Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 68 (9102 total)
3 online now:
AZPaul3, PaulK (2 members, 1 visitor)
Newest Member: sensei
Post Volume: Total: 904,721 Year: 1,602/14,231 Month: 526/1,076 Week: 259/376 Day: 1/64 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The evidence for design and a designer - AS OF 10/27, SUMMARY MESSAGES ONLY
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 547 days)
Posts: 16112
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 618 of 648 (588650)
10-27-2010 2:05 AM
Reply to: Message 607 by Dawn Bertot
10-26-2010 11:10 PM


As i suspected you really have nothing to offer in respose to the ppoint being made. Do these people have the same ability to not do these things because of that purposeful item?
Come on Dr In adequate something useful please
Dawn Bertot
I note that you did not answer my question, which was perfectly straightforward and required only a yes or no answer.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 607 by Dawn Bertot, posted 10-26-2010 11:10 PM Dawn Bertot has not replied

Parasomnium
Member
Posts: 2212
Joined: 07-15-2003


Message 619 of 648 (588651)
10-27-2010 3:16 AM


Murder or suicide?
A creationist and a scientist are assessing the following situation:
In a room there is a person hanging from a rope tied to a beam above. There is a chair lying on its side beneath the person.
That's all the information they have.
The creationist: "This is clearly murder. The chair must have been kicked away from under this poor victim by someone. Moreover, I think Superman did it."
The scientist: "I can't be sure of course, but as it stands, it's probably suicide. The evidence is not enough to conclude murder."
What follows is an argument of 600+ posts.

"Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge: it is those who know little, not those who know much, who so positively assert that this or that problem will never be solved by science." - Charles Darwin.

Admin
Director
Posts: 12870
From: EvC Forum
Joined: 06-14-2002


Message 620 of 648 (588656)
10-27-2010 8:17 AM


Summation Time
I've let this thread go on for more than double the 300 post limit, and given the rate of progress it is time to think about bringing things to a close. Please post your summations, you have until Friday morning Eastern Time US. Please do not reply to individual messages.

--Percy
EvC Forum Director

nwr
Member
Posts: 6244
From: Geneva, Illinois
Joined: 08-08-2005
Member Rating: 4.1


Message 621 of 648 (588658)
10-27-2010 8:28 AM


My summary
This thread perhaps achieves a dubious record.
It appears to have more words, but less content, than just about any other thread at this site. Maybe we need a "word salad" award

hooah212002
Member (Idle past 297 days)
Posts: 3193
Joined: 08-12-2009


Message 622 of 648 (588659)
10-27-2010 8:43 AM


Summary
Bertot will walk away feigning victory at our idiocy, just like every other creationist ever. He is the only rational, logical person on all of EvC.
If only we knew what he was rational and logical about.........
Edited by hooah212002, : No reason given.

"What can be asserted without proof, can be dismissed without proof."-Hitch.

Larni
Member (Idle past 197 days)
Posts: 4000
From: Liverpool
Joined: 09-16-2005


Message 623 of 648 (588662)
10-27-2010 8:52 AM
Reply to: Message 615 by Dawn Bertot
10-26-2010 11:40 PM


Nothing to see hear
In sumation
Dawn Bertot writes:
neither of these two questions have physical realities that we can observe, they are therfore irrelevant to THIS discussion
Then that means you designer has no impact on reality.
Edited by Larni, : just saw the closing words message.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 615 by Dawn Bertot, posted 10-26-2010 11:40 PM Dawn Bertot has not replied

Modulous
Member (Idle past 1599 days)
Posts: 7789
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


Message 624 of 648 (588663)
10-27-2010 9:03 AM
Reply to: Message 614 by Dawn Bertot
10-26-2010 11:34 PM


Summary
Neither design or evolution have any more going for it, than the other, THAT IS THE POINT.
I disputed that this is so and have challenged Bertot to provide the kind of evidence in this thread that put it on equal footing with the kind of evidence I put forward in the thread that I linked to that Bertot has refused to post in for nearly two years. (Confidence in evolutionary science)
Bertot kept repeating the claim, and not supporting it. I take this as evidence of Bertot's failure to support the POINT.
I was hoping for a bit of good faith debate, not repetition with CAPS LOCKS - but two years is clearly not enough to bring (intelligent) Design on an equal footing with evolution.
Edited by Modulous, : edited to make it more of a summary than a reply.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 614 by Dawn Bertot, posted 10-26-2010 11:34 PM Dawn Bertot has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 640 by Dawn Bertot, posted 10-28-2010 12:43 AM Modulous has seen this message but not replied

Dawn Bertot
Member (Idle past 995 days)
Posts: 3571
Joined: 11-23-2007


Message 625 of 648 (588666)
10-27-2010 9:20 AM
Reply to: Message 616 by jar
10-26-2010 11:47 PM


Re: Dawn was not sunrise but simply the glow of ignorance.
Sorry I did not see the admin post,so I edited this one
Dawn Bertot
Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 616 by jar, posted 10-26-2010 11:47 PM jar has not replied

jar
Member
Posts: 33967
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 4.4


Message 626 of 648 (588668)
10-27-2010 9:42 AM


It doesn't matter if there was a Designer!
So far absolutely no one has shown any reason why even if there was a designer, it would have any merit or worth beyond a historical footnote or in the case of Product Liability suits.
Even if true, it tells us nothing about how the world we see around us developed. We still need to figure out how things happened, what the model is, and for that, science so far has been the only process that has been shown to work.

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

Coyote
Member (Idle past 1601 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


Message 627 of 648 (588669)
10-27-2010 9:43 AM
Reply to: Message 614 by Dawn Bertot
10-26-2010 11:34 PM


EPIC FAIL!
You fellas really cant go any deeper that your own methodology can you. Neither design or evolution have any more going for it, than the other, THAT IS THE POINT. Both are allowable in the available evidence, both use the same methodology for its conclusions, neither of which is provable, yet both are demonstratable
The theory of evolution is based on evidence. The theory itself explains that evidence. It uses the scientific method in doing so.
"Design" is not based on evidence. It is based on particular religious beliefs. These believers are not even worried that there is no evidence or method supporting it--belief is enough. "Design" fights science and the scientific method because science contradicts it's beliefs. Fail!
There are no other alternatives besides these two, but both follow the same principle in thier application and conclusions
Wrong. "Design" does not follow the scientific method.
You have been asked repeatedly to produce some rule for distinguishing those things that are designed from those that are natural. You have consistently dodged this question. We can only conclude that you have no answer beyond, "I know it when I see it." Which is useless, and not science. Fail!
Both should be taught, there is simply no way around that point, OTHER THAN the SIMPLE, "I DONT LIKE IT", approach
There is no way to teach design as there is no method nor body of data, and certainly no theory to explain the facts. There is only a belief system. Trying to teach design would be nothing more than a catechism or bible study class. Design is nothing more than creation "science" with the serial numbers filed off and everyone not actually pushing design knows it. Fail!
You had your chance in this thread and you have done nothing but repeat your baseless assertions, unable to provide any evidence beyond "I know it when I see it." EPIC FAIL!
Edited by Coyote, : Posted before I saw Admin's post. This can serve as my summary.

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 614 by Dawn Bertot, posted 10-26-2010 11:34 PM Dawn Bertot has not replied

Percy
Member
Posts: 21347
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 2.4


Message 628 of 648 (588671)
10-27-2010 11:16 AM


My Summation
I didn't learn anything other than to receive further confirmation that ignorance and certainty go hand in hand, with certainty proving helpful in creating a state of mind where one pays little or no attention to what others are saying.
--Percy

Replies to this message:
 Message 634 by Dawn Bertot, posted 10-27-2010 10:03 PM Percy has seen this message but not replied

Son
Member (Idle past 3325 days)
Posts: 346
From: France,Paris
Joined: 03-11-2009


Message 629 of 648 (588672)
10-27-2010 11:27 AM


I really learned something here: admins at EvC forum have been wise to put this topic in the "free for all". Otherwise, after lots of repetition, no information and 600 posts, it feels like the quality of creationnists at this site is degrading (or maybe I'm getting bored at their repetitiveness). Dawn Bertot threw around the words evidence, logic and reality but showed no sign of understanding the scientific method, sometimes it felt like he thought he followed it but I'm not sure.

Omnivorous
Member (Idle past 166 days)
Posts: 3851
From: Adirondackia
Joined: 07-21-2005


Message 630 of 648 (588673)
10-27-2010 11:31 AM


Summary: All design, all the time
It is apparent to me that Dawn Bertot believes that everything is designed: there is no need for a methodology to distinguish the designed from the nondesigned--because it is all designed.
Dawn doesn't want to defend this proposition, and so asserts a recognition litmus test for design while refusing to define it. Otherwise, the abstracted mask of Intelligent Design would fall away, leaving only a bare-faced creationist.
But we already knew that about both Dawn and Intelligent Design. This thread was more of the same old song and dance, just Dawn's turn in the spotlight.

Dost thou prate, rogue?
-Cassio
Real things always push back.
-William James

bluescat48
Member (Idle past 3685 days)
Posts: 2347
From: United States
Joined: 10-06-2007


Message 631 of 648 (588674)
10-27-2010 11:36 AM


Over 600 posts and the evidence for design or designer hasn't moved even 1 nanometer

There is no better love between 2 people than mutual respect for each other WT Young, 2002
Who gave anyone the authority to call me an authority on anything. WT Young, 1969
Since Evolution is only ~90% correct it should be thrown out and replaced by Creation which has even a lower % of correctness. W T Young, 2008

ringo
Member
Posts: 20915
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 2.7


Message 632 of 648 (588683)
10-27-2010 12:42 PM


Bottom Line
You can logically "prove" that there must be a designer but without some connection to reality, all the logic in the world is useless.

"It appears that many of you turn to Hebrew to escape the English...." -- Joseppi

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2022 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.1
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2023