User Tag List

Informational! Informational!:  0
Likes Likes:  0
Page 106 of 147 FirstFirst ... 65696102103104105106107108109110116 ... LastLast
Results 841 to 848 of 1176

Thread: Where does everyone stand in regards to...

  1. #841

    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    1,706
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by [b
    Quote[/b] ]Intelligent design (ID) is the claim that empirical evidence points to the conclusion that life on earth was deliberately designed by an intelligent agent. The Intelligent Design movement is an organized campaign to promote ID arguments in the public sphere, primarily in the United States. The hub of the movement is the Center for Science and Culture, a subsidiary of the Discovery Institute, a politically conservative think tank. The phrase "Intelligent Design," was coined by legal scholar Phillip E. Johnson in his 1991 book ''Darwin on Trial.'' Johnson's argument, and a key tenet of the ID movement, is that the premise of philosophical naturalism, which has dominated not only scientific mehodology but all western intellectual discourse since the nineteenth century, is false. The ID movement presents a case for "reasonable doubt" about the standard scientific model of evolution by natural selection. ID includes arguments that abiogenesis is impossible, that evolution cannot account for the complexity of life, and that the universe is "fine tuned" for living things in a manner that must have been by design. ID proponents argue, by way of an "eliminative inference," that reason dictates we settle upon intelligent causes whenever natural causes cannot suffice to explain some observed phenomena. ID makes no explicit claims about the identity of the intelligent designer, its motives or methods of operation. In practice, ID is often used by its proponents for the purpose of religious apologetics, to argue for the existence of a monothestic God. The ID movement is largely associated with conservative Christians, and in this connection ID is sometimes described as a revision of the argument from design made famous by William Paley in the early 19th century.

    ID is rejected by the overwhelming majority of scientists and philosophers of science, who regard ID as a form of pseudoscience.
    They say if you play a Microsoft CD backwards, you hear satanic messages. Thats nothing, cause if you play it forwards, it installs Windows.

  2. #842

    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    1,706
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    By progressive it means that new information is found and used to build up on the current theory you have. Creationism is NOT progressive because the only source of information is the bible and there can never be any new information unless a new bible is "sent from above".

    Furthermore, Intelligent design isn't building up on original creationism. It's just another version.
    They say if you play a Microsoft CD backwards, you hear satanic messages. Thats nothing, cause if you play it forwards, it installs Windows.

  3. #843

    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    NC
    Posts
    2,344
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by [b
    Quote[/b] ]here's a little evolutionary quirk for you, it's possible that there be some basis for truth. The science behind it is explained fairly simple, first look at the geographical location of the 3 places you mentioned- notice something similar?? They're all fairly small, and have locations off of them that are even smaller -we have islands present in all 3 named cases-.
    ...In any case, I'm not saying magical little people exist, but your post is excellent proof of something that I wish people would have kept in mind when this thread was started: none of us know it all. Oh, and if my explanation's not enough proof for you here's some linkage to a related example: Homo floresiensis, and another..., and a third.
    I guess the point I was trying to make is that even if they are based on truth (like the indonesian one could have been... and I believe it was) they are not magical creatures that if you catch them will lead you to the end of the rainbow and give you a pot of gold. (another story comes from scandanavia or something)
    there have also been huge bigfoot like creatures before (in china?) but they weren't the magical creatures that native americans say they are.
    Talk sense to a fool and he calls you foolish-Euripides
    wikipedia rocks! (except for species info)(CPers-add your vast knowledge of CPs to wikipedia&#33
    A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky, dangerous animals and you know it
    Get all the fools on your side and you can be elected to anything

  4. #844
    War. War never changes. Est's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Champaign, IL
    Posts
    3,935
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by [b
    Quote[/b] ]It's just another version.
    Ever revised a hypothesis? Used/made a different version of software? New version means it shares the same roots (Bob's AOL 4.0 is still as AOL as his 2.0). So, as far as I can see, it's interrelated enough- Intelligent Design is an result of Creationism that shares some similar central points.

    Quote Originally Posted by [b
    Quote[/b] ]... and there can never be any new information unless a new bible is "sent from above".
    Why not? I don't care where I get evidence from so long as it's evidence, sent from above, below, or if it's been under my nose the whole time. Though it has a religious basis, doesn't mean that findings can't be used in support of it. Now, why don't we let the other nice people on this forum take a gander at things before we go on too much more or Starman might get upset at us again [img]http://www.**********.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif[/img] Oh, and as a final note for this post, I believe firmly in Evolution, so you know something's up that I'd bother to "argue" with someone who's on my "side". Oh well, 'till later.
    \(_o)/ ಠ_ಠ
    My Growlist
    NASC Website Come join in on the fun!

  5. #845

    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    1,706
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by [b
    Quote[/b] (Est @ Jan. 15 2005,3:05)]
    Quote Originally Posted by [b
    Quote[/b] ]It's just another version.
    Ever revised a hypothesis? Used/made a different version of software? New version means it shares the same roots (Bob's AOL 4.0 is still as AOL as his 2.0). So, as far as I can see, it's interrelated enough- Intelligent Design is an result of Creationism that shares some similar central points.
    First off, thats a bad analogy. Intelligent Design is very different from Creationism. Its another version NOT centered around creationist principles.

    Understand that.
    They say if you play a Microsoft CD backwards, you hear satanic messages. Thats nothing, cause if you play it forwards, it installs Windows.

  6. #846

    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    1,706
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by [b
    Quote[/b] (Est @ Jan. 15 2005,3:05)]
    Quote Originally Posted by [b
    Quote[/b] ]... and there can never be any new information unless a new bible is "sent from above".
    Why not? I don't care where I get evidence from so long as it's evidence, sent from above, below, or if it's been under my nose the whole time. Though it has a religious basis, doesn't mean that findings can't be used in support of it. Now, why don't we let the other nice people on this forum take a gander at things before we go on too much more or Starman might get upset at us again [img]http://www.**********.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif[/img] Oh, and as a final note for this post, I believe firmly in Evolution, so you know something's up that I'd bother to "argue" with someone who's on my "side". Oh well, 'till later.
    The problem is that Creationism is centered around the bible. There is no other source of information.

    Could the evolutionists PLEASE stop arguing against fellow evolutionists. It does bring up good points but i'd rather a creationist attack me. You pack of traitors [img]http://www.**********.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/new/smile_n_32.gif[/img]
    They say if you play a Microsoft CD backwards, you hear satanic messages. Thats nothing, cause if you play it forwards, it installs Windows.

  7. #847
    War. War never changes. Est's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Champaign, IL
    Posts
    3,935
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by [b
    Quote[/b] ]... well, many cultures have myths of little people. Hawaiians, the ones in idonesia, leprichauns or however you spell it from ireland, dwarves from I have no clue where, etc... many cultures also have myths of sea serpents, many others of vampires, bigfoot type of things, etc... so are they all true?
    Sorry, I guess it was what I interprited as sarcasm of some sort that led me to misconstrue.
    \(_o)/ ಠ_ಠ
    My Growlist
    NASC Website Come join in on the fun!

  8. #848
    War. War never changes. Est's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Champaign, IL
    Posts
    3,935
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by [b
    Quote[/b] ]First off, thats a bad analogy. Intelligent Design is very different from Creationism. Its another version NOT centered around creationist principles.

    Understand that.
    Oh, then please do explain.

    Quote Originally Posted by [b
    Quote[/b] ]You pack of traitors
    I'd feel like more of a traitor if I let what I think to be invalid arguements go unpointed out. This is a more extreme example, but if I said I was an "Evolutionist" and I said something completely wrong, wouldn't you feel entitled to correct me?? And no, I'm not trying to imply that you're completely wrong, just wanna get some things cleared up.

    Quote Originally Posted by [b
    Quote[/b] ]The problem is that Creationism is centered around the bible. There is no other source of information.
    Sooo.. If I found evidence that supported Creationism that wasn't in the bible, that'd invalidate it?? That's all I'm saying...
    \(_o)/ ಠ_ಠ
    My Growlist
    NASC Website Come join in on the fun!

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •