|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
Member (Idle past 2523 days) Posts: 2965 From: Los Angeles, CA USA Joined: |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Help me understand Intelligent Design (part 2) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 443 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
pink sasquatch writes: Read the forum rules lately? FYI, randman is not subject to the forum rules. He's the "village idiot", who must be tolerated no matter what he says or does. Thus saith Admin. People who think they have all the answers usually don't understand the questions.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Nighttrain Member (Idle past 4024 days) Posts: 1512 From: brisbane,australia Joined: |
Its this scientific evidence thats turning Evolutionists into ID'ers.
Silly me. And here I was thinking it took brain surgery.Brain-removal surgery.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Nighttrain Member (Idle past 4024 days) Posts: 1512 From: brisbane,australia Joined: |
Since creos sooner or later try to steer evolution discussions around to Abiogenesis, I want to put the torch to the belly and narrow down exactly who the ID-er is. I realise you propose nothing could have been 'created' without some form of intelligence. My question is, just how much evidence do you have to the identity of this mythological being? Do you have trademarks, fingerprints, irreducible (I couldn`t help myself there)proof of identity, leftover DNA,clay tablets,fossilised lab equipment,original blueprints or any evidence apart from an educated guess? Just must have happened that way will NOT pass.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
johnfolton  Suspended Member (Idle past 5622 days) Posts: 2024 Joined: |
Nighttrain, I'd agree with Ned & Randman that the evidence is more than just the sudden emergence of the fossil evidences. Scientists are simply flipping a 180 based on the totality of the scientific evidences (this includes the fossil record).
Professor Antony Flew turned a 180 based on the evidence (scientific complexities issues). Flew has not yet given a name to this Intelligence but based only on the evidence, he has recanted. Professor Flew told the Associated Press if his admirers are upset with his about-face, then thats too bad. My whole life has been guided by the principle of Plato;s Socrates: Follow the evidence, wherever it leads. http://www.ca/...-to-creation-antony-flew-former-atheist.htm
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
randman  Suspended Member (Idle past 4930 days) Posts: 6367 Joined: |
But Golfer, now Flew is a village idiot, old man,senile, etc, etc,...
Evos kind of flip out when they lose someone from the group. This message has been edited by randman, 12-06-2005 06:30 PM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
randman  Suspended Member (Idle past 4930 days) Posts: 6367 Joined: |
If you aren't interested in even briefly explaining how ID theory predicts/is confirmed by the fossil record, then you shouldn't be making such a strong assertion in a science forum. Golfer's comments do fine.
The scientific evidence for ID is simply in agreement with the Paleontologist massive fossil evidences. There is no reason for the scientist to go to the age of the fossil. Transitionals would of supported Toe, instead the lack thereof "only" supports ID.
Scientists have been hoaxed with frauds of a few fossils, it will take massive transitional fossils to derail ID. Scientists care about what is (not what is not)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
pink sasquatch Member (Idle past 6053 days) Posts: 1567 Joined: |
randman writes: The fossil record in toto fits ID, and does not fit ToE. This was the assertion I asked you to support. You give me:
randman writes: Golfer's comments do fine.
Golfer writes: The scientific evidence for ID is simply in agreement with the Paleontologist massive fossil evidences. There is no reason for the scientist to go to the age of the fossil. Transitionals would of supported Toe, instead the lack thereof "only" supports ID. Golfer's comments are no different than yours that I asked you to explain. They're both just assertions that the fossil record supports ID but not the Theory of Evolution. I'll take this idiocy to mean that you cannot explain how the fossil record data is predicted by ID theory, or how the data confirms ID theory. Simply ridiculous.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
randman  Suspended Member (Idle past 4930 days) Posts: 6367 Joined: |
lack of transitionals
sudden appearance stasis (opposite of evolution) etc, etc,...
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Wounded King Member Posts: 4149 From: Cincinnati, Ohio, USA Joined: |
lack of transitionals sudden appearance stasis (opposite of evolution) Is it just me or is this the same point phrased in three different ways? TTFN, WK
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
nwr Member Posts: 6412 From: Geneva, Illinois Joined: Member Rating: 5.3 |
Professor Antony Flew turned a 180 based on the evidence (scientific complexities issues).
I never did understand why creationists like to mention Flew. He was a philosopher, not a scientists. Most evolutionary scientists had never heard of Flew until the creationists mentioned him. And Flew did not turn against evolution, only against atheism.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
TimChase Inactive Member |
randman writes: lack of transitionalssudden appearance stasis (opposite of evolution) etc, etc,... Here is one of my favorite, more recent quotes on this point:
"Though fossils don't provide the cinematic, step-by-step record of evolution that some ID proponents demand, the sum-total of the scientific evidence for evolution is incredibly strong”and it will only strengthen in the coming years." Intelligent Design vs. evolution: a lopsided debateby Adam Dylewski Monday, November 14, 2005 http://www.dailycardinal.com/article.php?storyid=1027663 Here is just a little bit of the evidence you will find if you look around on the web. Whale Evolution/Cetacean Evolution (Atavistic Hind Limbs on Modern Whales)Whale Evolution and Atavistic Hind Limbs on Modern Whales from Edward T Babinski Scrivenings Smooth Change in the Fossil RecordSmooth Change in the Fossil Record from Don Lindsay Archive Don Lindsay Archive Transitional Fossil Specieshttp://www.origins.tv/darwin/transitionals.htm from Darwinians and Evolution http://www.origins.tv/darwin/indexpage.htm Observed Instances of SpeciationObserved Instances of Speciation from The Talk.Origins Archive TalkOrigins Archive: Exploring the Creation/Evolution Controversy Some More Observed Speciation Eventshttp://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/speciation.html (Homepage given above) Ring Species: Unusual Demonstrations of Speciationhttp://www.actionbioscience.org/evolution/irwin.html from Action Bioscience.Org Contact Verification Suspension Page There actually are fairly extensive fossil records, including a series of transitionals leading from fish to reptile, reptile to bird, reptile to mammal (passing through a double-jawed stage), and of course the transitionals leading from a land mammal to whales. As for the oblique reference to the fact that punctuated equilibria theory often appears to describe the evolution of species more accurately than traditional gradualism -- this appears to be true with species which reproduce by sexual means. As such, I would take it, a more rapid form of gradualism with genetic drift and natural selection would describe the periods of rapid evolution. But given the pronounced trends and the numerous periods of stasis which exist along these trends, the trends themselves often appear fairly continuous to the untrained eye. PUNCTUATED EQUILIBRIUM AT TWENTY: A PALEONTOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVEBy Donald R. Prothero, Ph.D. From Skeptic vol. 1, no. 3, Fall 1992, pp. 38-47. http://www.skeptic.com/01.3.prothero-punc-eq.html The following two articles deal suggest that humans may have undergoneevolution which would likewise be best described by the punctuated equilibria theory through the analysis of the human genome. (Non-Technical)'Punctuated' evolution in the human genome Medical and health information (Technical)Periodic Explosive Expansion of Human retroelements Associated with the Evolution of the Hominoid Primate Tae-Min Kim, Seung-Jin Hong, Mun-Gan Rhyu J Korean Med Sci 2004; 19: 177-85 http://jkms.kams.or.kr/2004/pdf/04177.pdf This message has been edited by TimChase, 12-06-2005 08:36 PM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
johnfolton  Suspended Member (Idle past 5622 days) Posts: 2024 Joined: |
nwr, Flew believes the scientific complexities (evidences) is the work of Intelligence. Origin of the Species is the issue, Professor Antony Flew is now supportive of ID not TOE.
Mr. Flew's change was consistent with his career-long principle of following the evidence where it led him. And his newfound theism is the product neither of a Damascus road experience nor of fresh philosophical arguments, but by his sustained analysis of scientific data. Flew said :"What I think the DNA material has done is show that intelligence must have been involved in getting these extraordinarily diverse elements together." "The enormous complexity by which the results were achieved look to me like the work of intelligence." http://www.bible.ca/...eation-antony-flew-former-atheist.htm
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AdminAsgara Administrator (Idle past 2333 days) Posts: 2073 From: The Universe Joined: |
Hi Golfer
Antony Flew isn't on topic for this thread. What any one person believes does not make this belief true or false. Maybe you could read up on what Flew actually did believe and what he does believe now. secweb.orgAntony Flew - Wikipedia AdminAsgara Queen of the Universe Comments on moderation procedures (or wish to respond to admin messages)? - Go to:
http://asgarasworld.bravepages.com http://perditionsgate.bravepages.com
New Members: to get an understanding of what makes great posts, check out:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
johnfolton  Suspended Member (Idle past 5622 days) Posts: 2024 Joined: |
Asgara, Nuggins in the opening statement begged the question. What is ID theory? Nuggins wanted to know what supporters of ID believed. What mechanics should be taught in public schools if ID was the only theory.
Flew being a supporter of ID answered Nuggins question what is ID. I thought this qualified it to be on topic. Its not about the evidence of theology (religion) but the enormity of the scientific evidences supporting the mechanics of ID that should be taught in the public schools. Theological evidence is not scientific evidence and because of separation issues left to the church. nuff said...
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MangyTiger Member (Idle past 6384 days) Posts: 989 From: Leicester, UK Joined: |
Flew being a supporter of ID answered Nuggins question what is ID. Not too put to fine a point on it but that's clearly complete nonsense. How does somebody (no matter who they are) supporting a theory help to define what that theory says? From the Opening Post:
These are the sort of questions you need to be answering for us. Have at it - we've been waiting a while I wish I didn't know now what I didn't know then
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024