Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,909 Year: 4,166/9,624 Month: 1,037/974 Week: 364/286 Day: 7/13 Hour: 0/2


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Intelligent Design is NOT Creation[ism]
sidelined
Member (Idle past 5938 days)
Posts: 3435
From: Edmonton Alberta Canada
Joined: 08-30-2003


Message 61 of 189 (144628)
09-25-2004 11:41 AM
Reply to: Message 59 by ID man
09-25-2004 11:33 AM


Re: ID is not Creation
ID man
What denials? IDists are saying that if the evidence leads to the metaphysical then so be it.
I have one question I hope you willingly answer. What is the definition of Intelligence in ID?

"You cannot reason a person out of a position he did not reason himself into in the first place."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 59 by ID man, posted 09-25-2004 11:33 AM ID man has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 63 by ID man, posted 09-25-2004 5:53 PM sidelined has replied

  
sidelined
Member (Idle past 5938 days)
Posts: 3435
From: Edmonton Alberta Canada
Joined: 08-30-2003


Message 64 of 189 (144720)
09-25-2004 6:08 PM
Reply to: Message 63 by ID man
09-25-2004 5:53 PM


Re: ID is not Creation
ID Man
The 'I' in the ID stands for some external agency- IOW nature acting alone didn't do it. It does not measure the intelligence.
How then do you propose to demonstrate the validity of your position if you cannot measure some aspect of this "external agency"? If you have no measure of the agency then there is no substance to the intelligence and as such cannot be taken seriously.It has no more explanation behind it than if we were to change the name to leprechaun intelligence or fairy intelligence.Perhaps you mean the central intelligence agency.LOL
So,being as you have no measure of the intelligence,what do you mean by design and how do you arrive at this conclusion?

"You cannot reason a person out of a position he did not reason himself into in the first place."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 63 by ID man, posted 09-25-2004 5:53 PM ID man has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 75 by ID man, posted 09-27-2004 11:08 AM sidelined has not replied
 Message 84 by Brad McFall, posted 09-27-2004 11:40 AM sidelined has not replied

  
sidelined
Member (Idle past 5938 days)
Posts: 3435
From: Edmonton Alberta Canada
Joined: 08-30-2003


Message 73 of 189 (144900)
09-26-2004 8:06 PM
Reply to: Message 65 by ID man
09-25-2004 6:11 PM


Re: ID is not Creation
ID man
Just a bump to ask if you might reply to my post #64 and as an aside I find your signature
"...the most habitable place in the solar system yields the best view of solar eclipses just when observers can best appreciate them
intriguing.Just what is meant by this? Is it implying that solar eclipses have only existed from the viewpoint of earth during the time when we have had the capacity to understand the significance of how they occur?

"You cannot reason a person out of a position he did not reason himself into in the first place."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 65 by ID man, posted 09-25-2004 6:11 PM ID man has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 76 by ID man, posted 09-27-2004 11:14 AM sidelined has replied

  
sidelined
Member (Idle past 5938 days)
Posts: 3435
From: Edmonton Alberta Canada
Joined: 08-30-2003


Message 119 of 189 (145081)
09-27-2004 1:42 PM
Reply to: Message 76 by ID man
09-27-2004 11:14 AM


Re: ID is not Creation
ID man
These two processes, working together, should end total solar eclipses in about 250 million years, a mere 5% of the age of the Earth. This relatively small window of opportunity also happens to coincide with the existence of intelligent life.
First off 250,000,000 years needs to be compared to the length of time that humans have held an intelligence.Taking a ballpark figure of 10,000 years since recorded history began{and with it any assurance of cognitve processes that could appreciate the actual meaning of a solar eclipse}this amounts to 0.0002% of the age of the earth. This is before taking into account how far into the past the "window of opportunity" extends.
It does not look that impressive as a coincidence goes eh?
Anyway this also veers away from the rest of my original post which is as follows
How then do you propose to demonstrate the validity of your position if you cannot measure some aspect of this "external agency"? If you have no measure of the agency then there is no substance to the intelligence and as such cannot be taken seriously.It has no more explanation behind it than if we were to change the name to leprechaun intelligence or fairy intelligence.Perhaps you mean the central intelligence agency.LOL
So,being as you have no measure of the intelligence,what do you mean by design and how do you arrive at this conclusion?
If you could reply to this part of my query I would appreciate it greatly.

"You cannot reason a person out of a position he did not reason himself into in the first place."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 76 by ID man, posted 09-27-2004 11:14 AM ID man has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024