, the praying lips and the arms thrust heavenward, behind all this, propping it all up, is the monstrous doctrine that gullibility and ignorance are divine.


Please don't try to explain this to a Christian though, for it has been most assuredly foretold that he would be mocked and persecuted for Jesus' sake by the "wise" of a fallen, perishing world. Yea, lo, verily, for it has been written

 

Every concept and definition in physics has an underlying mathematical definition and formalism. None of these appeal to or receive guidance from any form of "philosophy". In fact, formal philosophy carries no weight in how physics is done today.
It was Feynman who famously said "Philosophy of science is about as useful to scientists as ornithology is to birds".

 

That's only because we have observed the universe and noticed that every object follows certain rules. These rules are called scientific laws. And they have been proven to apply to everything that we observe. Even quantum mechanics wich is a field of science.

Every thing is established. You would need to have to have a ton of evidence and experiments to support that evidence. Then you would need other credible researchers take all of your data and try to replicate your experiments to confirm your discovery. Every discovery that we have made was like this and underwent this kind of scrutiny. Especially since scientists by nature are skeptical.

There is something called dark matter. It's called "dark" because we don't know what it is. But it's strength shapes the universe


There is also called dark energy. It's called "dark" for the same reason. If there is some form of identified energy form like god or something, the. We would be still be observe it's effects. We would just call it "dark".

Science ignores it because it's a fairytale as far as they know it. It has zero supporting evidence so it minus well be.

Religion has killed more humans in its cause than any other thing on earth.

From ancient empires. To the dark ages. To the rennisanse and the Muslim expansion. To colonization. To the conflict in middle east this very day.

In fact the more liberal religion became the more humans expanded their minds.

 

If one could see the actual molecule rather than the cartoon versions you've offered, and were thus able to observe everything it takes for it to just be a molecule - never mind bonding to other molecules, bombardment with subatomic particles or photons, or any of that - I'm pretty sure it would be difficult to believe otherwise.

 

Well that would certainly explain a lot - especially as regards what passes for science and scientists in this era.

 

To be fair it is not all Christians who have this fundamentalist mindset. In fact many of the greatest scientists were Christians but not fundamentalists.

The modern divergence between mainstream Christians who appreciate that their holy book is not to be taken literally and the fundamentalist evangelicals, such as those you describe above, began with the teaching of evolution in the Bible belt prior to the Scopes trial.

From there it has festered and grown to become a sub cult of Christianity that is so far on the extreme edge as to denounce other Christians who don't take the bible literally. Unfortunately it also leads to them denouncing and disparaging all scientific knowledge that exposes the fallacy of taking the bible literally which is why they have invented idiocies like "creation science" and it's illegitimate offspring ID.

At one stage this nation prided itself on being at the forefront of science and technology. Now it is being dragged backwards into superstition by a cult that refuses to evolve with the changing world that we live in.

 

Thank you for just proving my point about the fundamentalist subcult of Christianity that disparages science and scientific knowledge.

 

The truth is that science can't even conceivably give us anything more certain than the faith we place in the essential propositions undergirding science, which means science will never be the primary path to knowing, much less the only path to knowing. - Undeniable - How Biology Confirms Our Intuition that Life is Designed, by Douglas Axe, page 232

 

Religion is inanimate. It does not kill. It is evil humans who kill, whether they be atheist, Muslim, or Christian.

Your brilliant mind shines. To the dark ages. "Renaissance" is a proper noun. You should use a dictionary some time. And often.

 

I'm open to examining your proof.

 

So, you don't understand subatomic particles and chemical bonding. Therefore it must be a miracle. GodDidIt.

So, I guess you believe that the loud noise that follows lightning is also miraculous. GodDidIt.

Have you offered up any sacrifices lately?

 

We know it's not undeniable. It's denied by scientists the world over. Many of whom are Christians, Hindus and Muslims.

The only people who support Creationism are religious fundamentalists.

 

No amphibian has shown the ability to use mathematics or the dexterity to use writing devices. Absent data to indicate a positive I must leave the negative until shown otherwise particularly when simple observation and common sense indicate I should.

 

Would have been a good argument if religious books didn't teach you to kill and or opression certain groups of people

Or I'll continue to text this on my phone and not worry about spelling on something as informal as a forum on the Internet. But you could be a spelling natzi if you want criticizing my spelling. You certainty can't argue fact. So pointing out something so irrelevant and unimportant in a failed ad hominem attempt is the best you can do.

 

1. Islam teaches terrorism. Christianity teaches to treat others as you would have them treat you.
This Golden Rule is embraced by atheists who feign a kind of morality completely out of reach of their nihilism.
2. Stop bringing your inane arguments in and pretending they have merit when they do not.

Yes, it's SO "informal" that you must respond again and again, while you pretend to be omniscient as you write like an eighth grader and then excuse yourself. An ad hominem is attacking you. I simply pointed out the ignorance in what you wrote, and since you can't argue on behalf of your ignorant grammar AND spelling, you whine about "ad hominem" - you who always attack Christians even when the subject is clearly science. THAT is the best you ever do. Now join your many friends on my Ignore List.
Life is too short to read atheist "natzis" (sic). And yes, you really HAVE "fallen."