If 'Intelligent Design" Is True, Why So Many Lies? (page 4)

Frog

oh Skinny, I do believe Michaelangelo will turn in his grave at your interpretation of his sistine chapel centrepiece;0 Touche on the scientific community putting evolution up as a theory, more respect in that I think.

Narkissos

Slightly off-topic, I find some interest, at least on a rhetorical level, in the "Incompetent Design" approach:

http://powerofnarrative.blogspot.com/2005/10/incompetent-design-and-cow-manure-with.html

DanTheMan

Nate, your points about the difficulty of breaking down the facts supporting evolution into understandable sound-bytes that the uneducated layperson can understand is well-taken. Scientists and educated persons will need every bit of patience they can possibly muster, and then some, if the rising tide of fundamentalism and general ignorance is to be halted.

Nate Merit

Hi again Alan

Thanks again for posting. I am indeed catching on to these people. I made their same mistake though. When I was released from JW slavery I sought slavery just eight months later in fundamentalist Christianity. It took me fifteen years to finally leave mainstream Christianity.

I'm curious about your icon. Is that a tintype photo of yourself, or an old tintype? Either way, I love those old sepia-toned photos. I have a tintype of my great great grandfather and gg grandmother.

Thanks again for posting.
Nate

Nate Merit

Hi skinnyboy

I too have been touched by his noodly appendage! What a great visual. I copied it and sent it to my bud Mark Smith so he can include it on his atheist web-site www.jcnot4me.com

Though I'm sure it'll be weeks before it gets aded to the site.

I'm very mellow today and not nervous about my upcoming surgery as I was yesterday. It's too bad there is no 'delete' function so we can delete our own posts. I was acting like a jerk last night. Sheesh.

Thanks for posting, and for the pic.
Nate

Nate Merit

Hi Narkissos!

This looks like a really fun site. I've saved it to my favs so I can check it out, and also sent the link to my bud Mark Smith. He may want to include the link on his atheist website. The first page of the web-site startled me when it said that the ID theory is gaining acceptance amnong scientists. Hoo boy.

Thanks dude.
Nate

Nate Merit

Hi Dan the Man

Agreed. Pateince. I was really out of patience entirely last night and it shows.

I'm convinced the fundies will will with ID, at least for awhile. Sobering.

Thanks for posting Dan.

Nate

Room 215

Sorry, but all our empircal experience in life reinforces that order and design only proceeds from intelligence. The ID theory (and that's what it is and will remain-- a theory) is at least as plausible a hypothesis to explain the incredible complexity of all animate organisms, not to mention the exquisitely balanced yin-yang interdependence of the all the elements that comprise our biosphere as any other. Unquestionably, evolution can and does explain a great deal about what we observe in the animate cosmos; yet it offers nothing even remotely close to providing the definitive answer to the mysteries of life's origins. In fact, a total uncritical acceptance of blind evolution and randomness of the origins of the universe requires every much as great a leap of faith as does creationism in its most fundamemtal manifestation. i.e. , the Michelangelesque Deity adorning the Sistine Chapel.

SWALKER

The sad truth is that Americans are not very well educated, and that is why 60% of Americans believe the Genesis allegory/story is literal science and history. Americans loathe critical thinking and subjects that are difficult. Keeping people ignorant and superstitious plays right into the hands of TPTB, because it makes Americans easy to lead into stupid wars and anything else TPTB (The Powers That Be) wishes to lead superstitious ill-thinking Americans into.

I feel sorry for you! Putting others down is no way to get people to see your side. You must feel that you got an extra helping of brains, by who/whatever was handing them out, and you may have, but they took something away in the process...feelings.

Swalker

DanTheMan

The ID theory (and that's what it is and will remain-- a theory) is at least as plausible a hypothesis

The problem is, is that ID is not a testable, falsifiable hypothesis, the way evolution started out. So ID can never be a scientific theory, only a metaphysical hypothesis, which isn't science at all. Evolution started out as a hypothesis, and has been verified again and again by experimental and observational data.

If 'Intelligent Design" Is True, Why So Many Lies?

Share this