Evidence for Intelligent Design-is there any?

It's interesting that you say this, because the contradiction you're introducing is one of the points one makes when explaining why ID is just an idea with no cohesion, consistency, or independent lines of evidence.The argument goes like this: ID would like to have it both ways. When explaining why life must be designed, IDists draw analogies to human designs. When explaining why life is too wondrous to have happened naturally they describe how far beyond human comprehension the complexity of life is. So which is it? Is life something we could design ourselves, or is it far beyond our meager talents.The reality is that the complexity of life is pretty much what one would expect from a process that combines accumulating changes with selection and that operates all the time everywhere around the planet. The degree to which human beings can replicate any of life's processes is irrelevant to the question of how life began and evolved, except as it reflects upon our scientific ability to ferret out the secrets of the universe. Are you 12? Here's another request to address yourself to the topic and not to what you perceive as the personal foibles of your opponents.--Percy

And you know the amazing thing? The cell does all this without being intelligent at all!It seems like unintelligent natural processes can achieve more spectacular results in biology than intelligence ever can.A bit like evolution then.

You could tell him that, but since birds aren't mammals you'd be misleading him. Did you mean it is like a bird in that it flies, and it just happens to also be a mammal?TTFN,WK

To: bluegenes and b00tleg (if not all).TONY: Don't you just hate those religions that walk around so righteous, head so high and yet live by double standards. They have two sets of rules, those for them and those for all others.Well, The theory of Evolution is just that - just another bad smelling religion - two faced, self righteous garbage. With two sets of rules for nature.1# All the normal rules of science and nature we take for granted.
2# Special supernatural mystery phenomenon - where normal rules of every day life do not always apply. Where Abiogenesis can and does occur. Where molecular machinery can be spontaneous happen and where complex Information that is superior intelligent software logic commands just pop out of nowhere without any designer needed.When you bring in your religious dogma into a science forum there is going to be confusion in your head. Fact and fiction are two different worlds man. You need to separate the two.Abiogenesis is dead. Most wise "evolutionists" won't even touch Abiogenesis even with a ten foot pole now a days.If you think abiogenesis is still alive theory then lets clear that one up now. It's time you parted with your trash.

Yup. No argument here. I hope that forum member Dr. Adequate will forgive me for appropriating his argument here, but is this really the worst thing you can think of to compare evolution to; religion? It is bizarre that theists hurl accusations of religiosity at evolution, as though this were the worst insult imaginable. Does that not strike you as somewhat ironic? Abiogenesis is not the topic, nor is it necessary for evolution. Life could have originated in pretty much any way you care to name, including being kick-started by your god of choice, it would still evolve. Evolution is something that comes after the first origin of life. You could falsify all non-supernatural theories of abiogenesis tomorrow and it wouldn't mean a damn thing to the theory of evolution.It's also worth briefly mentioning that your description how evolution and abiogenesis work is a complete travesty, a mangled and mistaken mish-mash of error and creationist propaganda. I absolutely agree. that is why scientists demand EVIDENCE. Do you have any or are you just going to post repetitive and clichéd polemics? There are plenty of abiogenesis threads open. Take it there. When you do, you might like to back up your absurd claim about wise evolutionists and abiogenesis.Bottom line, this thread is for evidence for ID (which you seem to have conflated with Biblical creationism). Time to put up or shut up. Provide evidence or stop posting here.Mutate and Survive

---

"The Bible is like a person, and if you torture it long enough, you can get it to say almost anything you'd like it to say." -- Rev. Dr. Francis H. Wade

Hello Bio-molecularTony Unfortunately what you are supposed to be discussing is "Evidence for Intelligent Design-is there any? " -- see Message 1 for the thesis on this thread.It's curious that IDologists can't seem to talk about ID being science without talking about how evolution is not science by their definition, and yet ID doesn't meet their definition either.Yeah two-faced. Perhaps you would like to start a new thread where you can show "2# Special supernatural mystery phenomenon" are necessary to the ToE ...Go to Proposed New Topics to post new topics.Start with defining "Evolution"Then define the "Theory of Evolution"Just so we are on the same page eh?Enjoy.

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

---

• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

Tony,1) Who are you talking too? You have made this post in reply to yourself. When hitting the reply button, make sure you hit the button in the post you wish to reply to. As well as making the thread a lot easier to follow, it means that those members who are set up to receive e-mail notification of replies, will get a message telling them that a reply has arrived.If you are not replying to anyone in particular, you can use the "Gen Reply" button, which can be found at the bottom of each thread.2) We do not debate bare links at this forum. You need to put your argument in your own words and then use links as citations. If you are unsure of the forum rules, you can familiarise yourself with them here. Your post is in pretty clear breach of rule 5.3) The "Law of Biogenesis" has bugger all to do with abiogenesis or evolution and still less to do with the topic here, which is "Evidence for Intelligent Design - Is There Any?". If your performance to date is anything to go by, I'm taking it as a "no".Mutate and Survive

---

"The Bible is like a person, and if you torture it long enough, you can get it to say almost anything you'd like it to say." -- Rev. Dr. Francis H. Wade

Post of nonsense that is not contributing to the discussion has been hidden.Edited by AdminNosy, : use peek to see post. It does not contribute to the discussion.

First, pick on me not pot, it has done nothing to you for you to be so negative towards it.Second, the reasoning accessment I gave you was of your own words. You said, " The DNA systems function like a computer", (Message 128), then when you were called out on it you changed your opinion and said, "Not human technology - superior technology fit for a God /great universal creator"(Message 133).Then I just asked, "how can you determine any of this to begin with?"I'd like an answer if you don't mind...

---

"All great truths begin as blasphemies""I smoke pot. If this bothers anyone, I suggest you look around at the world in which we live and shut your mouth."--Bill Hicks"I never knew there was another option other than to question everything"--Noam Chomsky

Hi Percy, sorry I took so long to get to your post. Busy, and there are so many replies to my posts. Ouch.I disagree with your comments quoted above. I personally have my own thoughts (theory - reality).It goes like this: All reality is intelligently designed - so much so that it was necessary to build the complexity to such a high level so as to create the `look and `Feel` of something natural and real.Albert said: The physical reality is an illusion albeit a very persistent one.I have found this to be real and true. Physical life is not real, does not exist because you’re not really alive. You can not have living machines, but you can have machines the `think they are living`. So your living on what is really a lifeless planet - with just biotechnological machinery swarming everywhere. Made to look like the real thing, that never really existed anyway, but your not going to ever know that anyway, anyhow.Matter is not really physical though it looks to be so because it is designed to look that way. Energy fields are what atoms are made of not solid mass. So your living in an illusionary physical realm designed to give you a reality to exist. All is intelligently designed to look as real as possible, yet it is not what it seems.All things even mass must have a particle or something to create the illusion of mass. Science is now looking for that particle - Higges.This can get very deep...

Hey, Bio-molecularTony. Curiously we discourage arguments made solely by posting information from other websites, but ask that you explain what you think it means.For instance:Abiogenesis - Wikipedia

quote:

---

In the natural sciences, abiogenesis, or origin of life, is the study of how life on Earth emerged from inanimate organic and inorganic molecules. Scientific research theorizes that abiogenesis occurred sometime between 4.4 [2] and 2.7 billion years ago, when the ratio of stable isotopes of carbon (12C and 13C), iron (56Fe, 57Fe, and 58Fe) and sulfur (32S, 33S, 34S, and 36S) points to a biogenic origin of minerals and sediments[3][4] and molecular biomarkers indicate photosynthesis.[5][6]

​

Abiogenesis is a limited field of research despite its profound impact on biology and human understanding of the natural world. Progress in this field is generally slow and sporadic, though it still draws the attention of many due to the eminence of the question being investigated. Several hypotheses have been proposed, most notably the iron-sulfur world theory (metabolism first) and the RNA world hypothesis (genetics first).[7]

---

Your contention that evolutionists avoid the issue of abiogenesis is false: what they DON"T do is confuse it with the evolution of life from existing life, a process that has been ongoing for over 3.5 billion years at last count, and which involves different processes (life processes instead of chemical processes).The earliest evidence of the formation of the earth is metamorphic rock (which destroys any fossils) cooling from magma at around 150 million years after the earth formed, 4.55 billion years ago, so that would be 4.4 billion years ago for the oldest rocks known.The earliest evidence we have for life is the oldest sedimentary rock that has been found so far, at 3.5 billion years ago. At the time this rock formed life already existed.Because we don't have any fossils between 4.4 billion years and 3.5 billion years, we don't know when life first occurred.One thing we do know though, is that 4.55 billion years ago life did not exist on earth.So something did happen, what it is, however, we don't know.Abiogenesis is the scientific investigation of that question.Now the question is -- if you want to discuss the origin of life from and ID perspective -- whether you can put forward some hypothesis based on ID for how that life developed that can be tested.I look forward to your contribution to science.Enjoy.

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

---

• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

Mr Jack: DNA is not software. Google you way to better understanding....

TONY: When you fully understand depth of what DNA is and does, and can do. Then and only then can you let go of the old and stupid stand-by - nature-didit (non-intelligent evolution)

TONY: Just as life has fully automated design structures for self-republication. So to the universe have similar abilities, only by design though. I just read an article on different kinds of Entropy.
Gravity Entropy where things come together rather then flow apart.There is so much to learn and so like time to live life to learn it all.